[pilowsky]

Another great slam that I bid correctly and didn't make. I'm beginning to think that there is a five-minute window where I play really well, but it was forty years ago.
Make 6NT any lead.

---

Interestingly, the highest-scoring contract is 7D, which 0/22 people bid. 4/22 made 6N, 2 made 3N+2, 6 made 6N-1, 1 made 7N-2 and 2 made 7N-2.
Again, not the simplest hand in a reasonably large field.
Played properly I found this ending:

Spoiler

South on lead to make 4 more tricks.

---

[Stephen Tu]

"Bid correctly" is very arguable. You should definitely just raise diamonds on your 2nd turn. The idea is you want to find out if partner has spade control, it's possible bot has HAQJ DQJ SQ for example, and it's bad to bid some slam (on some hypothetical auction where partner shows only 1 key card) then have an opponent just lead out the AK of spades. It's also forseeable that 6d is just a better contract as you might need to ruff a heart to set up partner's hearts, or other various possibilities. If partner is stronger, on some auctions they can eventually take control and find out about your hand and maybe find 6nt instead of 6d when it's a more solid contract, rather than you just pigging out in 6nt (was this MP and you felt you needed to outscore people in 6d?). Or maybe you can find out they are > than minimum and find 7D on a slower auction (when they have a better hand than this; don't want to be in 7d on the actual hand). 6D would have matchpointed just fine in your field, if it was indeed MP. Yes 6nt is better here at MP, but hearts are more likely to be 4-2 or worse than 3-3, and on those you'll definitely be much happier in 6d which is almost impregnable. Better to have a very good score in 6d no matter how hearts break, than a super score in 6nt only when hearts are 3-3 (or squeeze works), but a bad score when 6nt fails on the more common 4-2/5-1 hearts. In a tougher field at matchpoints (at IMPs you always want to be in safer 6d) it would be a closer, tougher decision as you wouldn't have people bidding insane 7nt, finding ways to go down in 6nt even though hearts 3-3, or not bidding slam, and 6d/6nt making would be the only contracts.

As for the play, the position you reached is cute, but I think it requires misdefense by West, if it had kept one fewer club and one more heart you would be down as then East can unguard hearts in the endgame. It's also implausible IMO for declarer to take a line that results in this position. I think a more plausible line of play involves just ducking a heart early in the play and just playing for hearts 3-3, or various squeezes that probably need west to have long hearts. Trying for your presented end position would involve a lot of silly defeats IMO when hearts were 3-3 all along.

[nige1]

Pilowsky ' Another great slam that I bid correctly and didn't make. I'm beginning to think that there is a five-minute window where I play really well, but it was forty years ago. Make 6NT any lead. Interestingly, the highest-scoring contract is 7D, which 0/22 people bid. 4/22 made 6N, 2 made 3N+2, 6 made 6N-1, 1 made 7N-2 and 2 made 7N-2. Again, not the simplest hand in a reasonably large field.'
++++++++++++++++++++

Stephen Tu's line is best. As the cards, lie, ducking a ♥ sets up 2 more tricks, immediately. On other layouts, it preserves both your black suit threats and rectifies the count for genuine squeezes.

---

[pescetom]

 Stephen Tu, on 2020-October-13, 00:01, said:

Or maybe you can find out they are > than minimum and find 7D on a slower auction (when they have a better hand than this; don't want to be in 7d on the actual hand). 6D would have matchpointed just fine in your field, if it was indeed MP.

I agree with most of what you say, but I don't see why you wouldn't want to be in 7♦ on the actual hand after ascertaining you have all the Aces and Kings. It will make without impasse even if the hearts are 4-2 I think.

[Stephen Tu]

 pescetom, on 2020-October-13, 09:41, said:

I agree with most of what you say, but I don't see why you wouldn't want to be in 7♦ on the actual hand after ascertaining you have all the Aces and Kings. It will make without impasse even if the hearts are 4-2 I think.

What's the line? ruff out hearts? I think usu OK if 4-2 with hearts with West, but if East has 4 hearts, you might run into issues. Or if East has something like 2245. Or could go for cross-ruff lines but that can run into black suit overruffs/trump promotions.

7d might be right at MP in a very good field, not the actual one. But how can South find out about North's JD? Without that card it's quite a lot worse. I'm unsure what contract I actually want to be in on a single dummy basis. If I could see E/W cards I'd prob want to be in 7d so that I always take the right line, but single dummy? It might be best just to be in 6d and beat people with +1 vs making when they guess wrong. Or try 6nt.

[pescetom]

 Stephen Tu, on 2020-October-13, 11:36, said:

What's the line? ruff out hearts? I think usu OK if 4-2 with hearts with West, but if East has 4 hearts, you might run into issues. Or if East has something like 2245. Or could go for cross-ruff lines but that can run into black suit overruffs/trump promotions.

7d might be right at MP in a very good field, not the actual one. But how can South find out about North's JD? Without that card it's quite a lot worse. I'm unsure what contract I actually want to be in on a single dummy basis. If I could see E/W cards I'd prob want to be in 7d so that I always take the right line, but single dummy? It might be best just to be in 6d and beat people with +1 vs making when they guess wrong. Or try 6nt.

I agree that risking grand has more sense in a good field, and will have problems if (say) hearts are 4-2 and trumps 4-1. But it still looks like decent odds to me.
FWIW I just tried moving ♥9 to East to make 4: all it took was to pull trumps, ♥AK and ♣AKQ, East is squeezed with ♠QT7 ♥JT (if he discards ♠7 we take AK, if he discards ♥J we ruff a heart).

[Stephen Tu]

 pescetom, on 2020-October-13, 12:27, said:

FWIW I just tried moving ♥9 to East to make 4: all it took was to pull trumps, ♥AK and ♣AKQ, East is squeezed with ♠QT7 ♥JT (if he discards ♠7 we take AK, if he discards ♥J we ruff a heart).

Yeah, but that line will blow it on some alternate distributions. Like I said if I can peek at E/W cards to play, I want to be in 7d, I know which squeezes to play for and avoid getting winners ruffed. If I have to guess, I think large chance for something to go wrong somewhere.

[aawk]

6NT is made if ♥ are 3-3 or Q of ♠ drops.

If they lead ♥ play small in both hands test the ♠ and if Q does not drop 6nt is made if ♥ drop.

If they lead ♣/♦/♠ take the lead and give them a ♥ trick then test the ♠ and if Q does not drop 6nt is made if ♥ drop.

[Huibertus]

 aawk, on 2020-October-14, 00:06, said:

6NT is made if ♥ are 3-3 or Q of ♠ drops.

If they lead ♥ play small in both hands test the ♠ and if Q does not drop 6nt is made if ♥ drop.

If they lead ♣/♦/♠ take the lead and give them a ♥ trick then test the ♠ and if Q does not drop 6nt is made if ♥ drop.

I'm not conviced about testing the ♠. Yes ducking a heart in both hands is the right play. However there are more chances then the Q♠ drop. The long ♥ could be in the same hand as the Q 4th ♠ or any 5+card ♠, or the long ♥ could be in the same hand as a potential 5+card ♣. So there is squeeze potential.

Depending on what they led and played after winning a heart, you have to check if you still have a ♠ or ♣ entry and lead the final ♦ squeeze card from the other hand, and for that to work you must have cashed the top ♥s first.

There also are some minute double and triple squeeze chances.


So, concede a ♥, cash ♥s and after that, depending on entries, cash top ♠s (thus addin ♠Q drop succes to the ♣/♥ squeeze) or top ♣ you don't need as an entry and finally cash ♦s finishing in the hand opposite the ♠ or ♣ threat. Of course the ♠/♥ squeeze is positional so only works against W, the ♣/♥ squeeze would work against both E and W.

Not sure of the overall exact percentages but my feeling is allowing for a squeeze is slightly better then just the drop of ♠ Q.

[msjennifer]

Sir,
This hand occurred ,with a few spots different ,in a pairs PAR event way back in the 1970's as reported in my Daddy's collection.
Playing in 6NT there are 11 top winners and one has to duck a heart right away in order to rectify the count and keeping all squeeze chances intact.This is an elementary play for all advanced players.
THANKS

[pilowsky]

 msjennifer, on 2020-October-14, 10:34, said:

Sir,
This hand occurred ,with a few spots different ,in a pairs PAR event way back in the 1970's as reported in my Daddy's collection.
Playing in 6NT there are 11 top winners and one has to duck a heart right away in order to rectify the count and keeping all squeeze chances intact.This is an elementary play for all advanced players.
THANKS

Madam,
That's very interesting. This one occurred in an ACBL tourney at 21:24 0n 2020-10-12. tampateach was one of the four that made 6NT so she must be reasonably advanced.
In 1976 I was in the common room learning what an Ace was worth after getting back from seeing a guy with MDP at my first GP placement and then trying to work out what was wrong with my Fortran subroutine while studying anatomy.

I would love to see your Daddy's collection though. I am trying to learn this stuff from mistakes on BBO and by recreating hands I see in other places using the Hand editor.


My Daddy told me that the only important thing in life is integrity, so I never cheat; although I might be a little snarky sometimes. I think my mother was a bit slack with the truth occasionally, but she had four kids under four in the north of England so that was OK.

THANKS