[MrAce]

2NT was alerted lebensol
<br>2spade by pd has no special meaning, should be to play with 6 cards.

---

I don't think we are in forc pass auction here, i maybe wrong for some people, but i led accordingly thinking partner's double is trying to alert me from regular defense
So i led ♣A and dummy is

---

pd played ♣3 on my Ace, now what would you play at trick 2 ?

UDCA carding

[rhm]

Partner can not play the ♣2 when you hold it yourself.
I assume he played a small ♣ and it would be nice to know your carding agreements and whether this is IMPs or matchpoints

I do not understand why the double should have Lightner implications, when your vulnerable partner bid game, East used lebensol opposite a limited partner and is therefor very likely sacrificing.
For me this looks like a normal penalty double.

You need 2 more tricks, which will either have to be

1) 2 ♠ tricks.
2) 1 ♠ and one ♣ ruff
3) 1 ♠ and ♦ ace
4) ♦ ace and ♣ ruff.

Partner will need and is also marked from the bidding with at least one ace.
It is obvious that it is very dangerous to continue ♣, which would only be necessary in case 4. Even when partner has only one ace, it is most unlikely that declarer has the ♠ace and partner the trump ace, in which case his 4♠ without the ♠ ace would have been very doubtful anyway. (case 4)
More likely partner could have seven good ♠ and a singleton ♣. Accordingly play ♠ king. With a doubleton ♣, partner will encourage (or even better overtake with ♠ AQ) and discourage with a singleton ♣.

Rainer Herrmann

[MrAce]

Yes i corrected it to ♣3 and added our carding.

And no, i know that dbl is not lightner necessarily, especially if he has an Ace, which he has (likely) after we saw dummy.
But i don't think cashing ♣A can be wrong. Assume we led small ♠, he took and played his stiff ♣ and we gave him a ruff, seems very simple defense. How about if he is void in ♣ ?

My second choice was to lead ♠K.

I made exactly the same defense, you suggested. Cashed ♠K and he played Q on my K. After that it was obvious