[661_Pete]

I thought I'd pulled off a decent coup here - end-playing South:

---

I was West playing 4♠. Opponents led a ♥ and I cashed A♥, then AK♦ throwing my ♥ loser. I now took the opportunity to finesse ♠ and when South didn't cover my 10 I guessed right and finessed Q♠ but I still had two trump losers. Cash the A♠ and exit with a trump. South leads back another ♥. I ruff and exit again with a trump.

Now South has only clubs left, so forced to lead into my KQ. They cash the A♣. Contract made! I thought to myself at the time, nice end-play. But no! South could have defeated the contract by leading J♣. Then I can't avoid two club losers. So I was just lucky... .

Perhaps the contract can't be made against good defence. Or is there a way?

[The_Badger]

The bidding and vulnerability is always useful on a hand, Pete, as if we can place North with a six card ♥ suit or 5-5/6-5 in the reds, we then can place the black cards with South. Most players would probably have played a third round of ♦ to (try to) discard the ♣ loser before taking the ♠ finesse.

By the way, South with three cards to the J in ♦ can false card as he's not going to win a trick, so you can take his ♦ discard with a pinch of salt except if we know that North holds the red suits.

[HardVector]

I think you should always go down. On the way you played it, south misplayed by not cashing BOTH spades before getting out with the heart. On that defense, you have no recourse. If you attempt to cash a 3rd diamond, you may get south to make an error by not ruffing low. Discarding or ruffing with the 9 wins you a trick.

[661_Pete]

I think you're both right, I should have attempted a third ♦ which puts S under some pressure. I didn't realise the ♠ finesse was to no benefit.

Still - this deal has something to talk about - a bit more than mundane!

Sorry, should have mentioned: this hand was on BBO btw: E-W vulnerable, dealer S, and the bidding went:
(pass) 1♠ (2♥) pass
(pass) 3♠ (4♦) pass
(4♥) 4♠ all pass

So I knew most of the red cards were with North. And I was looking toward a sacrifice...

[HardVector]

661_Pete, on 2018-October-28, 14:08, said:

I think you're both right, I should have attempted a third ♦ which puts S under some pressure. I didn't realise the ♠ finesse was to no benefit.

Still - this deal has something to talk about - a bit more than mundane!

Sorry, should have mentioned: this hand was on BBO btw: E-W vulnerable, dealer S, and the bidding went:
(pass) 1♠ (2♥) pass
(pass) 3♠ (4♦) pass
(4♥) 4♠ all pass

So I knew most of the red cards were with North. And I was looking toward a sacrifice...

4♠ is a phantom sacrifice, 4h should go down 1. It goes down 2 on good defense. Spades lead into a finesse, low spade back forcing a high ruff, low club to the A, heart off the board, hop up with the A, spades forcing another high ruff for trump promotion with 2 diamonds to come. Your decision to bid 4s was unilateral and didn't involve partner. I thought 3s was ok, but 4 was out of bounds.