[TimG]

♠10. Most likely to be partner's void, high just in case he can take more than one ruff.

I think responder expects spades to be a source of tricks, thus he has some length there. If responder did not need to know about the spade stopper from partner, he could have bid 4N over 3♣. Maybe responder has something like ♠AQJx, red aces and xxx in clubs.

[kenrexford]

I'm simple. I'll ask about the 3♦ call, just to be safe, and then lead a diamond.

[han]

I'd also lead a diamond.

[skjaeran]

Agree with Tim that it looks like LHO liked the 3♠ response from RHO, and has a source of tricks there. The 3♦ bid doesn't have to be a 5-bagger either.

So I'll go for the ♠ ruff(s) and lead the ♠T.

[whereagles]

If pard has a ruff coming, it's not certain it's in spades. I'm gonna lead ♦Q.

[kgr]

small ♦.
Partner ruffs and sees my small ♦ as asking ♥

[FrancesHinden]

I don't quite understand why responder has to have spade tricks for his 3D response... if we listen to the auction without looking at our hand, responder has a diamond suit, club support and no spade control; he could hoping that the 3S "stop" is a control for slam purposes (rather than a QJx stop).

Maybe responder has xx Ax AK109xx KQx and is hoping for something like Kx xx xx AJ10xxxx opposite.

After thinking that through we look at our hand we notice that we have no hearts and we have a club keycard, so that construction doesn't quite add up.

Partner must have some heart length, and couldn't bid over 3D. So declarer must have heart length, and dummy must have some heart length.

Having been through all of this, I still don't think partner has a spade void. I just can't see why responder would conceal a 5-card spade suit and bid 3D instead.

The time a spade lead is right is when partner has the Ace of spades. The thing is, I don't think he would double with the ace and not the king; and their bidding is very odd indeed if they are off the AK of spades AS WELL AS the king of clubs. If I didn't have the CK, a spade lead would be more tempting.

So I lead a diamond hoping for partner to ruff it.

[nige1]

Jlall, on Jun 30 2007, 06:08 PM, said:

Txxxxx --- QJxxx Kx.

3C on right, 3D on left, 3S on right, 4N on left, 5C on right, 6C on left.

3S=stopper not necessarily length
4N=keycard for clubs
5C=1

Anyways it gets interesting when partner cracks this and LHO sends it back. LHO is a random person who is down a lot of imps so don't take too much inference from the XX.

Where are the hearts? What do you lead? Why?

Oh and btw before anyone says "double asks for the lead of dummies first bid suit" as their logic, your partnership agreement is "i have a surprise, find it" for this X.

Frances Hindenl, on Jul 1 2007, 12:09 PM, said:

I don't quite understand why responder has to have spade tricks for his 3D response... if we listen to the auction without looking at our hand, responder has a diamond suit, club support and no spade control; he could hoping that the 3S "stop" is a control for slam purposes (rather than a QJx stop).

Maybe responder has xx Ax AK109xx KQx and is hoping for something like Kx xx xx AJ10xxxx opposite.

After thinking that through we look at our hand we notice that we have no hearts and we have a club keycard, so that construction doesn't quite add up.

Partner must have some heart length, and couldn't bid over 3D. So declarer must have heart length, and dummy must have some heart length.

Having been through all of this, I still don't think partner has a spade void. I just can't see why responder would conceal a 5-card spade suit and bid 3D instead.

The time a spade lead is right is when partner has the Ace of spades. The thing is, I don't think he would double with the ace and not the king; and their bidding is very odd indeed if they are off the AK of spades AS WELL AS the king of clubs. If I didn't have the CK, a spade lead would be more tempting.

So I lead a diamond hoping for partner to ruff it.

IMO ♥ = 11 , ♦ x = 10, ♦ Q = 8, ♠ T =6, ♠ x = 5, ♣ x = 1
I like Frances' logic

[Fluffy]

Jlall, on Jul 2 2007, 04:37 AM, said:

I'm glad Frances offered some hand constructions at least...why does no one else?

It seems to me that one way to look at it is dummy has diamond length, some clubs, and we have no hearts so some hearts must be in dummy, and that doesn't leave too many spades so partner probably isn't void there.

I was in France with no connection except for several minutes

Your logic looks good, Dummy did need partner to have something in spades to play slam, so xx in spades or xxx can be.

Also it can be that declarer has ♠QJx so spade is still best lead.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jul 1 2007, 11:37 PM, said:

I'm glad Frances offered some hand constructions at least...why does no one else?

It seems to me that one way to look at it is dummy has diamond length, some clubs, and we have no hearts so some hearts must be in dummy, and that doesn't leave too many spades so partner probably isn't void there.

Because if 3♦ was not some sexy artificial bid, which you would have mentioned, then the hand construction is rather obvious.

One could always construct 5♦/4♠ for Responder and 1♦/3♠ for Opener, which is as consistent with the auction as much as 5♦/3♠ and 3♦/3♠ would be.

However, with hearts a lurking issue, dummy is not expected to have enough spades to give the opponents seven of them. Dummy probably has a small doubleton.

[FrancesHinden]

OK, now I've constructed a hand where partner thinks a spade is the winning lead which is vaguely consistent with the auction (I was struggling a bit before)

x
AKQx
AK109x.
Qxx


QJx
Jx
x
AJ10xxxx

...although I don't know why responder bothered with bidding 3D on this layout.
(As I mentioned before, I don't think partner would double with only the SA, and I don't think they can have two cashing spades and the CK missing)

The thing is, on this layout, a diamond lead is fine because he can't get all his spades away in time.

So maybe it has to be

x
AKQ
AK109xx.
Qxx


Qx
Jxxx
-
AJ10xxxx

Now a diamond lead is fatal.

OK, I've constructed a hand where a spade lead is right.
But I still think there are a lot more hands where partner is ruffing the opening diamond lead....

[TimG]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 2 2007, 09:21 AM, said:

...although I don't know why responder bothered with bidding 3D on this layout.

That seems to be a problem with many of the diamond length, club support, and some hearts constructions. If responder is something like 1453, it's hard to understand the 3♦ call.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on Jul 2 2007, 10:13 PM, said:

Anyways, partners hand was..

---
KQJT9xxxx
xx
xx

Down 3 on a spade lead, making on a diamond lead

Yeah, I usually need a slightly better heart suit to step into that auction.

Seriously, though, that's quite a position to take. Down four vulnerable, for -1100, still is not all that bad even against a non-vulnerable 6♣. I'd have a difficult time passing throughout and then doubling for a spade lead. It wouldn't be so difficult making the passes and the double. The problem would be escaping the room when partner saw my actual hand.

[foo]

Jlall, on Jul 2 2007, 10:13 PM, said:

Partners hand was..

- KQJT9xxxx xx xx

-3 on a ♠ lead, making on a ♦ lead

Yee gods man!

Where did your pd's testicles get taken to that they could not find a bid with that?!

(3C)-pa-(3D)-5H

...and let Them take The Last Guess.

[whereagles]

justin, who the hell have you been playing with?

[TimG]

Jlall, on Jul 2 2007, 10:13 PM, said:

Anyways, partners hand was..

---
KQJT9xxxx
xx
xx

What was responder's hand?

[FrancesHinden]

Jlall, on Jul 3 2007, 04:13 AM, said:

Frances, in your construction they asked for keycards then bid it missing 2.

I know. You said they were a lot down and fairly random...

Anyway,

i) all of my constructions didn't include partner passing throughout on a 9-card suit....
ii) on the actual hand, I bet us + dummy have more diamonds between us than we have spades (i.e. had we been able to see dummy before leading we'd still lead a diamond)
and
iii) if a diamond had beaten it you wouldn't have posted it as a problem