[FrancesHinden]

You should have been in 3NT, but instead you are in 4S. This is an IMPs KO match, last board. You don't believe you are either a long way up or a long way down, if anything you are 10-15 imps up.
Opponents play Acol in a fairly conservative style.

---

LHO leads a top club and RHO plays the 8, standard count.
LHO thinks for a while and switches to the 7 of diamonds, Ace, 3, 6.

Now see the poll.

[bluecalm]

Playing against standard count is always difficult for me because I have no idea if they would play a 9 or an 8 from 9854.
Anyway I suppose they would have ruffed a club if it's possible so I assume the opening leader has AK short probably.
I have easy 10 tricks if trumps are 3-2. If they are 4-1 I may need A♥ as entry to my club tricks.
I am not good at analyzing this kind of hands. Playing low trump from dummy looks good. If I win this I will think what next.

[karlson]

I think my plan is to ruff a diamond in hand without cashing the ♥A, play two rounds of trumps (with the finesse) ending in dummy, ruff another diamond, and then play clubs. This seems virtually 100% assuming the spade hook is on and the first diamond isn't overruffed -- they can get two clubs and either a ruff or long trump, and there are still very good overtrick chances.

Don't really understand playing spades now, lefty may well be able to see that taking the club ruff now will be the end of the defense, so clubs could still be 4-2.

If the ♠Q is not covered then on the second round I should play the ace -- it would be embarrassing to go down to Kxx of spades on my right when they return a third trump, and it seems like it would be hard to not cover ♠Q.

[Free]

♥A, ruff a ♦, I guess I'm missing something but it looks like the best way to get rid of my losers in dummy.

[rhm]

I would play the ♦K, discarding a low ♣ from hand, ruff a ♦ high, followed by the ♣Q.
I try to make the contract when ♠s break, but the ♠K being off side and ♣s being 4-2. Of course this means LHO may have made a mistake, but I think it is unlikely to hurt to play that way and it might have been hard to see for LHO that you could discard a ♣ on the 2nd ♦. If ♦s are 1-7 and LHO ruffs the second ♦, I will need the ♠K onside.

Rainer Herrmann

[FrancesHinden]

rhm, on 2011-March-28, 04:26, said:

I would play the ♦K, discarding a low ♣ from hand, ruff a ♦ high, followed by the ♣Q.
I try to make the contract when ♠s break, but the ♠K being off side and ♣s being 4-2. Of course this means LHO may have made a mistake, but I think it is unlikely to hurt to play that way and it might have been hard to see for LHO that you could discard a ♣ on the 2nd ♦. If ♦s are 1-7 and LHO ruffs the second ♦, I will need the ♠K onside.

Rainer Herrmann

LHO is 3=5=1=4 so this line makes, and ruffing a diamond to hand doesn't.
I think this line is correct: I don't see the urgency to ruff a diamond to hand at once.


Luckily my partner wasn't tested at the table, as LHO gave his partner a club ruff rather than switch to a diamond, and partner carefully ruffed a club (rather than a diamond) to hand to take the spade finesse.

p.s. I don't think that ace and a second spade is obviously right, but it has the merit of making the contract.

[gnasher]

FrancesHinden, on 2011-April-01, 12:40, said:

LHO is 3=5=1=4.
...
Luckily my partner wasn't tested at the table, as LHO gave his partner a club ruff rather than switch to a diamond, and partner carefully ruffed a club (rather than a diamond) to hand to take the spade finesse.

How did he avoid losing a diamond?

[FrancesHinden]

Because RHO returned a diamond trying to give his partner a ruff (not unreasonable)

If you had played the DK ditching a club earlier you are however in no trouble because the ruff was with the trump length.