bad luck or blunder?

Discussion:

(too old to reply)

a***@yahoo.co.uk

2019-04-16 22:42:52 UTC

Game all, MPs:

JT63
92
AK
AQJT7

4S opened on my left, passed round to me. I doubled, passed out. Partner leads the D5. Dummy comes down with:

-
AKQJT4
9873
632

I can see what this hand is about, take our defensive tricks now or never. I win the trick, declarer playing the DJ. I cash the CA at trick 2, partner playing the 4. I had a think and thought partner was discouraging and declarer holds the king, so I played my second diamond. Declarer ruffs, plays off the top three trumps, crosses to the hearts and goodbye club losers. 4SX= for -790. One other NS pair conceded this score.

The full deal:

JT63
92
AK
AQJT7
- AKQ97542
AKQJT4 5
9873 J
632 985
8
8763
QT6542
K4

The C4 was not discouraging, she happened to have a doubleton and understandably didn't want to drop the king under my ace. Of course double dummy 4S is two down. One pair did get it two down, and the other two pairs were in 5D one or two down.

Was my thinking flawed here or is this another one of those unlucky hands.

ais523

2019-04-16 23:15:10 UTC

Permalink

Post by a***@yahoo.co.uk
JT63
92
AK
AQJT7
4S opened on my left, passed round to me. I doubled, passed out.
Partner leads the D5.

Presumably fourth-highest?

This hand is a good argument for a lead system that indicates the length
of the suit. If you knew partner had six diamonds, it'd have been
impossible to misplay the hand. Of course, such systems suffer from
potential ambiguities when shorter suits are involved; a length-lead
system can attempt to convey information about the locatiions of high
cards, like fourth-highest does, but it's rarely as clear as a
fourth-highest signal would be. Even then, I'm hard-pressed to think of
a system which could unambiguously signal a six-card suit; it's
reasonable for your partner to have a four-card diamond suit on this
bidding.

Everything else that happened in the hand is likely just bad luck (e.g.
if you're forced to play the x from Kx, you're forced to play the x from
Kx, and that could be misleading no matter what your signalling system
is). I don't think it's reasonable for the second-round play of the Ace
to systemically promise the Queen.

On the other hand, I can see an argument for playing the Queen of Clubs
(or Jack of Clubs, if that's your agreement for the appropriate lead
from AQJxx): you probably haven't beaten the hand unless partner has the
King (because there's pretty much no way the partnership will be able
to cash three diamonds, so you need two club tricks; there's no
finesse on because you can see the King isn't in dummy, so if partner
doesn't have the King, the opponents have the clubs stopped). Playing
the Queen makes it almost impossible for the partnership to go wrong;
if partner overtakes they'll be playing the suit back to you (to show
a doubleton), if partner decides not to overtake then playing the Ace
next is basically guaranteed to beat the contract (if partner has
length they can give a clear signal with their second spot card, if
they don't it'll be clear from the King dropping, and with JT still in
your hand the King isn't an important card). So the only real risk is
if partner has a singleton club (in which case they may well have lead
it!). I think this would be a clear line at IMPs. At matchpoints, it's
rather less clear, because it likely gives up an overtrick if it's
wrong, and if 4SX is a common contract (there's no reason to think it
won't be), the overtrick is likely to matter.

--
ais523

a***@yahoo.co.uk

2019-04-16 23:33:25 UTC

Permalink

Post by ais523
On the other hand, I can see an argument for playing the Queen of Clubs
(or Jack of Clubs, if that's your agreement for the appropriate lead
from AQJxx): you probably haven't beaten the hand unless partner has the
King (because there's pretty much no way the partnership will be able
to cash three diamonds, so you need two club tricks; there's no
finesse on because you can see the King isn't in dummy, so if partner
doesn't have the King, the opponents have the clubs stopped). Playing
the Queen makes it almost impossible for the partnership to go wrong;
if partner overtakes they'll be playing the suit back to you (to show
a doubleton), if partner decides not to overtake then playing the Ace
next is basically guaranteed to beat the contract (if partner has
length they can give a clear signal with their second spot card, if
they don't it'll be clear from the King dropping, and with JT still in
your hand the King isn't an important card). So the only real risk is
if partner has a singleton club (in which case they may well have lead
it!). I think this would be a clear line at IMPs. At matchpoints, it's
rather less clear, because it likely gives up an overtrick if it's
wrong, and if 4SX is a common contract (there's no reason to think it
won't be), the overtrick is likely to matter.
--
ais523

I don't follow you here. If partner doesn't have the CK, declarer has it, and if declarer has it, playing another club will lead to what happened, except that declarers diamond losers rather than club losers go on the hearts. It comes down to what minor winners are cashable, which is what I got wrong. If declarer holds Kx in clubs and two losing diamonds, cashind DAK, CA together with the trump winner gets it down. Maybe it is down to a guess after all.

ais523

2019-04-17 00:19:09 UTC

Permalink

Post by a***@yahoo.co.uk
I don't follow you here. If partner doesn't have the CK, declarer has
it, and if declarer has it, playing another club will lead to what
happened, except that declarers diamond losers rather than club losers
go on the hearts. It comes down to what minor winners are cashable,
which is what I got wrong. If declarer holds Kx in clubs and two
losing diamonds, cashind DAK, CA together with the trump winner gets
it down. Maybe it is down to a guess after all.

I'm looking at this in terms of winners from the defence's point of
view. Declarer opened 4S, so you don't have winners there (other than
potential ruffs). Dummy has a heart stack (AKQJT4 = six heart tricks
after trumps are drawn, almost guaranteed), so you don't have winners
there either; your winners must be in diamonds or clubs.

You need to take the first four tricks to beat 4S. If declarer has CK,
then it's offside, and the declaring side have a club stop; taking the
first four tricks would thus require CA and three diamond tricks. But
taking three diamond tricks is almost impossible on this hand without
using clubs as an entry (you have DAK tight, so the only possible
entries to partner's hand are in clubs, or an outside chance of a heart
ruff).

Conclusion: if declarer has CK, you aren't beating this contract, full
stop. So if you're playing to beat the contract, you may as well assume
that partner has CK and play accordingly. (Of course, as this is
matchpoints, playing to beat the contract isn't the only option; playing
to minimize overtricks may be better if you think 4CX is going to be a
frequently reached contract. But if you think it's a rare contract, you
still need to play to beat it.)

--
ais523

a***@yahoo.co.uk

2019-04-17 08:39:35 UTC

Permalink

Post by ais523

I'm looking at this in terms of winners from the defence's point of
view. Declarer opened 4S, so you don't have winners there (other than
potential ruffs). Dummy has a heart stack (AKQJT4 = six heart tricks
after trumps are drawn, almost guaranteed), so you don't have winners
there either; your winners must be in diamonds or clubs.
You need to take the first four tricks to beat 4S. If declarer has CK,
then it's offside, and the declaring side have a club stop; taking the
first four tricks would thus require CA and three diamond tricks. But
taking three diamond tricks is almost impossible on this hand without
using clubs as an entry (you have DAK tight, so the only possible
entries to partner's hand are in clubs, or an outside chance of a heart
ruff).
Conclusion: if declarer has CK, you aren't beating this contract, full
stop. So if you're playing to beat the contract, you may as well assume
that partner has CK and play accordingly. (Of course, as this is
matchpoints, playing to beat the contract isn't the only option; playing
to minimize overtricks may be better if you think 4CX is going to be a
frequently reached contract. But if you think it's a rare contract, you
still need to play to beat it.)
--
ais523

I only need to take the first three tricks to beat 4S, since JTxx with a void in dummy is a guarenteed winner. Once a club and diamond winner hold up it is apparently a guess as to which minor to play for the third minor trick. I was wondering if there was a way of guessing better.

Douglas Newlands

2019-04-17 01:03:42 UTC

Permalink

Post by a***@yahoo.co.uk
JT63
92
AK
AQJT7
-
AKQJT4
9873
632
I can see what this hand is about, take our defensive tricks now or never. I win the trick, declarer playing the DJ. I cash the CA at trick 2, partner playing the 4. I had a think and thought partner was discouraging and declarer holds the king, so I played my second diamond. Declarer ruffs, plays off the top three trumps, crosses to the hearts and goodbye club losers. 4SX= for -790. One other NS pair conceded this score.
JT63
92
AK
AQJT7
- AKQ97542
AKQJT4 5
9873 J
632 985
8
8763
QT6542
K4
The C4 was not discouraging, she happened to have a doubleton and understandably didn't want to drop the king under my ace. Of course double dummy 4S is two down. One pair did get it two down, and the other two pairs were in 5D one or two down.
Was my thinking flawed here or is this another one of those unlucky hands.

Don't play double as penalty and the issue never arises.
You need 4NT for the big 2 suiters and can't waste it being too
committal on 3 suiters.
It becomes even more pointed when you can put the contract 2 off but
it's a complete guess what to play and how to unblock the clubs.

doug

Mick Heins

2019-04-17 11:28:25 UTC

Permalink

If you play fourth-best leads, the missing 4 and 2 of diamonds should
be concerning. If partner had nothing in clubs, nothing in hearts, a
strong partner, and QTxx of diamonds, would they lead a diamond? I
don't think so.

Partner has some fault due. They should consider leading the CK or
dropping it. It is bound to be the key card for partner to know about,
and playing the C4 is going to be very confusing using standard signals.

This hand is an argument for third and lowest leads -- the D6 would be much
easier to read.

--
Mickey

For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public
relations, for Nature cannot be fooled. -- Dick Feynman

Lorne

2019-04-17 16:10:35 UTC

Permalink

Blame partner's lead - why try to take tricks in your 6 card suit when
the oppo has signalled a very distributional deal and your doubleton
looks very likely to be a source of tricks or to set up a source of
tricks depending on who has the ace. I would lead the club K on this
auction.

Also on the actual lead I would play A then K with a doubleton if my
plan was to cash both. Should wake partner up to you having a doubleton
and on another layout could be useful in him signalling if he has an entry.

Hotzenplotz

2019-04-22 00:25:57 UTC

Permalink

How can you x? This is takeout for good pairs. Anyway, and pd drops the 2 asking for a C. Then a low C.