[manudude03]

---

I'm playing in the annual friendly between Northern Ireland and the republic and this board came up earlier. IMPs scoring, strong opps. You get the ♦8 lead, plan the play.

Lead agreements are top of doubleton, low from 3 and otherwise standard 2/4 leads.

[The_Badger]

+1 as I have spent 10 mins trying to work this one out in my head without getting quite to a solution. The old Badger brain is not what it used to be (Maybe I shouldn't attempt hands like this at 1am in the morning.)

[MrAce]

You have 2♥+ 1 ♣ losers so you need not to lose a spade. So spade finesse needs to work.
If we assume that ♦ 8 is from 8x, W is more likely to have 3 spades. But does not matter if he has only 2.

I would insert ♦T and if covered I'd win with K and play another ♦ to dummy. If I survive this now I play small ♠ to J and cash the A of ♠. If K dropped I am home. If not, E is likely to have started with Jxx(x) ♦ and i will now run diamonds discarding a ♥ on last one.

If W dropped ♠T on first spade J then I have a decision to make. Unless he is false carding, i can make by playing 3rd ♦ now.
If my first ♦T holds which means W started with J8xx ♦, which is a very weird lead imo, then I may have different strategy.

This is what I see at first glance.

EDIT: This line will lose vs 4-1 spade break, E holding 4, but playing for 4-1 ♠ jeopardize when spades are 3-2 I believe.

[steve2005]

Win A♦
lead Q♠ I assume you get a cover. If finesse fails your down. So win Ace.
I think if west led a singleton ♦ we are toast as east will have heart entry or A♣ for a ruff. So if singleton ♦ then option 1)
odds of a singleton aren't big and ♦ lead looks like it could be an obvious safe lead
So there are two choices
1) play T♠ being now singleton and playing J♠. If you do this you could have played for doubleton K♠ onside and led small ♠
2) lead to Q♦ and decide if you are now going to hook T♠.

Don't know if will hook T but will go to Q♦.

[MrAce]

steve2005, on 2017-August-12, 20:03, said:

So there are two choices
1) play T♠ being now singleton and playing J♠. If you do this you could have played for doubleton K♠ onside and led small ♠
2) lead to Q♦ and decide if you are now going to hook T♠.

Don't know if will hook T but will go to Q♦.

You put yourself into making a choice when spades are 2-3 (W having Tx or xx spade) even if we assume that you are not already down (W having Txx spade)

W can not have 8xxx ♦ according to the lead style explained by OP.

[The_Badger]

MrAce, on 2017-August-12, 19:53, said:

EDIT: This line will lose vs 4-1 spade break, E holding 4, but playing for 4-1 ♠ jeopardize when spades are 3-2 I believe.

As you indicate, Timo, a 3-2♠ and 4-2♦ break line is the best statistical line to play for and that's what I would have done, but I was wondering too if you can cope if ♠s are 4-1 with East.

[The_Badger]

steve2005, on 2017-August-12, 20:03, said:

Win A♦
lead Q♠ I assume you get a cover.

I would never lead ♠Q here - I did consider this - but it loses outright when East has a stiff ♠K and ♦s are 3-3. Statistically low but possible.

[steve2005]

MrAce, on 2017-August-12, 20:17, said:

You put yourself into making a choice when spades are 2-3 (W having Tx or xx spade) even if we assume that you are not already down (W having Txx spade)

W can not have 8xxx ♦ according to the lead style explained by OP.

yes I didn't consider possibility of a ♦ pitch if there is a losing ♠.

[manudude03]

I'm a little surprised people aren't a little more concerned about diamonds breaking 5-1 where you can make it if East has ♠Kx. Everyone who got the diamond lead ended up going down (players of various abilities).

---

[The_Badger]

manudude03, on 2017-August-13, 09:52, said:

I'm a little surprised people aren't a little more concerned about diamonds breaking 5-1 where you can make it if East has ♠Kx. Everyone who got the diamond lead ended up going down (players of various abilities).

I am surprised that everyone who got the ♦ lead went down. It's not that difficult hand if you keep things simple and play for 4-2♦ and 3-2♠ - the most favourable odds. I was wracking my brain when I first saw the hand that ♠s were potentially 4-1 with East.

[manudude03]

The_Badger, on 2017-August-13, 15:51, said:

I am surprised that everyone who got the ♦ lead went down. It's not that difficult hand if you keep things simple and play for 4-2♦ and 3-2♠ - the most favourable odds. I was wracking my brain when I first saw the hand that ♠s were potentially 4-1 with East.

The point was that the lead can really only be from singleton or doubleton, and if it was a doubleton, it might have been a different lead.

[MrAce]

manudude03, on 2017-August-13, 09:52, said:

I'm a little surprised people aren't a little more concerned about diamonds breaking 5-1 where you can make it if East has ♠Kx. Everyone who got the diamond lead ended up going down (players of various abilities).

---

I am surprised by your comment because playing for 5-1 diamonds will take you down when they are 2-4 and you have a spade loser. I mean are you suggesting that S should play a very specific ♦ and very specific ♠ split?

Also, if that was the deal above, how did people go down on ♦ lead? The line i suggested makes. It makes regardless of E holding Kx Kxx or KTx ♠

About not leading the xx ♦, W has to lead something. Unless he holds connected ♥ honors he has no safe lead anyway.

[manudude03]

I was on lead on the board, but declarer at my table won the lead in dummy and played a spade to the jack. Now you have 4 inescapable losers.

[PhilG007]

manudude03, on 2017-August-12, 17:03, said:

---

I'm playing in the annual friendly between Northern Ireland and the republic and this board came up earlier. IMPs scoring, strong opps. You get the ♦8 lead, plan the play.

Lead agreements are top of doubleton, low from 3 and otherwise standard 2/4 leads.

I dont agree with North's 1NT response. With 11 hcp his bid should have been 2NT which South would raise to 3NT

[eagles123]

PhilG007, on 2017-August-14, 07:40, said:

I dont agree with North's 1NT response. With 11 hcp his bid should have been 2NT which South would raise to 3NT

That is amongst the more idiotic of your posts, which for you is really saying something

[miamijd]

manudude03, on 2017-August-13, 09:52, said:

I'm a little surprised people aren't a little more concerned about diamonds breaking 5-1 where you can make it if East has ♠Kx. Everyone who got the diamond lead ended up going down (players of various abilities).

---

As Timo indicated, if West has a stiff diamond, your chances are pretty grim. You have to hope East started with Kx of spades. But if the lead was a doubleton, then all you need is Kx or Kxx with East to make, and even on K864 with East you have chances.

Unless you think the lead is 85%+ to be a stiff, the odds would seem to favor Timo's line.

Cheers,
Mike

[msjennifer]

To be frank the 4S bid by South,with nothing extra and 8 losers ,is far too optimistic..As to the line of play it is all pure guesswork and one's mood at the time.playing !A small spade to the jack and if it wins ash the spade Ace and hope the King appears or it not then hope that he holds 4Diamond cards is a decent line of play.!

[maartenxq]

manudude03, on 2017-August-12, 17:03, said:

---

I'm playing in the annual friendly between Northern Ireland and the republic and this board came up earlier. IMPs scoring, strong opps. You get the ♦8 lead, plan the play.

Lead agreements are top of doubleton, low from 3 and otherwise standard 2/4 leads.

Difficult can you catch 10x Kx or shld u finesse twice?

A bit beside the playing issue is the bidding option. Why not 3 nt instead of 4 ♠. My guess is partner will pass.