You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How was Ben Franklin's fire station paid for? The building, the equipment and the wages of all the employees?
Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Ah, I see. If partner has J7 fifth declarer is stuck. So then it's a guess. One guess needs the 7 (or 10), but the other is perhaps a more ‘indicated’ lead. I don't know what is percentage - and I'm not sure the actual hand will throw much light on the subject.
Still, I already missed one thing in analyzing. Maybe I missed something else…
Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
But then how do you defeat 3N?
Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'm assuming imps even though the OP failed to specify.

There has been more than one comment suggesting partner needs/might have 4HCP. We are looking at 26. If partner has 4, it means that declarer, having redoubled, jumped to 2N with 10HCP. That would be weird.
Also weird, as mentioned by Mike Ma and others, is the overall bidding. It seems partner at favorable (who ‘must’ have 5-card ) should have bid 2 over the redouble. But I see nothing we can do with that information.

Can we beat 3N if partner has 3HCP? The only chance seems to be Q and J. I play 10 and hope declarer has Qx. I eventually win a club and switch to S8.

How did partner find this lead? Perhaps he read something in the tempo of the 2N bid that influenced him to shy away from a spade lead.
I don't want to punish partner for a weird bid. I want to reward him for an inspired lead.
Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rajeshwar: That's a lot of analysis. I think you're at the table instinct was normal, and I would have had the same. I think the winning defense is playing for a pretty ‘particular’ hand - and still won't work if declarer has 10.

I remember Zia's “heats” differently - Heat 1 was the best.
Nov. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Club shift is also wrong when declarer has KQx, J10x, Jxx, AKQJ.

When I first saw this problem, I thought it was a choice between ducking the heart, or winning and cashing another heart. I haven't changed my mind yet.

I still see no reasonable hand where winning and playing a club is the only winning defense. Maybe those exist.

If you cah the hearts and partner has only 3, now you could still survive by playing a spade when declarer has Qx, J108x, Jx, AKQJx - only 14 HCP, but a lot more reasonable than the OP hand.
And, again, the club switch would have failed.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Actually, I thought it was the most intelligent comment I've ever seen from Tomasz. He was merely presenting the other side of an ‘argument’.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Phil: That's a reasonable on an auction where their combined length is fairly narrowly ‘known’. For example, (2M)P-(3M)P, (P)X.

But here, I think it's dangerous to pass with 0-1 (or after your ‘look’). Their combined length could be anywher from 6 (maybe 5) to 13.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I think duck at trick one is probably right only when partner has led from 10”

But are you stating that A and a DIAMOND return is right whenever partner has led from K.?

If you are going to return a heart at trick two, ducking seems like better ‘technique’.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“I agree that the worst problem of opening at first is the lack of tricks if partner doubles something.”

I'm not sure it's the worst problem with opening. An even worse problem might be that they make a game by dropping the K that you ‘must’ Having said that, if the bidding went P-3♣-P-3NT, I have; worse still, a slam; worst would be a grand slam.

“would regret not having shown spades at a safe level. (If I had, I would then pass and lead a heart, knowing that partner could not support spades).”

It's probably sensible to USE the asdvantage of your being a passed hand by playing that partner's 4 over your 41c asks for the longer major. I can see this being figured out/gambled on the fly.

“I would probably bid 4 in that position, but without any confidence.”

Well, I recommend that you at least LOOK confident. Poker is an element of bridge.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, that is one possible set of agreements - return lowest from 5-card, unblock with highest from 4-card - although it leaves out the third factor.

But not being able to separate (say) A962 from A92 is quite often going to present difficulties from partner. Logic suggests that a method where you need to distinguish 3-card from 5-card might be ‘easier’ to read than one where you need to distinguish 3-card from 4-card.

Also, dummy's length and partner's leading style are relevant factors.
Nov. 24
Michael Rosenberg edited this comment Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Nope, not nitpicking. I looked at the choices, and couldn't find one that ‘fit’ for me.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More than one possibility - at least. For example, I could not know whether 1 is correct or not, but think 2 is wrong.
Any combination of not having an opinion about a bid (or two bids), while having an opinion about another bid, would come under the heading of “Other”.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree I'd be happier if K was a small club. But I don't agree that partner is more likely to misjudge than if I open at the 1-level. In fact, I don't even understand why it's an argument.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is no foolproof way to always get this heart suit right. The best way is to have agreements; both of which card you return from 5 AND which card you lead when you need to unblock. And I think, whatever is agreed, there is a third agrement that should be followed.
In the optimal agreement, there is a connection between these three things. But, as usual, it's more important to be on the same wavelength with your partner than to have the optimal agreement,
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Duck can hardly be right, because if *either* of the pointed suit is running, you had just gave declarer his 9th trick.”

Declarer has Kx, J108x, AJx, KQJx. Diamonds are running, but only ducking prevails.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I can't tell if that's an argument for the A play or not. If it is, I think A play is a big error.

As has been pointed out elsethread, at imps the blocking of the suit is not a big deal - four heart tricks is enough.
Nov. 24
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Other. As usual, the options fail to cover all possibilities.
Nov. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Worst case for pass is: partner has K9 Jx xxxxxx J10x and each side can make 3 of a black suit while partner has no semblance of a call at any point in the auction”

I disagree. Partner, with that hand, might have bid 1N at his first turn to call. And at his second turn, should have doubled 3 if that is agreed as not being penalty. With no TO agreement or (more likely) no agreement at all, responder might have tried 3 - hoping for 6-5.
Nov. 23
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Over (3) P -(3N) you can bid 4. At least if partner doubles anything, you will be confident. Opening the bidding 1 conceivably puts you in a worse ‘position’.
Nov. 23
.

Bottom Home Top