[m1cha]

Vampyr, on 2017-December-25, 21:35, said:

"Any denomination" does not work, since major and minor games require different numbers of tricks.

True but I'm still thinking if it matters. Anyway, I have deleted my former post because I came to the conclusion that the OP probably doesn't imply what I thought it would imply.

[Vampyr]

m1cha, on 2017-December-25, 21:49, said:

True but I'm still thinking if it matters. Anyway, I have deleted my former post because I came to the conclusion that the OP probably doesn't imply what I thought it would imply.

I think it kinda does, because if you can make 11 tricks in a trump contract, there obviously isn't a unique answer.

[lamford]

nullve, on 2017-December-24, 04:06, said:

When the last 2 is played, the remaining players have to discard from suits that

* only they have left (or else the 2 in that suit could not have been a winner)
* they've already cashed the 2 in (which is only possible after the other players have shown out).

So each opponent had to get in on a non-2 at some point to be able to cash a 2. That's at least 4 tricks for the defenders, so the only possible game contract is 3N=.

My previous post shows that such a 3N= hand can be constructed, so the solution is 0 overtricks (in 3N).

This is a good answer. 4M= and 3NT= are the only possible contracts. The problem with 4 major seems to be that the defence have to make one deuce by ruffing and one length trick, but declarer must have won a length trick with a deuce in two other suits so the partner of the defender winning the length trick with the deuce cannot have any suit to discard! So I think 3NT= is the only solution.

[Lovera]

lamford, on 2017-December-26, 07:40, said:

This is a good answer. 4M= and 3NT= are the only possible contracts. The problem with 4 major seems to be that the defence have to make one deuce by ruffing and one length trick, but declarer must have won a length trick with a deuce in two other suits so the partner of the defender winning the length trick with the deuce cannot have any suit to discard! So I think 3NT= is the only solution.

My solution allows an overtick cutting comunication in club and unblocking the major suits (3+3+2+2=10). Is it valid ?

[lamford]

Lovera, on 2017-December-26, 08:27, said:

My solution allows an overtick cutting comunication in club and unblocking the major suits (3+3+2+2=10). Is it valid ?

I don't think it does unless you can give an order of play.

[nige1]

For Vampyr: You can adjust the earlier construction so that defenders can't defeat the contract but declarer still has to give up overtricks so that opponents can win their deuces. The play is essentially the same as before: west leads a black card and declarer cashes 9 tricks in the black suits, so that red cards can be unblocked.

---

[Lovera]

lamford, on 2017-December-26, 09:38, said:

I don't think it does unless you can give an order of play.

Opening lead is ♣ Q to K, ♠ A and K in dummy, little ♥ to 10 for E returning club for A in S then little ♠ for W, etc...

[nige1]

barmar, on 2017-December-25, 02:44, said:

My puzzle is why this can't happen online?

With a predealt board and compliant human players?

[Vampyr]

nige1, on 2017-December-26, 17:15, said:

With a predealt board and compliant human players?

It's not a very interesting puzzle if it involves players cooperating with the other side. The declarer play and defence should be plausible.

[broze]

Vampyr, on 2017-December-26, 22:24, said:

It's not a very interesting puzzle if it involves players cooperating with the other side. The declarer play and defence should be plausible.

I disagree. If a puzzle is any good, any conditions should be stated in it.

[nige1]

Lovera, on 2017-December-24, 08:25, said:

I had thought this one for +1 trick more.

---

Lovera, on 2017-December-26, 14:57, said:

Opening lead is ♣ Q to K, ♠ A and K in dummy, little ♥ to 10 for E returning club for A in S then little ♠ for W, etc...

How can that line work?
Instead, East can take 2 ♣ tricks and West can take 2 ♦ tricks, while the other players unblock major pips; so that, eventually, all 4 deuces win and declarer makes 9 tricks. But if 4 deuces win tricks, how does declarer make an overtrick?

In order to cash his ♣2, East must take the previous trick. Similarly West must win the previous trick, to cash his ♦2. Hence each defender takes two tricks. That is 4 defensive tricks

[Lovera]

nige1, on 2017-December-27, 11:20, said:

How that line work?
Instead, East can take 2 ♣ tricks and West can take 2 ♦ tricks, while the other players unblock major pips; so that all 4 deuces win. But if 4 deuces win tricks, how does declarer make an overtrick.

Because E has the heart suit that needs to be unblocked before that be lead a club against the A avoiding so to estabilish winners in suit. The subsequent play is reversed on W that has no more clubs and every return allows to rescue remaining winners. It is to be noted that the heart suit cannot be whole played otherwise W can unblock the Q of spade on those cards.

[nige1]

Vampyr, on 2017-December-26, 22:24, said:

It's not a very interesting puzzle if it involves players cooperating with the other side. The declarer play and defence should be plausible.

Puzzles are an art-form. Their beauty lies in the eye of would-be solvers, for some of whom, economy of presentation is a relevant aesthetic.

[lamford]

nige1, on 2017-December-28, 00:04, said:

Puzzles are an art-form. Their beauty lies in the eye of would-be solvers, for some of whom, economy of presentation is a relevant aesthetic.

Indeed. Vampyr would presumably decry a help-mate in chess ...