[thepossum]

Hi all

I'm curious about this type of hand which crops up all the time. I'm familiar with most probabilities and decisions on breaks and drops vs finesses of Queen. However is there anything that drives a particular strategy for playing trumps in this configuration. Am I missing something very basic about how to play these trumps. Is there anything that indicates a strategy when you have potential finesses in either direction

Note suppose there is a 7 of diamond lead, (EDIT covered by dummy) and followed by 10 in East and won by South with the Ace

regards P

---

[Stephen Tu]

With these sort of positions missing the Q, and two different ways to finesse, there are usually two main considerations:

• Can I deal with 4-1 break, Qxxx-x, and can I deal with it breaking 4-1 either way, or only one way? This usually depends on whether you have the 9, and if the JT are split or not. For example, if dummy has AJTx and you have Kxxx, missing 9, you can pick up Q9xx or Qxxx on your left, so the usual strategy in a vacuum is to cash the K first. If Q9xx is on your right, you can't do anything about it so you don't cater to that. Now if you had the 9, you can pick up Qxxx either way so it's a tossup, not having other info.
• Do you have distributional information from the bidding or play about other suits. If someone is found to be longer in a particular suit, generally you play his partner for the Q, because of vacant spaces, unless HCP considerations mark that person with the Q also.

Sometimes these two principles conflict with each other so you have to calculate which factor creates a bigger edge.


Sometimes there are additional considerations because of the overall hand, needing to keep a particular hand off lead that might make one choose a different way to hook. Or sometimes you just don't hook at all, play off AK, hoping for doubleton Q or else you just go about playing your other suits because you calculate you can make as long as trumps break 3-2 and you don't misguess the Q (perhaps this lets you discard a loser somewhere in compensation, or definitively avoids any defensive ruff, or gives you two dummy ruffs in compensation rather than just 1 if the Q doesn't fall)


On the given hand, you have the 9, so factor 1 isn't a consideration. Factor 2, you know LHO is short in diamonds from the lead (apparently stiff diamond or 7x), so that very slightly favors playing LHO for the Q (given that you have D + 2 club losers, and have to pick up the Q to make this thing. If you didn't have that many losers, and could afford the loss of a trump trick, on some hands you would just cash HAK to avoid losing a heart finesse + a diamond ruff, particularly at IMPs).


A third factor also sometimes worth considering is also that a person with small trumps sometimes will lead one, while holding the Q of trumps almost certainly won't, so in the absence of a clear-cut lead or other clues this favors playing opening leader for the Q.

[thepossum]

Thx Stephen

The players who made this contract did indeed lead the K first followed by low to dummy and the Q dropped from West in this case

Sadly I was one of those (approx 50%) who went down 1 on this hand by playing it incorrectly

In some circumstances and the need for different play, if I could afford it, I may play for the drop and leave it out if it didn't drop. Clearly I needed the finesse on this one as you say

Regards P

[apollo1201]

 thepossum, on 2019-March-01, 18:36, said:

Sadly I was one of those (approx 50%) who went down 1 on this hand by playing it incorrectly

It is by turning those « 50/50 » finesses into « 50+/50- » with context elements (auction incl passes, lead, side lengths...) as mentionned by Stephan that you on the long run make progresses and score above the 50/50 tossers or those who play « always on the right » or « the J follow the Q » beliefs / rules.

[nullve]

 thepossum, on 2019-February-28, 20:56, said:

Note suppose there is a 7 of diamond lead, followed by 10 in East and won by South with the Ace

RHO might not have played the ♦T from ♦QJT3 unless you covered the ♦7, so did you?

I ask, because there's a silly(?) "discovery play" (other than leading the ♥T from hand at some point, intending to finesse through RHO if LHO doesn't cover) that depends on the ♦7 not being a singleton:

Play low from dummy (giving RHO a chance to play low from ♦QJT3, suggesting a 2-3 split if he doesn't), winning in hand, then a diamond to dummy's king, a spade to hand and then a third diamond, giving LHO a chance to ruff. The point is that you may now be able to glean some information about LHO's trump holding not only based on

* the fact that diamonds split 2-3, so that trumps are (at least if we have nothing else to go on) more likely to split 3-2 than 2-3
* the principle of restricted choice and the fact that he didn't lead a trump,

but also on your interpretation, based on what you know about LHO as a player, of his play to, and maybe bodily reaction to, the play of the third diamond.

Of course, I had to try this line against GiB (basic version). Here's what happened on one deal:

---

The ♥T from hand "discovery play" at trick two would also have worked on this deal. (I checked.)

[thepossum]

 nullve, on 2019-March-02, 10:05, said:

RHO might not have played the ♦T from ♦QJT3 unless you covered the ♦7, so did you?

Hi, sorry

Yes, I covered the 7 with the 9