[pclayton]

Here's a defensive problem sent to me by one of my teammates:

______________________

With None vul, surprisingly you pass instead of trying a Woolsey 2♦ (either six card major which we play) holding:

JT3
A98754
A2
J4


Bidding is 1nt-p-2h(xfer)-p-2s-p-3nt-all pass. You're on lead and you try a 4th best heart. You're playing 3/5 v suits, 4th vs NT and UDCA.

Dummy puts down:

Scoring: MP

---

T1: H7, H6, H3, HT
T2: H2, H4, HQ, C7
T3: S2, S9, SA, S3
T4: S5, ST, S4, S6

What now ?

[temp3600]

First, can declarer have less than Jxx in diamonds? It is unlikely. With Ax KJTx Txx AQ9x, conceding an unnecessary spade trick seems very risky, as it would likely lead to one more undertrick than the rest of the field. Then again, if opponents don't switch to diamonds, maybe following this train of thought, it can win a lot! How much of a gambler is East?

Now let's suppose declarer has something in diamonds. We are probably trying to prevent an overtrick then. Let's give declarer Ax KJTx KTxx Axx. He has 4 tricks in spades, 2 in hearts already, 2 top clubs, and at least one coming in diamonds. One sure way of preventing the overtrick is to setup our own heart suit, before the DA is knocked out.
What about Ax KJTx Jxx AQ9x? Declarer's play is risky, as he is likely down if spades are 4-2 - setting up the third heart trick seems better.

I'm plaing declarer for Ax KJTx KTxx Axx. HA and a heart.

[pclayton]

I guess I should mention that 1N is 15-17. For the purposes of a problem like this you can assume a deviation is possible, but not likely.

[whereagles]

Hum.. if declarer were afraid of a diamond switch, he would probably have tried to lose the spade to pard. On the other hand, pard seems to have started with 5 clubs (with 4 he wouldn't have discarded one.. RIGHT?). If I play back a heart, declarer can get away with 3 spades, 3 hearts and 3 clubs.

I'll try a diamond, eventhough it might be the last trick I take if temp3600's hand is the actual one.

[mikeh]

Partner pitched the ♣7 in a scenario where he can certainly play us for some hcp, but there is no way he knows which minor suit Ace we hold (assuming that we have one at all). So a construction that gives partner Qxxx in ♣ doesn't make a lot of sense: he would have implicitly preferred an inferior ♦ suit over the ♣ suit where, if I held the A, a switch would be very useful.


While nothing is close to certain, I'd give declarer something like Ax KJ10x Jxx AQ9x... and he has gone for the good board by playing on ♠, rather than driving out the ♥A... maybe not the best imp line of play but this ain't imps.

And if we play A and a ♥, his gamble has paid off.

So I play cash the red aces and then play a second ♦.