[PhilG007]

---

Another challenging deal from Eric Jannersten's classic book "The Only Chance"

Playing a Grand Slam poses a unique challenge in that it has absolutely no room for error. It's likened
to a mountaineer picking his way along a narrow ledge. One slip and.........Its the same as a declarer,one faux pas
and its curtains.
On this deal,you went a bit overboard with the bidding. 6NT was quite high enough but that is irrelevant now.
You have to make 13 tricks on a touch and go contract West leads the J♠
Is there any hope? Take over as declarer..

[nige1]

PhilG007 'Another challenging deal from Eric Jannersten's classic book "The Only Chance". Playing a Grand Slam poses a unique challenge in that it has absolutely no room for error. It's likened to a mountaineer picking his way along a narrow ledge. One slip and.........Its the same as a declarer, one faux pas and its curtains. On this deal,you went a bit overboard with the bidding. 6NT was quite high enough but that is irrelevant now. You have to make 13 tricks on a touch and go contract West leads the J♠. Is there any hope? Take over as declarer.'
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Spoiler

Thank you PhilG007. I'm puzzled because there seem to be several chances and opportunities to take a wrong view. At imps or rubber-bridge, you can cash 9 winners ending in the South hand. Assume neither defender has discarded a ♦. Now, with only ♦s in the North-South hands ...
-- If LHO appears to have been dealt a singleton ♦, then cash ♦A and finesse ♦9.
-- Otherwise advance ♦J.
-- -- If LHO covers ♦J with ♦K then win ♦A and finesse ♦9 (hoping that LHO did not begin with doubleton ♦KT)
-- -- If both opponents follow small to ♦J, then ...
-- -- -- If LHO has fewer ♦s than RHO, then cash ♦A.
-- -- -- Otherwise (and with no accurate count), advance ♦Q hoping to pin RHO's doubleton ♦T.

---

[apollo1201]

Can’t really understand the title « only chance » because you can pick all of the followings, guessing correctly:

K vs. Txxx
Kx vs. Txx
Kxx vs. Tx

Lacking the 8 for Kxxx vs. T😉

Maybe we can infer the D distribution after the AKQ are cashed in the other suits. In books, EW are kind enough to have some side doubletons...

[Cyberyeti]

This hand is as much psychological as anything, what holdings do you think W covers Q with ?

I'm not sure I want to cash all the side suit winners and then go more than one off.

Does W cover with Kx ? probably, would be embarrassing not to if partner had 109x.

Does W cover with K10 ? always.

Does W cover with Kxx ? probably not.

So if it goes Q ducked, we try to pin the 10, if it goes QKA we try to finesse the 9 as Kx is 3x as common as K10 and we reckon he covers more than 1/3 of the time.

Of course if W thinks his partner has 10xx without the 9, then he should not cover with Kx and declarer will get it wrong.

[apollo1201]

If we just play 6, I am not sure however of the best way to guarantee the contract. A then small to Q?

[FelicityR]

I believe the whole part of this problem is beyond making a guess in the ♦ suit - but making a guess is all we might have - but cashing the side suit winners in the right order. This allows us to work out what hand it is best to be in at the critical moment that we tackle the ♦ suit in isolation.

As both ♣ and ♥ can be manipulated to end up leading from both the North and South hands, it is essential to cash the ♠s first as there is no 'flexibility' there.

But, there again, except if we encounter exceptional breaks in the side suits, we are at the mercy of the defenders discarding honestly...