[gnasher]

---

You're East, sitting over dummy.

4♣ was a splinter, showing less than an opening hand. The rest were cue-bids. (If you're wondering about the 5♠ bid, North is a client.)

Partner leads ♥9, which runs to declarer's 10. Declarer plays ♠J to the queen and ace, then leads ♣5. What do you do and why, or is it just a guess?

Edit: Sorry, the contract is 6♥, not 6♦ as it says in the subject line.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-September-24, 06:22

[MrAce]

Why are we defending 6 ♦ ?

Anyway, assuming they play 6♥ i would auto play small by instinct. Opener liked the splinter, imo he is unlikely to hold the K, i may be wrong though. Only problem we can create for declarer maybe in clubs, i think pd made a good lead, lets cooperate with him.

[MrAce]

I think we have to assume declarer has only 5 hearts in order for us to have a chance after 4 and 5 ♦ cues. We also have to assume he doesnt have more than 2 spade tricks

Jx
AKxxx
AK
KJxx/QJxx/Qxxx

J
AKxxx
AKx
KJxx/QJxx/Qxxx

Hoping up the ♣A can be fatal. Of course ducking the first ♣ is fatal if pd has a sure ♦ trick and declarer was joking with 5♦ cue...i dunno.

Only thing i know is Andy probably ducked this and they made and he is seeking for sympathy which he got from me

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 06:03, said:

Hoping up the ♣A can be fatal. Of course ducking the first ♣ is fatal if pd has a sure ♦ trick and declarer was joking with 5♦ cue...i dunno.

Ducking is fatal if declarer has J AK10xx AKxx Kxx.

Quote

Only thing i know is Andy probably ducked this

I was West.

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2012-September-24, 06:19, said:

Ducking is fatal if declarer has J AK10xx AKxx Kxx.

Yes, of course but i am not gonna play for this specific club holding.(Admittedly i didnt even see that and wouldnt see it at the table in a fast pace play, untill you told me ) Imo there are much more club combinations where ducking comes on top compared to hoping up the ace.

I mean, i am a kind of player who doesnt really care much about winning post mortem arguments, i try to win the match. I didnt sit down and thought about how many combinations declarer may have where ducking or playing ace is better. As i said earlier i would play small by instinct, knowing from my own personal experience, fwiw, that hoping up the ace in that type of situations, especially when i have Ace 6th costs in long run.

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 06:50, said:

wouldnt see it at the table in a fast pace play

As a general principle, I don't think you should allow the play to be fast when you're defending a slam.

Anyway, you don't get fast-paced play with me at the table. On this occasion you would have had at least a minute to decide what you were going to do when the club was played.

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2012-September-24, 07:04, said:

As a general principle, I don't think you should allow the play to be fast when you're defending a slam.

Anyway, you don't get fast-paced play with me at the table. On this occasion you would have had at least a minute to decide what you were going to do when the club was played.

Oh i wouldnt duck just for the sake of playing fast, i would take my time on first ♥ lead, and it doesnt need a rocket scientist to figure it is club suit and i have only 2 options when played, duck or jump my ace that will matter if there is anything to matter. I just admitted that i wouldnt be able to see the hand you gave .

I dont think seeing it would have changed my mind though. I would still play small all day long with this auction. Obviously i let them make their slam by ducking on this one, but i got close to what declarer holds. Even if you change declarers small diamond to a club and make him hold Kxxx ♣ ducking is the winner if declarer decides to play for Axx clubs, where ace would be a sure loser.

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 12:05, said:

Obviously i let them make their slam by ducking on this one, but i got close to what declarer holds.

I didn't say that was his hand - that was just an example of a layout where it's right to take the ace. In fact, I think that all such layouts have the same characteristics:
J AKxxx AKxx Kxx
J AKxxx AKxxx Kx
Jx AKxxx AKxx Kx
J AKxxxx AKxx Kx

[MrAce]

gnasher, on 2012-September-24, 13:27, said:

I didn't say that was his hand - that was just an example of a layout where it's right to take the ace. In fact, I think that all such layouts have the same characteristics:
J AKxxx AKxx Kxx
J AKxxx AKxxx Kx
Jx AKxxx AKxx Kx
J AKxxxx AKxx Kx

I understand that but all of those hands are basically the same hand and you keep assuming short clubs in declarers hand. In fact these hands are less likely than your first one.

J AKxxx AKxxx Kx for example, declarer wouldnt play this way, would you ? He would have played on diamonds after clearing trumps, which he has to anyway.

J AKxxxx AKxx Kx pd wpuldnt lead his stiff trump, after all you might have held Qxx. But you may convince me if 5♦ meant something else than just a cue of course.

I maybe wrong but declarer not clearing trumps but playing clubs now makes me think he has more than 3 clubs. It would be funny of him to go down when he has one of those hands you listed and West was ruffing diamond, no ?

[PhilKing]

gnasher, on 2012-September-24, 13:27, said:

I didn't say that was his hand - that was just an example of a layout where it's right to take the ace. In fact, I think that all such layouts have the same characteristics:
J AKxxx AKxx Kxx
J AKxxx AKxxx Kx
Jx AKxxx AKxx Kx
J AKxxxx AKxx Kx

Most of these hands would just punt slam after partner bids 4♠.

Gunnar bid 5♦ because he needed extra playing strength opposite so that he could handle the club losers.

[FrancesHinden]

My partner had the same problem on a slightly different auction. His analysis of layouts where ducking gains or costs was hence slightly different but I'm not going to give them because I think it tells you too much about declarer's hand if I give another auction.

Has anyone yet suggested a layout where ducking gains, other than saying "it's always right to duck in this sort of position"?

Edit: yes I see some suggestions, generally when declarer has Qxxx clubs

This post has been edited by FrancesHinden: 2012-September-24, 14:50

[inquiry]

I edited the title to make it 6H not 6D. A note, some users, advanced users at least, now have the ability to edit their own titles. Since I have long had the ability to edit titiles (anyones), I am not sure where the option on editing titles should appear, but gnasher, you should have been able to edit your own title....

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 13:58, said:

I understand that but all of those hands are basically the same hand and you keep assuming short clubs in declarers hand. In fact these hands are less likely than your first one.

I'm not assuming anything. That was, as I said, simply a list of the layouts where it's right to take the ace. I wasn't arguing that we should take the ace, and I wasn't arguing that we should duck. And when I said "all such layouts have the same characteristics" that was another way of saying "all of those hands are basically the same hand".

Quote

J AKxxx AKxxx Kx for example, declarer wouldnt play this way, would you ? He would have played on diamonds after clearing trumps, which he has to anyway.

If I had that hand I would definitely play as declarer did. The chance of RHO ducking with ♣A [edit: when we have a diamond loser] is much higher than the risk of a 0=4 break.

Quote

But you may convince me if 5♦ meant something else than just a cue of course.

5♦ was just a cue-bid.

This post has been edited by gnasher: 2012-September-24, 15:08

[gnasher]

inquiry, on 2012-September-24, 14:47, said:

A note, some users, advanced users at least, now have the ability to edit their own titles. Since I have long had the ability to edit titiles (anyones), I am not sure where the option on editing titles should appear, but gnasher, you should have been able to edit your own title....

Yes, you're right - thanks for pointing that out, and for editing the title.

[PhilKing]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 13:58, said:

I maybe wrong but declarer not clearing trumps but playing clubs now makes me think he has more than 3 clubs. It would be funny of him to go down when he has one of those hands you listed and West was ruffing diamond, no ?

Not as funny as West leading a trump with a diamond void.

[MrAce]

PhilKing, on 2012-September-24, 15:11, said:

Not as funny as West leading a trump with a diamond void.

gnasher, on 2012-September-24, 15:00, said:

If I had that hand I would definitely play as declarer did. The chance of RHO ducking with ♣A [edit: when we have a diamond loser] is much higher than the risk of a 0=4 break.

Of course, but would you do it w/o clearing trumps ?

What would it cost him to clear trumps even if he is not going to play on diamonds but a club ? A good declarer knows trumps are 2-2 from the lead. Where is the fire ? I mean i could bet good size of money that this guy has 4 or 5 clubs.

Maybe i am thinking this too simple, i dunno...

[gnasher]

MrAce, on 2012-September-24, 22:33, said:

Of course, but would you do it w/o clearing trumps ?

What would it cost him to clear trumps even if he is not going to play on diamonds but a club ? A good declarer knows trumps are 2-2 from the lead. Where is the fire ? I mean i could bet good size of money that this guy has 4 or 5 clubs.

Maybe i am thinking this too simple, i dunno...

If you have J AKxxx AKxxx Kx, you have two chances to make the contract: diamonds coming in, or East ducking with ♣A. If you want to encourage East to duck with ♣A, you should play as though you have J AKxxx AKx QJxx.

[JLOGIC]

I would duck

[PhilKing]

The straw in the wind that suggests ducking the club was declarer's 5♦ bid.

He was looking for North to have a max in terms of playing strength. Obviously North should have signed of lacking a fifth trump, better diamonds, or a club void which was possible in their methods!

[gnasher]

PhilKing, on 2012-September-25, 05:49, said:

The straw in the wind that suggests ducking the club was declarer's 5♦ bid.

He was looking for North to have a max in terms of playing strength.

Isn't that what 5♥ would mean? On general principles, if you just want partner to bid slam with a max, you make a try and then sign off, whereas cue-bidding implies interest in specific cards.