|
|
 |
Reply
| | | From: alansc (Original Message) | Sent: 1/4/2009 1:40 AM |
.----------------------------------------------------.
|Dealer: N ===North======== Brd# 169937 |
|Declarer: S Scoring: MP |
|Vulnerable: None S: AK4 |
|Contract: 3NT H: KQ96 |
|Result: Made 4 D: JT864 |
|Score: 430 C: 9 |
|===West========= ===East========= |
|> alansc .----------. |
|S: J9 | | |
|H: JT8432 | |
|D: K | | |
|C: AT42 .----------. |
| |
| |
.----------------------------------------------------. BIDDING: West North East South
1D Pass 1S
Pass 2D Pass 3C
Pass 3S Pass 3NT
Pass Pass Pass Opps not that sophiscated so dont put much into the bidding You led the JH, declarer wins the Ace and leads the DQ. You win the king(good play) and lead a club to pards king. He wins and returns the C8. Declarer plays the Q. Your play? |
|
 First
Previous
2-9 of 9
Next
Last
|
Reply
| |
Interesting problem. If declarer started with 4225, you obviously play low and get 2 club tricks after partner wins the DA to set this contract (of course, if declarer has 4 spade tricks, he can make at this point by finessing the HT and winning 4s+4h+1c before driving out the DA. Declarer surely has the SQ so it's likely that 4 spade tricks are there).
However, if declarer started with 4126 and you duck, the DA might be the last trick for the defense (since declarer led the DQ at trick 2, he probably started with Q9 diamonds and not Qx because he didn't guard against stiff honor in your hand).
At IMPs, you obviously try to set but at MPs it's not so clear. I think you should still duck though - if declarer really has 4126 with the DQ9, you should at least have some company at the bottom of the scoresheet. |
|
Reply
| | | From: alansc | Sent: 1/4/2009 4:14 PM |
This is what happened
I ducked playing pard for the DA so we can take 3C and 2D.
Declarer made a spectacular deceptive play of the DQ holding Qxxx, A, AQx QJxxx earning himself a top and myself a lesson from pard. Did I deserve that fate?
|
|
Reply
|  0 recommendations | Message 5 of 9 in Discussion |
|
| This message has been deleted by the author. |
|
Reply
| |
| So declarer made 11 tricks for a top? Very unusual play, he probably needed a swing but I still don't think it's a good idea to rely on the DK offside and misdefense when you have a play for 12 tricks if the DK is onside and spades break. |
|
Reply
| |
so u assumed declarer bid 3C then 3N with something like Qxxx A(x) Qx(x) QJxxx? |
|
Reply
| | | From: pons | Sent: 1/4/2009 5:35 PM |
Declarer made a lucky play. The only hint (if you trust the bidding at all) is that you are giving declarer a MAX of 11 HCP... maybe QXXX-AX-QX-QJXXX) where they might have been content with 2NT instead of a game-forcing 3C |
|
Reply
| |
> so u assumed declarer bid 3C then 3N with
> something like Qxxx A(x) Qx(x) QJxxx?
Sure, I see this all the time. He bid 3C and then didn't know what to do over 3S :)
Actually, if you need a swing the play does have some merit.
In 3NT, you always beat those in 5D no matter where the DK is. Against those in 6D, if the DK is onside you lose and if it's offside you win no matter how you play.
So if you assume that the DK is offside to have a chance to win the board (because if it's on, 6D makes), you might as well try the deceptive play to try to beat those in 3NT.
So to answer your question: you deserved the zero, but didn't deserve the lesson from pard :) |
|
|
First
Previous
2-9 of 9
Next
Last
|
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to All Message Boards