[mgoetze]

---

You stumble into 6♣ and LHO is kind enough to lead a diamond. What do you do?

[rhm]

To have a chance we will need to establish 2 heart tricks for spade discards from hand. This means we can afford exactly 2 heart ruffs in hand.
So win in hand and lead the heart ten at trick 2.
Since many lead an ace against a suit slam East is more likely to hold the ♥A.
So finesse against the heart queen.
If this looses to the ace next try to ruff out the heart queen with 2 ruffs.
If the heart ten looses to the queen, next ruff a low heart and if the ace does not appear then a ruffing finesse against the heart ace.
Reach dummy by ruffing high your diamond losers in the process.
When West has 5 hearts and East did not switch to spades you still might catch West in a major suit squeeze after 2 heart ruffs if he holds the spade king as well.
Just run your remaining trumps and your diamond ace in hand and watch whether West discards hearts. If not assume he blanked the king of spades on the last trump.
Clubs will have to be 2-2 or 3-1

Rainer Herrmann

[mgoetze]

Well, I'm relieved that Rainer would have gone down the same way I did and I did not miss some superior squeeze without the count.

My expert partner, who was dummy, brought up an interesting point. It is important to recognize that whether you play on hearts or for some kind of squeeze you will always want to play the ♥10 early, so do it as quickly as possible so that LHO doesn't have too much time to prepare a plan and may hitch with the ♥A. Tough one for me as I have been brainwashed by Larry Cohen into always taking plenty of time on trick 1.

[ArtK78]

mgoetze, on 2012-October-03, 07:10, said:

Well, I'm relieved that Rainer would have gone down the same way I did and I did not miss some superior squeeze without the count.

My expert partner, who was dummy, brought up an interesting point. It is important to recognize that whether you play on hearts or for some kind of squeeze you will always want to play the ♥10 early, so do it as quickly as possible so that LHO doesn't have too much time to prepare a plan and may hitch with the ♥A. Tough one for me as I have been brainwashed by Larry Cohen into always taking plenty of time on trick 1.

That type of thought brings up ethical issues, as you are not supposed to vary your tempo in an attempt to gain an advantage.

As a practical matter, I agree with the idea of trying to get information from LHO's reaction to an immediate play of the ♥10. As an ethical issue, I have some problems.

[PhilKing]

FWIW if they hitch and play low I am running the ten - they were thinking of covering with the queen. After hesitating they will not play low with the ace unless they are dodgy or a novice. If they play low smoothly I have a problem ...

It seems rather unlikely that we will have had an auction where leading the ♥A is credible (don't be shy - give us the auction when presenting any play problem), and if the king holds I am home regardless of breaks (I have four outside winners and eight trump tricks). If it loses, the queen may still drop in three.

Oh, and there's no squeeze when West has ♥Axxxx and the ♠K regardless of what East plays when in with the queen, since you only have 10 winners (I assume that's what's known as a squeeze without the count ).

[mgoetze]

The auction was 1♥-2♣-4♣-4♠-4NT-5♥-6♣. We were playing a horrible system wherein 1♥-2♣-3♣ is nonforcing.

[aguahombre]

Sounds like you played it well and it didn't work. I do believe some people have different definitions of "immediately". In context of this hand, it should mean "at trick two", and not refer to undue haste or tempo variation. We get to pause during trick one, after the opening lead is faced without anyone crying tempo. We get to then play the heart ten at trick two without any ethics issues.

I don't know what your partner was trying to say, but it sounds as if you did right.

[mgoetze]

aguahombre, on 2012-October-03, 10:13, said:

Sounds like you played it well and it didn't work. I do believe some people have different definitions of "immediately". In context of this hand, it should mean "at trick two", and not refer to undue haste or tempo variation. We get to pause during trick one, after the opening lead is faced without anyone crying tempo. We get to then play the heart ten at trick two without any ethics issues.

I don't know what your partner was trying to say, but it sounds as if you did right.

The point is that I spent about 30 seconds thinking at trick one. I could instead have spent about 5 seconds on trick one, which is not "undue haste" but still gives LHO less time to think about what to do if a heart is lead, and then played the heart ten at trick two.

[Codo]

But an expert opp had never turned his card face down before he decided what to do in Hearts at trick two with a critical holding in that suit, so this fast play had not helped a lot. If OTOH a game plan like: Play 2 Diamonds, ruff two diamonds -with a club back in hand and let the heart ten later had been better- you had never found that out in 5 seconds. So your line was surely superior.

[han]

ArtK78, on 2012-October-03, 07:59, said:

That type of thought brings up ethical issues, as you are not supposed to vary your tempo in an attempt to gain an advantage.

We have had this discussion before and I don't remember this being correct. I don't recall any rule that says that I have to wait a while before playing trick 2. No, if I have won trick 1 and I know I am going to playing the heart 10 for trick 2, I can play it immediately if I want to. The opponents can protect themselves by taking their time in third seat.

What is not allowed is waiting 3 minutes in order to suggest that you have a problem while you do not. That is an attempt to mislead your opponents with your tempo and is entirely different.

[gnasher]

han, on 2012-October-04, 04:58, said:

I don't recall any rule that says that I have to wait a while before playing trick 1.

It would be a matter of regulation rather than law, so it would vary by jurisdiction.

[gnasher]

mgoetze, on 2012-October-03, 09:55, said:

The auction was 1♥-2♣-4♣-4♠-4NT-5♥-6♣. We were playing a horrible system wherein 1♥-2♣-3♣ is nonforcing.

Were you also playing a horrible system where neither 3♦ nor 4♦ is a splinter, and one cue-bids Qxx in preference to AQxx?

[mgoetze]

gnasher, on 2012-October-04, 05:11, said:

Were you also playing a horrible system where neither 3♦ nor 4♦ is a splinter, and one cue-bids Qxx in preference to AQxx?

4♦, I am reasonably certain, would have been a splinter, but I am not privy to the reason why partner chose not to bid it. I'm afraid I missed a 4♦ bid in there; the correct auction is 1♥-2♣; 4♣-4♦; 4♠-4NT; 5♥-6♣.

[gwnn]

han, on 2012-October-04, 04:58, said:

What is not allowed is waiting 3 minutes in order to suggest that you have a problem while you do not. That is an attempt to mislead your opponents with your tempo and is entirely different.

It is also not allowed to wait 3 minutes just to annoy your opponents.

[han]

gnasher, on 2012-October-04, 05:10, said:

It would be a matter of regulation rather than law, so it would vary by jurisdiction.

As I'm sure you understood, I meant trick 2, not trick 1. I have edited my post.

Is there a jurisdiction that forces you to wait for a while before playing trick 2?

[gnasher]

han, on 2012-October-04, 08:30, said:

As I'm sure you understood, I meant trick 2, not trick 1. I have edited my post.

Is there a jurisdiction that forces you to wait for a while before playing trick 2?

I probably misread the earlier version. No, I don't know of any jurisdiction that enforces a pause at trick two.