[wuudturner]

A hand from the club the other day. Playing with my regular partner, against one of the stronger members of the local game, just short of platinum LM. Matchpoints. South deals, all vulnerable.

The bidding goes (South as dealer)

pass - pass - 1♢ - pass
1♠ - pass - 2♡ - pass
2♠ - pass - 4♡ - all pass

North is the one with 9K master points, so she knows what a reverse is, though South is not strong, and North tends not to trust her partner's bidding.

My hand was:

5
64
T7643
KQ732

I lead the spade stiff.

Dummy comes down as:

AJT87
J8
82
J985

Declarer thinks for a second, then ducks, as partner rises with the king. He returns the spade deuce, as declarer plays the queen. I ruff, and take stock of what I know.

It seems abundantly clear that declarer is 2560. She would never blast 4♡ on a 4 card suit. But if she is 5-5 in the red suits, then she would open 1♡. And since her spades were seen to be Q6, I can count 2560.

Partner has the same information of course. His spade deuce asks for a club return, so it seem clear that he has the ace of clubs. At the same time, I can count the diamonds around the table too. They must be 6520, with partner having the void.

So, partner could have asked for a diamond return too. The question is now, which suit do I return? I am confidant that partner had 5404 shape to start.

The problem is, if I return a club, as partner has requested, I know that declarer will ruff. Has partner a heart trick that I don't know of, and does not wish to ruff a diamond? Or, did partner ask for a club, perhaps having not counted out declarer's hand?

Anyway, I decide to ignore the suit preference signal, since I am confidant that declarer will ruff. I lead my second highest diamond, asking for another spade return, even though my remaining trump 6 will not be too dangerous.

Of course, this is a story about a fix. partner follows suit in diamonds with the queen. Declarer wins, then draws two rounds of trump, ending in dummy with the jack as I show out on the second round, having ruffed already. Now declarer runs spades in dummy, pitching first a club, then the 5 and 9 of diamonds.

So declarer was in fact 2551. She had mis-sorted her hand initially, thinking she was 46 in the red suits.

Declarer makes 11 tricks. The full hand was:

---

Had I led a club, partner would win, returning another spade. Declarer now needs to ruff with the 7, else I can overruff. And if she ruffs higher, then partner's trumps get promoted. Worse, by shortening her trumps, now declarer needs to play only one round of trumps to the jack, before she can run the spades.

[FelicityR]

The moral of the story is, perhaps: Always Trust Your Partner.

As for this statement: So declarer was in fact 2551. She had mis-sorted her hand initially, thinking she was 46 in the red suits.. It may be true but I am a sceptic. With two red suits, declarer would rather be in a 4 heart contract than a 5 diamond contract one level higher. By bidding diamonds then reversing in hearts she keeps the bidding forcing and lower than a 1H - 3D high level reverse

[rmnka447]

I'm in line with FelicityR -- Trust your partner. Definitely return a ♣.

The key question to ask yourself is "Why didn't partner signal for a ♦ return with a void?"

The answer should be obvious -- either partner isn't void in ♦ or has a sure trump trick.

I think a key lesson from this hand is that you should keep reevaluating what you know about the hand based on how the play, signaling and cards played. In that regard, it's often as important to consider what didn't happen as much as what did happen,

[pescetom]

Thanks for a thoughtful and crystalline clear post, useful to players of all levels. I agree with others about the moral.

[pescetom]

rmnka447, on 2019-May-19, 11:00, said:

I'm in line with FelicityR -- Trust your partner. Definitely return a ♣.

The key question to ask yourself is "Why didn't partner signal for a ♦ return with a void?"

The answer should be obvious -- either partner isn't void in ♦ or has a sure trump trick.

I think a key lesson from this hand is that you should keep reevaluating what you know about the hand based on how the play, signaling and cards played. In that regard, it's often as important to consider what didn't happen as much as what did happen,

I agree, but the OP (implicitly but intentionally, I imagine) raised important questions about how trusting partners should signal and interpret signals.
If it should already be clear to partner that we have a void in diamonds, when should we signal for a diamonds return all the same, and when should we signal for some other return? When is he free to disregard either signal?

[ahydra]

OP, can you please edit your post to replace the messed-up symbols with the standard BBO ones? [ sp ], [ he ] etc (without spaces).

Thanks,

ahydra

[johnu]

FelicityR, on 2019-May-19, 07:03, said:

The moral of the story is, perhaps: Always Trust Your Partner.

As they say, trust but verify if you can. If declarer was 6-5 in the red suits, partner had a choice of 4 spade spots to return and chose the 2. You have no reason I can think of to disregard partner's clear signal with this hand.

FelicityR, on 2019-May-19, 07:03, said:

As for this statement: So declarer was in fact 2551. She had mis-sorted her hand initially, thinking she was 46 in the red suits.. It may be true but I am a sceptic. With two red suits, declarer would rather be in a 4 heart contract than a 5 diamond contract one level higher. By bidding diamonds then reversing in hearts she keeps the bidding forcing and lower than a 1H - 3D high level reverse

??? Nobody I play with would bid intentionally open 1♦ with 5-5 in the red suits. The illusion of saving space is just that, an illusion. You've got to rebid 3♥ at some point to promise 5 hearts (and depending on the auction, that may not be true) and responder is going to assume you have 6+ diamonds so you may end up in the wrong suit.