[diana_eva]

I failed this at the table. The auction is pretty silly, it was an indy. Zero agreements, we stumbled into 7♠ eventually and now we have to make it:

---

Lead was ♣5

[nige1]

diana_eva, on 2015-April-17, 09:37, said:

I failed this at the table. The auction is pretty silly, it was an indy. Zero agreements, we stumbled into 7♠ eventually and now we have to make it:
Lead was ♣5.

---

To get the ball rolling, my guess ...

Spoiler

Play ♣8 from dummy, ruffing in hand, ♠A, ♥A, ♠Q, ♣A, Assuming ♠J appears or both defenders follow: ruff a ♥, Cash ♠K and remaining ♠ discarding a ♣ unless it's good, ♦K, ♥K. If ♥QJ have appeared, then claim. Otherwise finesse ♦s.

[mikeh]

I tried to do some rough and ready calculations. I think it to be close between playing for good things to happen in the majors (establish hearts, with a diamond hook as fallback) or just playing on diamonds immediately.

I may well be wrong, but my sense was that the immediate diamond play was slightly the better.

Win the club, play diamond K and low to the A. We may be down now! A bad diamond break sets us immediately, so 31.5% is bad news.

The Q will drop doubleton or stiff some 28% of the time, I estimate and we pull trump and claim.

Of the remaining 40% or so, half the time LHO is short and half of the remainder, LHO has the spade J (all percentages are estimates, not precise figures....give RHO 2 diamonds, and the odds are slightly under 50% that LHO has the spade J).

So if that is correct, playing on diamonds will make about 58% of the time. I think, but am uncertain, that playing for good majors and the diamond fallback is a little less.

Note all assumes that spades behave and I have ignored a stiff spade J, which throws off the vacant space analysis.

[diana_eva]

Spades behave, I just felt I was sloppy and there has to be something better than what I did at the table. I liked this hand a lot, and felt guilty for not playing as superbly as it deserved lol

[Fluffy]

mikeh, on 2015-April-17, 12:49, said:

I tried to do some rough and ready calculations. I think it to be close between playing for good things to happen in the majors (establish hearts, with a diamond hook as fallback) or just playing on diamonds immediately.

I may well be wrong, but my sense was that the immediate diamond play was slightly the better.

Win the club, play diamond K and low to the A. We may be down now! A bad diamond break sets us immediately, so 31.5% is bad news.

The Q will drop doubleton or stiff some 28% of the time, I estimate and we pull trump and claim.

Of the remaining 40% or so, half the time LHO is short and half of the remainder, LHO has the spade J (all percentages are estimates, not precise figures....give RHO 2 diamonds, and the odds are slightly under 50% that LHO has the spade J).

So if that is correct, playing on diamonds will make about 58% of the time. I think, but am uncertain, that playing for good majors and the diamond fallback is a little less.

Note all assumes that spades behave and I have ignored a stiff spade J, which throws off the vacant space analysis.

I am lost, you mean that 3-3 hearts or diamond finesse is below 58%? EDIT: Misscounted top tricks.

Diamond finesse also has some extra fallback, as we might even make when spades are 0-5 and ♥QJ are doubleton. Also squeeze RHO if he has hearts and 4 diamonds,

[mikeh]

Fluffy, on 2015-April-17, 13:57, said:

Also squeeze RHO if he has hearts and 4 diamonds,

The squeeze on rho adds nothing. If he has 4 diamonds, then either the Q drops under the K (stiff Q on left) or the finesse works in the end game...we only need 1 hook...admittedly, it would have popped up, so technically in this position we are not finessing, but the point is that a red suit squeeze on rho doesn't add to the family of hands on which playing on hearts wins.

[Lovera]

I think that establish diamonds is easier than hearts (8 vs 7) ruffing one (dia 4-2) with 10 of spade (J onside or toghether longness).

[nige1]

Arithmetic is not my long suit but, always assuming that ♠s behave, I think the two lines have much the same chance.

LINE 1. Playing for 5 ♥ tricks; otherwise taking ♦ finesse
♥ probabilities:
01.5 % ♥ are 6-0. Hence immediate defeat.
04.0 % LHO has singleton ♥ and ♠Jxx. Hence immediate defeat.
05.5 % Immediate defeat.

35.5 % ♥s break 3-3.
03.2 % ♥QJ doubleton.
38.7 % Immediate success in ♥s.

Of the remaining 55.8% when ♥ don't break but opponents don't ruff.
05.7 % Defender has ♦Q singleton.
13.5 % RHO has ♦Qx.
20.4 % RHO has ♦Qxx.
05.0 % RHO has ♦Qxxx and ♥ control.
01.0 % RHO has ♦Qxxxx and ♥ control.
45.6 %
38.7% + (45.6 % of 55.8%) = about 64%

LINE 2. Playing immediately on ♦s:
05.7 % Defender has ♦Q singleton.
33.9 % RHO has 3♦s.
13.5 % RHO has ♦Q doubleton.
10.4 % RHO has a small doubleton ♦ and ♠J lies favourably.
about 64 %

[diana_eva]

This was the full hand. The only way i see is get the diamonds right or ruff a diam with the SQ and finesse the SJ, which I thought was too DD to get it right:

---

[Lovera]

100 of honors.

[nige1]

If you play on ♦ immediately and LHO follows with ♦Q to the 3rd round, then ruffing with ♠Q and finessing ♠T is quite reasonable.