[mgoetze]

---

How do you play 7♠ on the ♠8 lead? Are you happy or unhappy to be in 7♠?

[nige1]

mgoetze asks
"How do you play 7♠ on the ♠8 lead? Are you happy or unhappy to be in 7♠?"

Play dummy's ♠T and win trick.
Cash ♦KA and ruff a ♦.
Unless ♦Q appears, cash ♣QA and ruff another ♦ high.
Draw trumps and hope for the best.
IMO 7♠ a poor contract.
You're unhappy unless it makes

---

[PhantomSac]

no idea what the best line is but I'm pretty sure it's s terrible contract

[rmnka447]

7 ♠ is a terrible contract.

Someone needed to ask themselves the following questions:

Can I count 13 winning tricks?

Am I reasonably sure the chance of the grand making is 65% or more?

If you can't answer yes to one of those two questions, then bidding the grand is ludicrous. Looking at the hands, I can't see how either player could find the proper answers to bid 7.

I don't have a clue as to the best line of play either. At best, you have to make some favorable assumptions about the lie of the cards. But it seems like it will take several to have any chance at making 13 tricks. Good luck at guessing those correctly.

[blackshoe]

What's the best line in 6♠?

[BillPatch]

7 ♠ was difficult to analyze. I commend Nige1 for providing a good solution for the terrible contract. In answer to rmnka447 hypothetical question, there are theoretically no proper bidding answers that reach such a horrid final contract.

6♠ is an order of magnitude more difficult, since now we must consider the timing of potential throw-in plays. I doubt 6 is a good contract. Anyone care to sim potential EW hands DD.

[nige1]

BillPatch, on 2015-August-29, 11:27, said:

7 ♠ was difficult to analyze. I commend Nige1 for providing a good solution for the terrible contract. In answer to rmnka447 hypothetical question, there are theoretically no proper bidding answers that reach such a horrid final contract.

6♠ is an order of magnitude more difficult, since now we must consider the timing of potential throw-in plays. I doubt 6 is a good contract. Anyone care to sim potential EW hands DD.

Thank you IMO 6♠ is a good contract.

[BillPatch]

nige1, on 2015-August-29, 19:28, said:

Thank you IMO 6♠ is a good contract.

I see it. If trumps split 3-2 then we should be able to (not necessarily in this order).draw trump duck a diamond ruff a club in dummy and get back to hand by ruffing a heart to cash remaining winners in clubs unless clubs split 5-0 or0-5. Very roughly will make 68% (3-2 spades) * 90%(3-2 or 4-1 clubs) or approximately 61.2%. Additional chance, if trumps split 4-1, we can duck a round of trump, recapture lead, finesse one round of diamonds, drop queen in two more rounds, an run clubs if they split 3-2. Just a guess, an additional 4% for a total of 65% that 6 ♠ makes. Any better lines?

[PhantomSac]

If trumps are 3-2 you are basically* cold. In 6S you would worry about how to handle 4-1 trumps while still always making on 3-2 spades. It matters a lot what the lead is, they are basically endplayed at trick 1.

*If clubs are 5-1 with 5 on your right you might be in some trouble but they will often lead their stiff club in that case

[mgoetze]

nige1, on 2015-August-27, 17:38, said:

Play dummy's ♠T and win trick.
Cash ♦KA and ruff a ♦.

FWIW, this would not have worked on the layout I had in the bidding practice room - spades were J8-653 and diamonds were 5-2, so you would have made had you ruffed both diamonds with something other than the ♠2.

As for the claim that 6♠ is a bad contract, puh-leaze.

Holding the South hand, I found out that partner had a 1♥ opening, 4 spades, no keycards (good news!) and the ♦K and ♥K. In real life, I should probably give up at that point (but continue if partner had not had the ♥K!) - I did bid it up to 7♠ but mainly to test whether partner and I were on the same page WRT methods.

[nige1]

deleted. (Haven't yet got the hang of replying with my tablet)

[nige1]

mgoetze, on 2015-August-30, 18:15, said:

FWIW, this would not have worked on the layout I had in the bidding practice room - spades were J8-653 and diamonds were 5-2, so you would have made had you ruffed both diamonds with something other than the ♠2.

It would be normal to ruff with ♠7 and ♠Q, retaining ♠2 to return to hand to draw trumps.

[nige1]

deleted. Sorry.

[mycroft]

Here I thought this was going to be about that new extension of an old convention, where you bid 7NT directly if you are reasonably certain you're going to make it, and bid 7♠ as a puppet to scramble to the most reasonable grand...