[AL78]

MPs, 5CM, strong NT.

---

I intended my double as takeout to show heart shortage, something in the minors and not wanting to go past 3NT if partner held a double stop. This should go off, but I failed to twig during the defence that partner had a spade void. The defence started with ♣AK, then she led a low diamond to my ace. ♠A and another takes it down immediately, but thinking declarer had ♦KQ doubleton and noting partner had led a low diamond, not a high one, I led a diamond back and that was the end of the defence, the only other trick my ♠A. I should have probably guessed anyway partner had a void since otherwise why didn't she switch to a spade at trick three?

That was a complete bottom, no surprise there. No-one found a minor slam (it's not a good slam), a couple were in 4♥ one off, one other made 3♥, but we should really be in a minor game, not defending, although getting them down would have given us nearly 75% on the board which would have been better than zero.

One day I'll learn to slow down and think things through a bit more rigorously.

[sfi]

As with other topics, it doesn't look like you were the primary contributor. Double is normal IMO, and the low diamond switch should deny interest in a spade ruff.

[AL78]

sfi, on 2021-January-15, 17:31, said:

As with other topics, it doesn't look like you were the primary contributor. Double is normal IMO, and the low diamond switch should deny interest in a spade ruff.

I still think I could have thought it through a bit more. I'm not sure whether or not this partner knows about hi-low leading to ask for a ruff, so I probably shouldn't have read anything into the low diamond lead.

[akwoo]

Since you're in England, I'm assuming you play 2nd/4th leads - in this case partner would've led the 4♦ rather than the 3♦ if declarer had KQ doubleton.

However, I also think that partner should've lied and led the 8♦ rather than the 3♦.

You were definitely not the primary contributor here though. You might want to sit your partner down and make sure you're on the same page as to what doubles are for takeout. "Everyone" nowadays would play your double as takeout, but some older players may never have learned this.

[sfi]

AL78, on 2021-January-15, 17:56, said:

I still think I could have thought it through a bit more. I'm not sure whether or not this partner knows about hi-low leading to ask for a ruff, so I probably shouldn't have read anything into the low diamond lead.

There were definitely clues there, but there were clues pointing in different directions. Defence is a cooperative endeavour and your efforts may best be spent talking constructively with your partner and introducing some basic concepts about signalling. Even something as simple as "low lead = wants the suit returned" will go a long way to improving the team defence.

[mikeh]

AL78, on 2021-January-15, 17:25, said:

MPs, 5CM, strong NT.

---

I intended my double as takeout to show heart shortage, something in the minors and not wanting to go past 3NT if partner held a double stop. This should go off, but I failed to twig during the defence that partner had a spade void. The defence started with ♣AK, then she led a low diamond to my ace. ♠A and another takes it down immediately, but thinking declarer had ♦KQ doubleton and noting partner had led a low diamond, not a high one, I led a diamond back and that was the end of the defence, the only other trick my ♠A. I should have probably guessed anyway partner had a void since otherwise why didn't she switch to a spade at trick three?

That was a complete bottom, no surprise there. No-one found a minor slam (it's not a good slam), a couple were in 4♥ one off, one other made 3♥, but we should really be in a minor game, not defending, although getting them down would have given us nearly 75% on the board which would have been better than zero.

One day I'll learn to slow down and think things through a bit more rigorously.

So, you think declarer has KQ doubleton in diamonds. Why does make you think that playing a diamond back is going to do any good at all?

Also, you know that partner has AKxxxx in clubs. Those high hearts in dummy suggest that declarer has 6 hearts, but he also has 2Clubs and, you think, 2 diamonds

Since he is known to have 13 cards, being 6=2=2 in hearts and the minors, how npmany spades does he have?

And if he has 3, how many does partner hold? And why didn’t he lead his stiff?

Of course, partner rates to hold the diamond king, both for his 2C call and because he led low. However, the inference that declarer has spade length is unmistakeable.

In Hamman’s book, written with Manley, he said that too many people ask themselves the wrong question at critical times in the play. They ask ‘what should I do?’ when the correct question is ‘what’s going on?’

Ask the right question, and the answer to the wrong question is often clear.

I personally prefer to ask ‘what do I know?’

Here, we ‘know’ that Lho has 2 clubs, at most 2 diamonds ( he might well falsecard from Qx), and probably 6 hearts. Therefore he has 3 or 4 spades. Once partner didn’t switch to his stiff, he has a void.

Learn to ask the proper question. You will be amazed at how much you ‘know’ if you listen to the bidding. I put ‘know’ in quotes because one has to think in terms of probability much of the time...you suspect...you infer....certain things, with varying degrees of certainty, but here, I’d have a very high degree of certainty that partner has a spade void when I win the first diamond.

Slow down....stop asking yourself what to do and start thinking about what the auction, and play so far, has told you.

[mikeh]

I should also add that the double was a bad idea.

You have a minimum opener but with primary support for partner’s long suit, and good shape. What do you think 4C shows?

If partner has sufficient spade support to make that trump, he will bid 4S over 4C. If he has sufficient diamonds, then his clubs are longer and clubs should play just fine.

A double here, if not penalty (and few good players use it as such) shows, and I can’t stress this enough, extra values but no clear direction.

You have no extras and you have a clear direction,..clubs!

Were you afraid of bidding clubs on your minimum, just pass. Partner is still there (I’d bid 4C rather than pass, fwiw).

From your partner’s perspective he can expect some 5=2=4=2 hand with a king more than you hold, or you might be 6=2=3=2 with not great spades, hence no 3S bid.

AKJxx xx AJxx Qx would be a solid double.

[nullve]

sfi, on 2021-January-15, 17:31, said:

Double is normal IMO

I'd expect 3♣ to not only be GF but set up forcing pass at all levels. But then the double of 3♥ would be penalty unless playing some kind of P/X inversion.

mikeh, on 2021-January-15, 21:08, said:

Those high hearts in dummy suggest that declarer has 6 hearts

Yes, but also that someone has done something unusual in the auction since a partner who knows about LoTT would hardly ever let opps play 3♥X on a known 10-card fit.

I like the agreement that partner is the one to be trusted in situations like that, so my reaction as East on seeing dummy would be to imagine a layout such as

---

where South's overcall is vomit-worthy but not entirely unrealistic.

It is also likely that partner would shift to a diamond instead of a spade on this layout.

Seeing declarer's Q drop under the ♦A would be quite a shock, though. But, again assuming partner knows about LoTT, and using the principle that partner is the one to be trusted, I'd assume the ♦Q was some kind mechanical error (misclick? senior's moment?) by South rather than partner being 0256 or having chosen a diamond shift with 1345 (or already impossible 1246) shape.

On this layout it doesn't matter double dummy whether East returns a spade or a diamond, but imagine what might happen if East returns the ♦T (concealing the jack) and declarer starts wondering where East's points are...

[sfi]

nullve, on 2021-January-16, 00:17, said:

I'd expect 3♣ to not only be GF but set up forcing pass at all levels. But then the double of 3♥ would be penalty unless playing some kind of P/X inversion.

I don't think that's the sort of inference that gets taught to newer players these days, but I could be wrong.

BTW, Mike was right to point out double may not have been a good idea. I was overly focused on the meaning of double and didn't pay much attention to the actual hand.

[AL78]

mikeh, on 2021-January-16, 00:00, said:

I should also add that the double was a bad idea.

You have a minimum opener but with primary support for partner’s long suit, and good shape. What do you think 4C shows?

If partner has sufficient spade support to make that trump, he will bid 4S over 4C. If he has sufficient diamonds, then his clubs are longer and clubs should play just fine.

A double here, if not penalty (and few good players use it as such) shows, and I can’t stress this enough, extra values but no clear direction.

You have no extras and you have a clear direction,..clubs!

Were you afraid of bidding clubs on your minimum, just pass. Partner is still there (I’d bid 4C rather than pass, fwiw).

From your partner’s perspective he can expect some 5=2=4=2 hand with a king more than you hold, or you might be 6=2=3=2 with not great spades, hence no 3S bid.

AKJxx xx AJxx Qx would be a solid double.

I was reluctant to go beyond 3NT, hence why I didn't bid 4♣. It wouldn't be the first time we've been in 5minor for a bad score because most others are scoring better in 3NT.

[AL78]

mikeh, on 2021-January-15, 21:08, said:

So, you think declarer has KQ doubleton in diamonds. Why does make you think that playing a diamond back is going to do any good at all?

Also, you know that partner has AKxxxx in clubs. Those high hearts in dummy suggest that declarer has 6 hearts, but he also has 2Clubs and, you think, 2 diamonds

Since he is known to have 13 cards, being 6=2=2 in hearts and the minors, how npmany spades does he have?

And if he has 3, how many does partner hold? And why didn’t he lead his stiff?

Of course, partner rates to hold the diamond king, both for his 2C call and because he led low. However, the inference that declarer has spade length is unmistakeable.

In Hamman’s book, written with Manley, he said that too many people ask themselves the wrong question at critical times in the play. They ask ‘what should I do?’ when the correct question is ‘what’s going on?’

Ask the right question, and the answer to the wrong question is often clear.

I personally prefer to ask ‘what do I know?’

Here, we ‘know’ that Lho has 2 clubs, at most 2 diamonds ( he might well falsecard from Qx), and probably 6 hearts. Therefore he has 3 or 4 spades. Once partner didn’t switch to his stiff, he has a void.

Learn to ask the proper question. You will be amazed at how much you ‘know’ if you listen to the bidding. I put ‘know’ in quotes because one has to think in terms of probability much of the time...you suspect...you infer....certain things, with varying degrees of certainty, but here, I’d have a very high degree of certainty that partner has a spade void when I win the first diamond.

Slow down....stop asking yourself what to do and start thinking about what the auction, and play so far, has told you.

Yes I know, that is one major problem I have, not taking in all the inferences, and the one or two I overlook are the ones that would point me in the right direction instead of guessing or trying to be passive when it is wrong.