Opening lead is the 4 of hearts. Standard leads.
Tricky Contract Should it make?
#1
Posted 2021-July-21, 12:43
Opening lead is the 4 of hearts. Standard leads.
#2
Posted 2021-July-21, 14:02
That would be my plan at the table. I suspect I am completely wrong as my line looks too easy for this to have been posted as a problem.
#3
Posted 2021-July-21, 14:35
AL78, on 2021-July-21, 14:02, said:
That would be my plan at the table. I suspect I am completely wrong as my line looks too easy for this to have been posted as a problem.
You're not completely wrong but that line doesn't work. As far as I can tell, only one line works but I'm not sure if it is the best line to take.
Sometimes the most simple looking turn out to be tricky to get right.
![Posted Image](https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)
#4
Posted 2021-July-21, 21:30
#6
Posted 2021-July-23, 09:58
AL78, on 2021-July-23, 09:42, said:
This only matters because it's specifically A10, if it's Ax you can just play 3 rounds of hearts. I can't see any likely positions where it loses where something else works.
#7
Posted 2021-July-23, 10:30
Cyberyeti, on 2021-July-23, 09:58, said:
My question about this hand has always been this: should you actually find the winning line?
Basically, my thinking is this. The diamond finesse is almost surely doomed to fail, so wasting entries there is folly. That leaves hearts and spades to worry about. The key card in spades is the 10: who has it and how many with it. Hearts need to be either 3-3 or the 4th heart ruffed. As the 4-2 heart break is the a priori expectation it seems that arranging a ruff is probably needed - and that means not being overruffed by the 10 or having too many spades played before the ruff.
This is where ducking the heart seems prudent. If the hearts are 3-3, it doesn't matter if you duck. But if the hearts are 4-2, ducking the heart retains control. If the opps switch to spade and a spade, there is still the opportunity to test hearts - if they are 3-3 pull the last trump and claim with a diamond loser. If they are 4-2, you can then ruff the 4th in dummy as long as the long heart and long spade are together.
If you win the first heart, you are screwed as the opps can arrange to play 3 round of spades or ruff with the 10 before you can arrange the ruff.
I think this play should be found if one is "in form", as they say. It is far-sighted and you have to work it out at trick one, as usual.
#8
Posted 2021-July-24, 16:39
I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.
This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.
What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).
It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.
#9
Posted 2021-July-24, 18:30
gszes, on 2021-July-24, 16:39, said:
I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.
This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.
What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).
It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.
Thank you for the response! Btw, this hand was against robots.
#10
Posted 2021-July-25, 05:31
gszes, on 2021-July-24, 16:39, said:
I guess I have to fall back on a 33 heart break OR have the player with 2 hearts NOT have the spade T, I then exit with a heart.
This LOP loses when lho began with 2 hearts and the AT of spades.
What happens if lho started with a singleton heart (thank goodness I didn't duck trick 1 and LHO starting with 3 hearts is a non factor)? Same first 2 tricks and lho exits with? Let's assume it is a club since a dia makes it too easy. Win the A and lead a dia to the Q (virtually forcing lho to win the K or risk losing it).Now we know we need a heart ruff to make our contract and 33 hearts seems out of play. Say Lho wins the dia K and returns another club. We ruff that and lead a heart. LHO might be able to work this out but the urge to ruff the heart would seem overwhelming to most and fatal (even if they began with ATx).
It just seems plain wrong to play LHO for a weak doubleton heart when their expectation for a ruff is so low. Even if their p had the heart ace they would have to guess correctly at trick one to duck. It is just too tiny a target.
The problem is not that he returns the second heart, the issue is that he wins and returns his second spade, and his partner plays a third when in with the heart. You can't objectively make if he has a stiff heart and 2 spades.
#11
Posted 2021-July-25, 09:23
Cyberyeti, on 2021-July-25, 05:31, said:
And thank you for the response as this question has been bugging me for days: should this contract be made?
#12
Posted 2021-July-25, 10:28
Winstonm, on 2021-July-25, 09:23, said:
I think it should, but I think you need some deep thought at trick 1 to realise you have to duck this, as you have to realise that where this fails, other things fail also.
#13
Posted 2021-July-25, 13:24
Cyberyeti, on 2021-July-25, 10:28, said:
Thanks again as your thinking coincides with mine.
This hand is the type that I would have figured out and made back in the day. It is hard for me to regain the concentration level I had as a younger man. With that lapse has come some self doubt. So again I thank you for helping me understand that my first thoughts - that I should have made this contract - was a valid thought.