[661_Pete]

Well, this had to happen! I was sitting West on this board, which happened to be the final board of the session - probably explains the wild bidding!

---

Now I was in a dilemma, how to indicate a diamond lead to my partner? I reasoned that a 'Lightner double' might induce her to lead a club, which I didn't want - even before I saw the dummy!

I passed and 6NT was the contract.

Well, no luck on the diamond lead: partner led a low heart. Declarer followed with the 9 from dummy. I did my best, ducking the K, hoping that declarer would have to overtake the 9 and then had no entry to dummy for his clubs and I might later come in with K♥. No such luck. Declarer ran all the clubs, squeezing everyone else painfully, then a heart finess and a spade to my partner's Ace. By this time she had discarded all her diamonds, I think (I'd lost count by now)- anyway another spade or heart followed (I forget which) and declarer had no difficulty taking 12 tricks: 8 clubs, 3 hearts and one spade.

I suppose with hindsight, it's funny! I'm sorry to say I wasn't too amused at the time - I snapped at my partner a bit, which I feel guilty about. Have to apologise to her next time I see her....

[edit]And I think we'll have to discuss discards (hadn't done so up till now). I think I signalled with the 9♦ as my first discard, implying HELD, but she didn't notice. Can't really blame her: end-of-session fatigue!

[mikestar13]

In bridge as in life, excrement occurs.

[FelicityR]

I have to say, Peter, that I wouldn't be amused either. At some time in our bridge careers, we have all defended a small slam contact where the opponents have been off the ace and king in a suit but the contract makes due to the lead, but defending a small slam contract where the opponents are not only off an ace and a king in a suit, but also an additional ace (!) would rank as a true disaster.

Better luck next time

[mikeh]

Declarer rebid 2N. Unless declarer is an utter idiot he or she has at least 2clubs and even an utter idiot would find some other call with a void. Meanwhile, how do you know partner has 10xxx(x) and not Qxxx(x)? Ducking the heart 9 is inexcusable.

Yes, assuming you signalled violently in diamonds....and I hope you played at least two encouraging diamonds as early as possible, partner defended even worse than did you, but she could be forgiven to some degree since your duck at trick one told her that declared had AKQx in hearts to go along with 8 clubs so she probably mentally switched off

It’s human nature to ignore our own mistakes and notice partner’s but you owe her a big apology since you made the first and huge mistake, misleading her about the entire hand

(speaking of which, my comment about the hearts only makes sense if declarer held AKQ8, since otherwise declarer would pop the J)

[DozyDom]

mikeh, on 2020-March-06, 15:22, said:

Declarer rebid 2N. Unless declarer is an utter idiot he or she has at least 2clubs and even an utter idiot would find some other call with a void. Meanwhile, how do you know partner has 10xxx(x) and not Qxxx(x)? Ducking the heart 9 is inexcusable.

Yes, assuming you signalled violently in diamonds....and I hope you played at least two encouraging diamonds as early as possible, partner defended even worse than did you, but she could be forgiven to some degree since your duck at trick one told her that declared had AKQx in hearts to go along with 8 clubs so she probably mentally switched off

It’s human nature to ignore our own mistakes and notice partner’s but you owe her a big apology since you made the first and huge mistake, misleading her about the entire hand

(speaking of which, my comment about the hearts only makes sense if declarer held AKQ8, since otherwise declarer would pop the J)

Mikeh, I'm not particularly on board with ducking the heart either - but when you say partner has switched off, surely if declarer has AKQx in hearts, and has just played 8 club winners, then what on earth is going on when they play a spade to lose to the A? If they started with the AD, they have 13 tricks off the top. If they don't, they have 12 tricks on top and have just allowed you to take the contract off! So I do think there's no way this can be Peter's fault; his partner should be able to place the points around the table, and give partner the AD.


But that doesn't make them an utter idiot, any more than N's bid made them an utter idiot, or your belief that E should assume declarer started with 12 or 13 top tricks makes you an idiot. They probably just had a long, hard day. No need to be rude about them.

[AL78]

On the run of clubs, did you discard the ace of diamonds? Partner should deduce that you must have the king to make this otherwise irrational discard.

[DozyDom]

AL78, on 2020-March-09, 02:52, said:

On the run of clubs, did you discard the ace of diamonds? Partner should deduce that you must have the king to make this otherwise irrational discard.

That would be a poor choice if N holds the A, rather than KQ, of spades

[661_Pete]

To be honest, I don't know if I did make any sort of signal to partner. We get to see the deals on the travellers, but not the play, and I can't quite remember. I know I was rather tired.

I've only played with this partner twice before, and we never got round to talking about discards. Next time we're together we'll discuss this - perhaps Mckenney as a fairly 'natural' system. Whatever she opts for....

...And hope for better luck next time we defend an unmakeable slam. But I still think this hand was funny - even if it was at our expense!