BBO Discussion Forums: Careful now - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Careful now

#1 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-December-29, 17:48


Perhaps a bit feebly, you decide not to double (do you agree?) but partner is there. The play goes:
3 2 J Q
4 7 8 K
6 8 9 A
4 K 5 9
5 6 Q 8
K 5 3 7

Partner's 5 and 3 are present count.

Things seem to have gone OK so far. Now what?
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#2 User is offline   BunnyGo 

  • Lamentable Bunny
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,505
  • Joined: 2008-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, ME

Posted 2010-December-29, 17:58

View Postgnasher, on 2010-December-29, 17:48, said:


Perhaps a bit feebly, you decide not to double (do you agree?) but partner is there. The play goes:
3 2 J Q
4 7 8 K
6 8 9 A
4 K 5 9
5 6 Q 8
K 5 3 7

Partner's 5 and 3 are present count.

Things seem to have gone OK so far. Now what?


There must be some typos in the play (if nothing else J of hearts at trick 1), it's making it a bit hard to follow.
Bridge Personality: 44 44 43 34

Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
0

#3 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-December-29, 18:08

Partner has:

K??
Jx
AK832
K53

If I play back a diamond and partner ducks, they can ruff a diamond, ruff a club, and exit a diamond for down 1. Alternatively, if I play back a diamond and partner wins and plays a club they can shake a spade, down 1.

If I play a high club they can among other things ruff and get out the DQ for down 1.

Better is to hope partner has the ST. I play a spade to the ten and ace. If they return the spade 9, partner ducks. If they return a low spade, we pop jack. Or of course partner could have the KT9 of spades but that's less fun. If partner has K9x of spades we will survive for down 1.
1

#4 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-December-29, 18:08

View PostBunnyGo, on 2010-December-29, 17:58, said:

There must be some typos in the play (if nothing else J of hearts at trick 1), it's making it a bit hard to follow.


We led a trump and partner put in their jack. What is the typo?
0

#5 User is offline   JLOGIC 

  • 2011 Poster of The Year winner
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 6,002
  • Joined: 2010-July-08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2010-December-29, 18:12

Meh my construction makes the bidding make basically no sense...partner passed our 1S with a pretty good 14 and then they balanced with a random 8. But their balance makes no sense no matter what, they are both passed hands and r/w... and partner's X on Jx of trumps makes no sense without significant values. I still think my layout is right based on how the play has gone. Do we split high with KQ holdings? I am assuming we split low and that partner has shown the AK and not the KQ with this play. Pretty funny that this is the only reasonable layout I can come up with. I think since it's pretty I have it right.
0

#6 User is offline   BunnyGo 

  • Lamentable Bunny
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,505
  • Joined: 2008-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, ME

Posted 2010-December-29, 18:21

View PostJLOGIC, on 2010-December-29, 18:08, said:

We led a trump and partner put in their jack. What is the typo?


Ah, the "typo" was that the picture had South to the right of the dummy and this was confusing me.
Bridge Personality: 44 44 43 34

Never tell the same lie twice. - Elim Garek on the real moral of "The boy who cried wolf"
0

#7 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-December-29, 18:33

View PostJLOGIC, on 2010-December-29, 18:12, said:

Meh my construction makes the bidding make basically no sense...partner passed our 1S with a pretty good 14 and then they balanced with a random 8. But their balance makes no sense no matter what, they are both passed hands and r/w... and partner's X on Jx of trumps makes no sense without significant values. I still think my layout is right based on how the play has gone. Do we split high with KQ holdings? I am assuming we split low and that partner has shown the AK and not the KQ with this play. Pretty funny that this is the only reasonable layout I can come up with. I think since it's pretty I have it right.

You've have the high cards and the distribution right.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

#8 User is offline   Fluffy 

  • World International Master without a clue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,404
  • Joined: 2003-November-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:madrid

Posted 2010-December-29, 19:01

There is a typo, the 8 is played twice instead of the 2.

Anyway the hand proposed by justin seems the only reasonable except that I don't understand why he thinks 8 must be in partner's hands.

His analysis sounds good to me, return 7 so that partner knows he is not wellcome to play the King from Kxx
0

#9 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2010-December-30, 15:55

This is a bit less interesting than I thought it was when I posted it.

A diamond continuation definitely beats it exactly one, regardless of partner's spade and diamond spots.

At the table, I thought a spade would let it through when partner had Kxx Jx AK732 Kxx - spade to declarer's 10, Q to partner's ace, club ruffed, 8, diamond ruff in dummy. My worry was that this would squeeze me between A and J, but in fact dummy would have had to throw its small spade a trick earlier, blocking the suit.

Before switching to a spade, I'd also want to be certain that partner doesn't have Kxx Jx AK632 Kxx. Obviously he should discard 6 from that, but that does require him to notice that 6 is worthless.

Finally, this

Quote

If I play a high club they can among other things ruff and get out the DQ for down 1.

would be dangerous. If partner's diamonds are AK732, declarer can now make by leading Q - if partner wins it he's endplayed; if he doesn't, declarer ruffs a diamond and cashes J to squeeze partner.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

3 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users