[kenrexford]

Scoring: MP

---

You end up declarer in 4♥ in the South. The contract was inferior, but the one I had to declare anyway.

I suspected at a critical point that I should take a certain type of line, but I decided against that and did not analyze the play along that line any further, embarking instead upon a losing line.

I'm curious if anyone thinks that this should make, or at least be attempted, along the line I considered.

The lead was the diamond King, won by LHO. LHO then continued with the diamond Queen.

To you...

[FrancesHinden]

There seems to be one obvious line, which I assume is the losing one...

Ace of clubs, club ruff, spade to the ace, club ruff, AK of hearts. Ostensibly just needs clubs 4-3, hearts not 5-0, spades not 4-0.

And it might recover from 5-2 clubs depending on what happens next and what trump holding they ruff and who ruffs. It also might recover from 4-0 spades if they ruff with a trump trick.

[Free]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 31 2007, 02:10 PM, said:

There seems to be one obvious line, which I assume is the losing one...

Ace of clubs, club ruff, spade to the ace, club ruff, AK of hearts. Ostensibly just needs clubs 4-3, hearts not 5-0, spades not 4-0.

And it might recover from 5-2 clubs depending on what happens next and what trump holding they ruff and who ruffs. It also might recover from 4-0 spades if they ruff with a trump trick.

exactly my thoughts

[mikeh]

Free, on Aug 31 2007, 08:12 AM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Aug 31 2007, 02:10 PM, said:

There seems to be one obvious line, which I assume is the losing one...

Ace of clubs, club ruff, spade to the ace, club ruff, AK of hearts.  Ostensibly just needs clubs 4-3, hearts not 5-0, spades not 4-0.

And it might recover from 5-2 clubs depending on what happens next and what trump holding they ruff and who ruffs. It also might recover from 4-0 spades if they ruff with a trump trick.

exactly my thoughts

and mine

[keylime]

ditto.

[skjaeran]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 31 2007, 03:10 PM, said:

There seems to be one obvious line, which I assume is the losing one...

Ace of clubs, club ruff, spade to the ace, club ruff, AK of hearts. Ostensibly just needs clubs 4-3, hearts not 5-0, spades not 4-0.

And it might recover from 5-2 clubs depending on what happens next and what trump holding they ruff and who ruffs. It also might recover from 4-0 spades if they ruff with a trump trick.

Hard to see another line coming closer than half as good as this one.

[SoTired]

FrancesHinden, on Aug 31 2007, 08:10 AM, said:

There seems to be one obvious line, which I assume is the losing one...

Ace of clubs, club ruff, spade to the ace, club ruff, AK of hearts. Ostensibly just needs clubs 4-3, hearts not 5-0, spades not 4-0.

And it might recover from 5-2 clubs depending on what happens next and what trump holding they ruff and who ruffs. It also might recover from 4-0 spades if they ruff with a trump trick.

I think slightly better is ♣AK, ♥A, ruff club, ♥K, ruff 2nd club. I believe that gives you more chances to make if clubs are 5-2.

[1eyedjack]

I don't know how bad it is in comparison, but a "playable" line is to concede the second round of diamonds, pitching a spade, so that third round would accept the force in hand. Then cash Ace of Hearts (perhaps AK, if Kirby rule does not apply) and maybe set about the Spade suit.

[kenrexford]

Well, here's the rub that I have not yet seen analyzed. This is MP, right? It seems that the par contract should be 4♠, because of the Swan hand as Responder. So, assuming that alternative contract of 4♠, and the inferences available from the lead, is there an alternative line that provide the same trick expectation in 4♥ as in 4♠? Or, does the set-up-clubs line provide the same trick expectation as 4♠? Or, is there a line that seems mathematically most likely to cater to the same trick expectation as 4♠? Does this factor matter?

[skjaeran]

kenrexford, on Sep 2 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

Well, here's the rub that I have not yet seen analyzed.  This is MP, right?  It seems that the par contract should be 4♠, because of the Swan hand as Responder.  So, assuming that alternative contract of 4♠, and the inferences available from the lead, is there an alternative line that provide the same trick expectation in 4♥ as in 4♠?  Or, does the set-up-clubs line provide the same trick expectation as 4♠?  Or, is there a line that seems mathematically most likely to cater to the same trick expectation as 4♠?  Does this factor matter?

If there's no trump loser and clubs are 4-3 you'll often make 12 tricks in a spade contract. If one but not the other black suit is favourable you'll often make 11 tricks.

The only way to counter that, I think, is to play for Qx in trumps in 4♥. That means cashing ♥AK dropping the queen, then ♠AK and ruff if needed, trump to jack and claim 11 tricks. You can never match 12 tricks if that's the outcome in a ♠ contract.

I believe the Frances proposed line is better - play as safely as you can for ten tricks, get 11 part of the time and hope you match the normal result playing in spades. I don't think you need to go 'all in' for making five here.

[kenrexford]

skaeran, on Sep 2 2007, 10:46 AM, said:

kenrexford, on Sep 2 2007, 04:45 PM, said:

Well, here's the rub that I have not yet seen analyzed.  This is MP, right?  It seems that the par contract should be 4♠, because of the Swan hand as Responder.  So, assuming that alternative contract of 4♠, and the inferences available from the lead, is there an alternative line that provide the same trick expectation in 4♥ as in 4♠?  Or, does the set-up-clubs line provide the same trick expectation as 4♠?  Or, is there a line that seems mathematically most likely to cater to the same trick expectation as 4♠?  Does this factor matter?

If there's no trump loser and clubs are 4-3 you'll often make 12 tricks in a spade contract. If one but not the other black suit is favourable you'll often make 11 tricks.

The only way to counter that, I think, is to play for Qx in trumps in 4♥. That means cashing ♥AK dropping the queen, then ♠AK and ruff if needed, trump to jack and claim 11 tricks. You can never match 12 tricks if that's the outcome in a ♠ contract.

I believe the Frances proposed line is better - play as safely as you can for ten tricks, get 11 part of the time and hope you match the normal result playing in spades. I don't think you need to go 'all in' for making five here.

That's the line I took, for the most part.

I won the second diamond on dummy and then spade to the Ace, dropping Jack to my left. After two top hearts, I found out about a 4-1 split. I managed to win the second diamond on dummy (1), the spade Ace (2), the heart A-K (4), the spade K as a gift (5), the club A-K (7), the heart Jack en passant (8), and then to throw RHO in with the last spade, forced to lead a diamond (9) for down one. Poor result, of course.

However, 5♠ did make. At MP, down one was as bad in the scoring as just making four.