[jillybean]

---

Partner leads a small club which you win with the J, how do you continue?

[Phil]

What is the club spot partner led? What are spot leads?

[fromageGB]

♦8. You might need to take/set up a diamond before it is lost on the spades.

[han]

Just like Phil I would like to know how many clubs partner has.

[aguahombre]

If we can't find out from the club spot how many pard has, we could take a wild guess that Declarer didn't Wood with two small.

[Fluffy]

my only real concern is declarer having ♠Kx ♥AKQJxxx ♦A ♣xxx he will make this contract becase I will switch to diamonds.

To fromage: if you are switching to diamonds regardless of coun maybe you should not play ♣J

[kenberg]

I no longer believe what I said. Seemed like a good idea at the time.

[aguahombre]

Fluffy, on 2013-January-28, 12:35, said:

my only real concern is declarer having ♠Kx ♥AKQJxxx ♦A ♣xxx he will make this contract becase I will switch to diamonds.

To fromage: if you are switching to diamonds regardless of coun maybe you should not play ♣J

I guess knowing we use 3/5 leads wouldn't help us if declarer is that lame.

[kenberg]

Ditto

[jillybean]

Playing 4th best, partner led the 4. If it matters, is not a regular partnership.

[bd71]

Fluffy, on 2013-January-28, 12:35, said:

my only real concern is declarer having ♠Kx ♥AKQJxxx ♦A ♣xxx he will make this contract becase I will switch to diamonds.

How likely do we think it is that partner led from unsupported ♣K rather than ♦KQJ?

[kenberg]

bd71, on 2013-January-29, 02:26, said:

How likely do we think it is that partner led from unsupported ♣K rather than ♦KQJ?

A key point I think.

I already erased a couple of things that I said so I was staying quiet until I thought more, but last night it occurred to me that this must be the first question: Why did partner lead a club at all? Partner is leading from a shaggy holding, hoping that some of my meager values are in the suit he chooses. I did bid 2♦ in response to his double. This doesn't promise much, but when looking to find values in my hand, it seems reasonable to turn to diamonds. The usual reason for partner not starting diamonds would be that he has the ace and fears, especially after the diamond cue by declarer, that the King is on his right. Maybe this is so. At any rate, I now think I am leading a diamond.


And I get this hand is a strong reason for playing 3/5 against suits.

[Fluffy]

jillybean, on 2013-January-28, 21:17, said:

Playing 4th best, partner led the 4. If it matters, is not a regular partnership.

Declarer also plays

[kenberg]

Fluffy, on 2013-January-29, 06:27, said:

Declarer also plays

A good point. But if declarer has the 3 then partner has led from four, declarer has two cards in the suit, and he can/will play a spot higher than the 3. If declarer does not have the 3, he won't play the 3. So one way or the other, declarer will, presumably, follow with the non-3. Still, it would be good to know what in fact happened.

[jillybean]

Yes, declarer played the 3

[aguahombre]

jillybean, on 2013-January-29, 09:03, said:

Yes, declarer played the 3

Your leads are 4th, declarer played the 3; that changes everything. Declarer in-fact made two dumb moves ---one in the auction, and the other in the play. We cash the other club trick.

[kenberg]

Absolutely we cash the other club. If that is the wrong move, and it is just barely possible that it is, the game is too tough for me. But we need three tricks not two, so some thought is still required. Say we cash the club ace and then shift to a diamond. Declarer goes up with is ace. If he has eight running trump and a diamond honor, or maybe AKJ of diamonds and and seven running trump, the stage is now set for a diamond spade squeeze against partner. We could refuse to rectify the count by not cashing the second club but I would hate to have to explain this brilliant play later if it turns out badly.

Otoh, if partner has the ace of diamonds I worry about just how I will explain not leading a diamond at trick 3 after I cash a second club at trick 2. [Aqua's correction below applies to a now deleted and really stupid remark]

I think I play the ace of clubs and watch partner's spot. If he has the KQxx of spades and lacks the ace of diamonds, I need to play a spade at trick 3. I expect him to inform me of this at trick 2.

Btw, this worry about explaining myself is a way of speaking. I don't play with people who expect me to justify my every choice.

[aguahombre]

kenberg, on 2013-January-29, 10:55, said:

Otoh, if partner has the ace of diamonds I worry about just how I will explain not leading a diamond after I cash a club. Leading the club 7 is out of the question. Partner would win the King and return a third club expecting me to ruff.

Was thinking about leading that club 7 at trick two and letting partner figure out what she is holding in spades or diamonds. Seems to knock off the squeeze value of the club queen, and I don't believe pard will imagine declarer ducking twice with Ace third of clubs.

[kenberg]

aguahombre, on 2013-January-29, 11:04, said:

Was thinking about leading that club 7 at trick two and letting partner figure out what she is holding in spades or diamonds. Seems to knock off the squeeze value of the club queen, and I don't believe pard will imagine declarer ducking twice with Ace third of clubs.

Right. I deleted that from my comment, even before I saw what you said. I simply forgot I still would have the ace. Partner knows where the ace is, as you say.Really I think if partner is thinking, he should notice the discard problem and realize taking the spade ace off the board is a good idea.

In fact taking the spade ace off the board might be right even if declarer holds Qx. Clearly he has two spade tricks available then, but if by any chance that does not bring him up to 11 tricks, an early spade play might be just right. Say declarer has seven running hearts and AQx of diamonds. After Jack then Ace of clubs and a diamond, he plays the spade Q, this must be covered, he ruffs a club back to his hand and runs trump. Again partner must guard spades and can't.

It's really tough to understand what is going on. Has declarer really bid this way holding only the AK of hearts as key cards? With two small clubs? It makes little sense.

Maybe Aqua is right, lead a club back to partner's King. Partner knows whether he is holding the KQ of spades or the ace of diamonds, let him make the right play.It shouldn't be that hard.

[kenberg]

Before this hand slides into forum history, can you tell us what W actually had? His partner bid at the 1 level and was forced to bid over the 3♦ cue. Apparently W thought slam worth exploring. On what? With two small clubs and no club cue, he could safely bid slam only if, in response to 4NT, partner showed all the remaining aces. Certainly E did nothing to suggest that he might have three aces, so I think that W must have AKQxxxx or so in hearts and the ace of diamonds. There is also an issue of whether trumps were ever agreed. W bid 3♦ on the second round, E having bid spades, and 4NT on the next round, over 3♠.. Just when did hearts become trump? OK, W has the King of hearts so as long as E doesn't think spades are trump we are ok.

Now for tricks. Where was W thinking of finding 12?. Well, he stopped in 5. If W has ten tricks in his own hand then the spade ace on the board makes eleven and the hand is over after we take the clubs. I can't imagine W bidding this way with only eight tricks in his own hand. So W has a nine trick hand, most of them in hearts of course. This all seems like bizarre bidding for a guy with xx in clubs and K or Kx in diamonds, but maybe that's what he has. I think he has the diamond ace. AQ maybe. If so, Club, Club, Diamond won't work, Club, Club, Spade might, and even Club, Diamond might work.

Anyway, I am curious. West held what? I have further speculative thoughts but it would be sort of pointless to list them.