[Jinksy]

---

IMP pairs, opps are good club players.

1: Partner leads the 3♥ (2/4), K, J (UDCA, giving count here), 5
2: C2, 3, A, 5
3: S3, 5, K, 4
4: S2

Win, or duck again? (or would you have won the round before?) Why?

[The_Badger]

My interpretation is that opener is trying to sneak a ninth trick through (♠J) with a 5-4-2-2 holding. I also have a sneaky suspicion that he might even be 4♦/5♣ too. Take the trick and switch to ♦Q hoping that he guesses wrong and partner has enough ♦ spots to beat the contract.

[Kaitlyn S]

 Jinksy, on 2017-July-01, 03:31, said:

---

IMP pairs, opps are good club players.

1: Partner leads the 3♥ (2/4), K, J (UDCA, giving count here), 5
2: C2, 3, A, 5
3: S3, 5, K, 4
4: S2

Win, or duck again? (or would you have won the round before?) Why?

If East bid 3NT instead of 4S with KQT92, K, T5, K8642, then why couldn't West have bid 2NT with J3, Q7, AJ962. AQT5?

While I don't expect that this is the case, I think it's more likely than being able to take four diamond tricks. I win (the first spade in case West has D-AK) and play another heart.

Side point: Say West has J3, A7, K6432, AQT5 and partner has suggested a club slam. Doesn't West have a good enough hand to move over 3NT? Ironically, you have no chance to beat it if West is weaker, say J3, A7, J6432, AQT5. It's possible that declarer has J3,A7,96432, AQJ5 but at IMPs, would West sit for 3NT when both red suits are potentially dangerous? East could easily have short diamonds on this auction (say AQT52, K2, 5, K8642.) Note that 5C is excellent and 3NT will go down most of the time the SK is offside because now the diamond switch is a lot easier without that D10 in dummy. If E-W want to bank on the spade finesse, they might as well try 6C.


EDIT to add:
SEARCH TERM 1D_1S_2C_2H_2NT_3C_3S_3NT
SEARCH TERM 1Dz1Sz2Cz2Hz2NTz3Cz3Sz3NT

[steve2005]

If you take A♠ declarer can go to board and cash the last 3 spades. If he is trying to sneak a 9th trick by you in spades he has a lot of tricks in the minors. If he needs to sneak a trick by you, he has a danger suit.

He might not have A♥ and is wide open there or his diamonds are poor like Badger said possibly 4 and a diamond switch kills him.


The really wierd thing is his spade spots are good enough to lead the Q if he has the Jack so if you duck he doesn't have entries to cash spades.


so something wierd is happening, but my head cold isn't letting me see it.

[The_Badger]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-01, 09:40, said:

If East bid 3NT instead of 4S with KQT92, K, T5, K8642, then why couldn't West have bid 2NT with J3, Q7, AJ962. AQT5?.

Yes, Kaitlyn, it also went through my mind that West could have ♥Qx only, but he might have bid an offshape 1NT with your hand instead of 2♣ knowing that if the bidding went as in the diagram, he'd would have to lie about his ♥ stopper.

The other thing is if West keeps his cool (reads the situation right) the defence may never come to 4♦ tricks, but it seems the only way the contract is off if West has ♥A

[nekthen]

The spade play does set alarm bells ringing. Why not lead the J and then small? Maybe he is looking to sneak through 2♠ tricks to go with his 2♥ tricks and 5♣ tricks

S Jx
H Ax
D Kxxxx
C AQxx

Personally, I would rebid 1N but many would bid 2C (as a weak NT player I open 1N but I assume we are playing strong NT here)
East has expressed some doubts about 3N. Although we can see 4♠ is cold and East should probably elect to bid 4♠ instead of 3N

Alternatively, he has just misplayed spades and, if we hold up, he cannot enjoy his spades because his clubs are AQJT and he has only one entry left to dummy and he needs two

I am going to take A♠ and play Q♦

EDIT. If West ducks, we can only take 3♦ tricks to go with A♠
So assuming partner has been honest, West could also be

S Jx
H Qx
D AKxxx
C AQxx

Now we need to win A♠ and lead a ♥ back. This seems to be the only layout where 3N goes down, so at IMPs I guess we play for it. East's bidding was misguided and perhaps this is the only way to punish it

[manudude03]

A diamond switch is not going to work unless partner has at least AKJx as far as I can see, and partner might have lead a top diamond with that (even though it costs here). The only realistic hand I can think of that we can beat it is declarer having something like Jx Ax AJxxx QJxx where the winning defense is to win and play another heart.

edit: construction nonsense as Mr Ace points out.

[MrAce]

 Jinksy, on 2017-July-01, 03:31, said:

Win, or duck again? (or would you have won the round before?) Why?

1-Win and play ♥

2-Yes, I would have won the previous round because declarer may hold something like Jx Qx AKxxx Axxx.

 manudude03, on 2017-July-03, 03:59, said:

<snip>. The only realistic hand I can think of that we can beat it is declarer having something like Jx Ax AJxxx QJxx where the winning defense is to win and play another heart.

This is the only unrealistic hand you constructed, as declarer already played a club to the A at trick 2!

[manudude03]

 MrAce, on 2017-July-03, 04:21, said:

This is the only unrealistic hand you constructed, as declarer already played a club to the A at trick 2!

Whoops, missed that. This contract is looking kinda cold now then unless declarer had ♥Qx which still makes it right to win and play a heart.

[msjennifer]

Win the first spade and back the H10

[rmnka447]

Win A and return a heart.

Opener's 3 ♠ would seem to confirm 2-2 in majors and some 5-4 minor holding. Opener might bid a logical alternative 3 NT with ♥ Ax over 3 ♣.

[Kaitlyn S]

Frankly, over 90% of the time (maybe even 98%), declarer is going to have the ♥A and enough in diamonds to prevent the defense from taking four diamond tricks, and the mental energy trying to figure out whether to play partner for ♥A or ♦AKJx will usually be better spent on other boards unless you are a mental ironman.

Here we have been presented with a problem so we assume the play matters and is important, and we have lots of time to think about it. You don't have that at the table. If you played ♦Q hoping that partner had ♦AKJx or if you played a heart and partner did have ♦AKJx, don't beat yourself up about it.

Literally, at the table, I probably would have thought "well declarer probably has 2-2-5-4 with the ♥A, but it appears that partner having the ♥A is more likely than a good holding in diamonds"; and I would have put enough thought to know to win the first trick, but at that point I would have just tabled a heart. If I put much more thought into a hand that where it was unlikely to matter, my brain would be mush for the second half of the match (or pairs game.) If North complained about South's defense on this hand, then North deserves to have a burnt out partner after 13 hands or so (with a lot more complaints to come!) There are many hands that require a lot of mental energy, at the table, this just doesn't seem to be one of them.

[Winstonm]

These opponents should be bidding rationally. If so, the only thing that makes sense to me is: Jx, Ax, xxxxx, AQJx. Of course, if the opps are old-fashioned bidders the hand could be Jx, Qxx, Axxx, AQxx. How the opps open 44 in the minors is critical to the choice of plays, is it not?

When these problems come up I always am reminded of Bob Hamman's Bols Bridge Tip:

Quote

‘If you ever to amount to anything at this game, you must build up a picture of the unseen hands. The idea is to know what the problem is before you try to solve it.’

[Kaitlyn S]

 Winstonm, on 2017-July-03, 10:03, said:

These opponents should be bidding rationally. If so, the only thing that makes sense to me is: Jx, Ax, xxxxx, AQJx.

Would you pass 3NT with this hand? Would anybody in a pair that knows enough to bid 3C over 2NT sometimes pass 3NT with this hand?

In case there's anybody that would, your partner bid 3C (either showing fear of notrump, or looking for a club slam) without the club ace, the club queen, or the club jack. They also bid 3NT over 3S (with S-AKQxx they would probably bid 4S) so you probably have a spade loser or finesse. Partner bid 3C for a reason - they must have a lot of black cards. A lot of black cards means not very many red ones; meaning that you either lose four diamond tricks when the opponents win their spade trick, or that partner doesn't have help in hearts and there will be an avalanche of hearts when you lose a spade trick.

[johnu]

 steve2005, on 2017-July-01, 09:40, said:

The really wierd thing is his spade spots are good enough to lead the Q if he has the Jack so if you duck he doesn't have entries to cash spades.

Opener rebid 2♣ so declarer should have 4+ clubs. You might want to revise the number of possible entries to dummy (although it is possible declarer has AQJ10 in clubs so you would be right about the entries. Still, a big parlay that declarer misplayed spades and the clubs are partially blocked.

[nige1]

 Jinksy, on 2017-July-01, 03:31, said:

IMP pairs, opps are good club players.
1: Partner leads the 3♥ (2/4), K, J (UDCA, giving count here), 5
2: C2, 3, A, 5
3: S3, 5, K, 4
4: S2
Win, or duck again? (or would you have won the round before?) Why?

Perhaps this is the layout...
Win the 1st or 2nd round of ♠s.
Switch to ♦Q and another.

---

[Kaitlyn S]

 nige1, on 2017-July-03, 12:48, said:

Perhaps this is the layout...
Win the 1st or 2nd round of ♠s.
Switch to ♦Q and another[/hv]

West didn't rebid 1NT because he was afraid of diamonds, and decided to rebid 2C instead which emphasizes the diamonds?

EDIT: You changed the layout! OK while some would rebid 1NT with this, I agree on the new layout (with five diamonds) that many would bid 2C. So I have to resort to my previous argument that a "good club player" wouldn't let 3NT sit with this hand.

Why would he let it set with ♥Qx? Probably because that's a less good holding for play in 5C. If partner didn't have good enough spades to bid 4S over 3S and has at most the king in clubs, partner needs strength elsewhere, which (because of the 3NT call over 3S) is probably in hearts.

[nige1]

 Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-03, 12:55, said:

West didn't rebid 1NT because he was afraid of diamonds, and decided to rebid 2C instead which emphasizes the diamonds?
EDIT: You changed the layout! OK while some would rebid 1NT with this, I agree on the new layout (with five diamonds) that many would bid 2C. So I have to resort to my previous argument that a "good club player" wouldn't let 3NT sit with this hand.
Why would he let it set with ♥Qx? Probably because that's a less good holding for play in 5C. If partner didn't have good enough spades to bid 4S over 3S and has at most the king in clubs, partner needs strength elsewhere, which (because of the 3NT call over 3S) is probably in hearts.

Sorry I'm prone to mistakes when editing lin files
Just my guess at a likely layout consistent with the bidding and play.
Its not up to us to gripe about opponent's bidding and play...
IMO, their bidding was reasonable.
Although cashing ♣A seems a mistake

[Kaitlyn S]

Another interesting question:

You hold 75, Q7432, AKJ2, T5 on lead against 1D-1S-2C-2H-2NT-3C-3S-3NT. The opponents must have game going strength, so if your partner has a top heart, they have little else of value and the opponents are going to take tons of black suit tricks. So if you want to set 3NT you have to assume that partner has a black card (because the DQ isn't enough.)

Given that you need partner to have a black suit entry (meaning that the opponents have two heart stoppers), and that the opponents probably have lots of black suit tricks once they regain the lead, why on earth would you emphasize hearts by leading the ♥3? When partner gets in, you don't want him to play hearts because it's unlikely to beat the contract! You need partner to have a diamond holding that will beat the contract; either ♦Qx or ♦T9x. So wouldn't you lead the ♥7?

If partner led the ♥3 on this layout, it's his own fault that I didn't find a diamond return.

EDIT to add: This shows the value of thinking before making the opening lead. When I saw your post, my first thought was that North should lead a top diamond to tell partner where you lived (since partner's likely only getting in once.) Looking deeper into the situation showed that this lead wouldn't work if partner had either ♦Qx or ♦T9x, making the H7 lead far better. While the H7 may give up a trick, it's unlikely to give up the ninth trick (plenty of tricks should be available in the black suits) and a "passive" black suit lead could prove disastrous if it finds a card for declarer (for example the ♣Q or the ♠J.)

[MrAce]

 nige1, on 2017-July-03, 12:48, said:

Perhaps this is the layout...

Perhaps.
Perhaps pd is a moron and did not start a ♦ honor on first lead.
Perhaps we should play exactly for pd to hold AKJx in ♦. Instead of playing declarer for Qx ♥ and hope pd is a moron.
Perhaps pd does not play smith echo either.
Perhaps...you are right because I do not see anything interesting in this board to make its way to forums unless we beat it on ♦Q lead now. (Smith echo could change my mind on playing ♥ though)