[manudude03]

---

Butler IMPs scoring

Yes, this is a terrible slam to put it lightly. Luckily you avoid the diamond lead and get the ♥6 lead. Plan the play. If you draw trumps, you find LHO started with Qx.

[ahydra]

What signal does E give on the first trick and the second club? If I draw trumps and lead the S8, what happens?

Essentially this looks like deciding which opponent has ♠Kxx (can also pick up Kxxx, not including the ten, with East). You can use the C5 to get back to table. But it's not clear at first glance who has the ♠K - East might be doubling on ♦AK and West looks a bit thin on the ground for an unfavourable overcall (even a pre-empt), though I suppose he may have seven hearts. If I can't figure anything out from the carding I'd take the ruffing finesse.

ahydra

[manudude03]

ahydra, on 2016-October-03, 06:14, said:

What signal does E give on the first trick and the second club? If I draw trumps and lead the S8, what happens?

Essentially this looks like deciding which opponent has ♠Kxx (can also pick up Kxxx, not including the ten, with East). You can use the C5 to get back to table. But it's not clear at first glance who has the ♠K - East might be doubling on ♦AK and West looks a bit thin on the ground for an unfavourable overcall (even a pre-empt), though I suppose he may have seven hearts. If I can't figure anything out from the carding I'd take the ruffing finesse.

ahydra

RHO plays high on the first trick (showing diamonds), and then a middle heart. When you play a spade, you get the 3 from LHO, and if you pop the ace*, the 2 from RHO. They play reverse count if you want to rely on it.

*Don't necessarily take this as a hint that RHO has the king of spades.

[MrAce]

LHO does not have QJ of ♥ or would lead Q. Has Qx ♣.
He did not lead ♠ or ♦, despite the double. So he has at most 7hcp and a rotten ♥ suit. I would play West for ♠K.
When I decide W has the ♠K I need to decide whether to play him for Kx or Kxx or Kxxx
West normally should not have side 4 card spade, but even if he did, that would make him hold stiff ♦ and probably would lead ♦.

So

A-If I decide to play him for Kxx, I need W to hold Kxx or KT ♠ so I play ♠ to J, then A and then small to ruff.

B-If W has 7 hearts +2 cl and did not lead diamond makes him hold at most 2 ♠ and we can not make even if he has Tx ♠ by ruffing finesse. This allows us only 2 discards since East will be holding 5 spades
W has to hold ♠Kx if he has 7 hearts so we can squeeze East. This also works when W has 6 h and Kx ♠.

If we decide W to hold Kx ♠ and East to hold AK♦, I think we can cash all clubs before we touch spades. Last 5 cards holding AQJ9♠ and J♦ in dummy. East can not hold. He has to hold 4 spades + 1♦/ Then we play spade to J, Cash A and drop the K and play diamond and endplay East.

[alok c]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 06:52, said:

LHO does not have QJ of ♥ or would lead Q. Has Qx ♣.
He did not lead ♠ or ♦, despite the double. So he has at most 7hcp and a rotten ♥ suit. I would play West for ♠K.
When I decide W has the ♠K I need to decide whether to play him for Kx or Kxx or Kxxx
West normally should not have side 4 card spade, but even if he did, that would make him hold stiff ♦ and probably would lead ♦.

So

A-If I decide to play him for Kxx, I need W to hold Kxx or KT ♠ so I play ♠ to J, then A and then small to ruff.

B-If W has 7 hearts +2 cl and did not lead diamond makes him hold at most 2 ♠ and we can not make even if he has Tx ♠ by ruffing finesse. This allows us only 2 discards since East will be holding 5 spades
W has to hold ♠Kx if he has 7 hearts so we can squeeze East. This also works when W has 6 h and Kx ♠.

If we decide W to hold Kx ♠ and East to hold AK♦, I think we can cash all clubs before we touch spades. Last 5 cards holding AQJ9♠ and J♦ in dummy. East can not hold. He has to hold 4 spades + 1♦/ Then we play spade to J, Cash A and drop the K and play diamond and endplay East.

Another possibility is West may be void in ♦ as he did'nt lead it & his vulnerable overcall with poor suit & points.His hand may be Kxxx -Qxxxxxx-nil-Qx, East may be 10xx-Jxxx-AKxxx-x.In that case ♠ to Q then ♠A, ♠J etc discarding ♦ from hand.

[MrAce]

alok c, on 2016-October-03, 08:45, said:

Another possibility is West may be void in ♦ as he did'nt lead it & his vulnerable overcall with poor suit & points.His hand may be Kxxx -Qxxxxxx-nil-Qx, East may be 10xx-Jxxx-AKxxx-x.In that case ♠ to Q then ♠A, ♠J etc discarding ♦ from hand.

Yes, everyone knows how to play spades if W has K 4th. And yes he can have this hand, we all seen people with awful bids and this guy is perhaps one of them, but is it likely? No imo.
Another important thing against playing W for K 4th is, it does not work if he has the T too.

From my experience in forums, I am guessing Manudude03 asked this as a problem because W had Kx ♠ which leads to a fancy squeeze and endplay. At the table I would play W for Kxx ♠. But if this problem made its way to forums, I would play for Kx♠ on, squeeze and endplay East.

[nige1]

Agree with Mr Ace.
Last Wednesday, in a Western District league match.
we played a deal like this, with a similar theme.
NS bid accurately to 6♥ missed at the other tables
LHO led a ♣T won by dummy's ♣K.
Declarer ruffed a ♠. Crossed to ♥Q, Discarded a ♦ on ♠A,
Ruffed a 2nd ♠. Crossed to ♥Q.
Ruffed dummy's last ♠. Crossed to ♣A and played dummy's remaining trumps to squeeze RHO in the monors. If LHO discarded a top ♦, then declarer could discard a ♣, and concede a ♦.

---

[Phil]

Against competent opponents I would play West for 4702 because the double and non diamond lead make little sense otherwise. And preempting red/white with Q7th makes will contain some extreme shape.

But it seems like a tossup to play West for Kxxx versus KTxx, and unless im missing something we need to play the first round of the suit differently.

At the table I'd probably play low to the Q on the off chance that LHO is deaf to the double.

No way LHO has Kx of spades.

[rhm]

deleted

[Fluffy]

I need to know opponents but in general I don't trust the double unless I know they are really good, for me it is a matter of finding LHO with ♠Kxx or ♠10xx. Given that he could have both, ♠Kxx is more likely so that's what I would try.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2016-October-03, 10:46, said:

Against competent rookie opponents I would play West for 4702 because the double and non diamond lead make little sense otherwise. And preempting red/white with Q7th makes will contain some extreme shape.



No way LHO has Kx of spades.

FYP

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 17:31, said:

FYP

? RHO x'd a slam apparently without a void so he has ♦AK. LHO didn't lead a diamond.

I have a pretty good sense of the shapes here.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2016-October-03, 17:56, said:

? RHO x'd a slam apparently without a void so he has ♦AK. LHO didn't lead a diamond.

I have a pretty good sense of the shapes here.

You are really surprising me for 2 reasons.

1-For imagining a competent player to bid 2♥ with 4702. A hand that would make easy 4 ♠ against 5-6 spades and out. Vulnerable! Who does that?
2-Even if he did, for imagining that he would lead a ♥ from Kxxx Qxxxxxx Void Q7 AFTER pd bid 4♥ and doubled 6♣.

Quite an imagination IMO.

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 18:09, said:

Quite an imagination IMO.

So come up with a layout that needs 'less' imagination.

[MrAce]

Phil, on 2016-October-03, 21:28, said:

So come up with a layout that needs 'less' imagination.

Kxx
QT98xx
Kx
Qx

This is much less imaginative both bidding wise and lead wise. Not saying every competent player will bid 2♥ with this. But at least, even if they did, ♥ lead would be choice of some of them.
4702 and leading ♥ at the same time...is not imo.

I've made a poll in BW both for bidding and lead 2 different posts. I have yet to see anyone to lead ♥ in 4702 hand and yet to see a competent player to bid 2♥. I do not believe you would bid 2♥ in this lifetime with 4702 either. Would you? Would it even occur to you? It is imps.

[alok c]

Delete

[alok c]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 22:42, said:

Kxx
QT98xx
Kx
Qx

This is much less imaginative both bidding wise and lead wise. Not saying every competent player will bid 2♥ with this. But at least, even if they did, ♥ lead would be choice of some of them.
4702 and leading ♥ at the same time...is not imo.

I've made a poll in BW both for bidding and lead 2 different posts. I have yet to see anyone to lead ♥ in 4702 hand and yet to see a competent player to bid 2♥. I do not believe you would bid 2♥ in this lifetime with 4702 either. Would you? Would it even occur to you? It is imps.

In the cited hand East was doubling with a single A opposite a preemptive hand?North's 6c bid pretty much guarantees 1st round H control & seeing his own hand East knows finesse will be successful in S if required at all .

[Phil]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 22:42, said:

Kxx
QT98xx
Kx
Qx

This is much less imaginative both bidding wise and lead wise. Not saying every competent player will bid 2♥ with this. But at least, even if they did, ♥ lead would be choice of some of them.
4702 and leading ♥ at the same time...is not imo.

I've made a poll in BW both for bidding and lead 2 different posts. I have yet to see anyone to lead ♥ in 4702 hand and yet to see a competent player to bid 2♥. I do not believe you would bid 2♥ in this lifetime with 4702 either. Would you? Would it even occur to you? It is imps.

So East doubled 6♣ on xxxx Jxxxx Axx x. Ya, right. Maybe that's the hand you should post and see how many doubles you get.

Yes I saw the BW poll. I wouldn't bid 2♥ myself with a ratty 4702, sure, but yes, it did occur to me. And it was the choice of Jim Munday, John Adams, Phil Martin and Ben Christensen (on USA1 juniors). So its not an overbid to say, "no one competent bid 2♥", its plain wrong. The only name player to bid 1♥ btw is JDonn, but his vote has always carried a lot of weight with me, so its rather close as of this morning.

[manudude03]

MrAce, on 2016-October-03, 09:36, said:

From my experience in forums, I am guessing Manudude03 asked this as a problem because W had Kx ♠ which leads to a fancy squeeze and endplay. At the table I would play W for Kxx ♠. But if this problem made its way to forums, I would play for Kx♠ on, squeeze and endplay East.

I guess I'm too predictable . Maybe it's because I generally don't find "find the queen" problems to be particularly interesting most of the time. At the table, I also played for West to have Kxx (noting that KT and K7 also work) and went down when West has Kx. I seem to have misplaced the hand record, but the layout was something like:

---

The opps had a bit of a misunderstanding and West didn't think the double was lead directing. I figured after the event that perhaps Kx was the most likely layout (West being 2632 or 2722) that allows a make, but it also struck me as being very risky at the same time.

[MrAce]

I knew it!!