[lamford]

---

West leads the king of clubs against your normal game and East plays the seven, ostensibly showing an even number. Over to you.

[gszes]

I prefer to take the heart finesse for 4 tricks (if I need them) rather than relying only on a 33 split. With this thought I will win trick 1 and try a low spade toward the T. This play makes it possible to return to the spade A the second round (unless a 40 split is revealed) of the suit and ALWAYS know if 4 heart tricks are needed or not (and if a 33 split is needed or not so we can avoid a finesse when it is not necessary).

[Stephen Tu]

I'm just playing ace and a spade, playing for trumps to behave, and falling back on 3-3 hearts. That's 84% or so and hard to beat IMO. I looked at other lines looking for more chances in hearts but they seemed worse. e.g. finesse spades first round, or cash one round of spades and work on hearts if an honor didn't fall.

I think you'll find that if spades don't behave, play for 3-3 spades is better than finesse hearts, because on large chunk of working H finesse the long spade going to ruff in before the heart trick set up to cash their diamond. And finding east with say both KJX and Jxxx(x), greater length in both suits is less likely.

[lamford]

Stephen Tu, on 2018-March-26, 11:05, said:

I'm just playing ace and a spade, playing for trumps to behave, and falling back on 3-3 hearts. That's 84% or so and hard to beat IMO. I looked at other lines looking for more chances in hearts but they seemed worse. e.g. finesse spades first round, or cash one round of spades and work on hearts if an honor didn't fall.

I think you'll find that if spades don't behave, play for 3-3 spades is better than finesse hearts, because on large chunk of working H finesse the long spade going to ruff in before the heart trick set up to cash their diamond. And finding east with say both KJX and Jxxx(x), greater length in both suits is less likely.

I think in isolation ace and another is slightly better (78% compared with 76.5%). However, if RHO shows out on the second round, he will get a chance to signal a diamond, and if West has ♠ KJx he will find the diamond switch. I think running the queen or nine makes it harder for the defence. I think both lines allow you to play for 3-3 hearts and you will have no reason to take a heart finesse in practice.

[nige1]

Quote

West leads the king of clubs against your normal game and East plays the seven, ostensibly showing an even number. Over to you.

---

I like Stephen Tu's line. Win ♣A. Cash ♠A.
- If both defenders follow, then lead another ♠, hoping that ♠s behave or ♥s break 3-3.
- If a defender shows out on ♠A, then cash ♥AK.
- If RHO showed out on ♠A, then you need RHO to hold ♥J singleton or doubleton.
- If LHO showed out on ♠A, then you need LHO to hold ♥J singleton or doubleton or ♥ to be 3-3.

[Trick13]

lamford, on 2018-March-26, 11:29, said:

I think in isolation ace and another is slightly better (78% compared with 76.5%). However, if RHO shows out on the second round, he will get a chance to signal a diamond, and if West has ♠ KJx he will find the diamond switch. I think running the queen or nine makes it harder for the defence. I think both lines allow you to play for 3-3 hearts and you will have no reason to take a heart finesse in practice.

To my surprise, in isolation, low to the 9♠ is even better (81.35%). It picks up both 4-0 breaks (4.78% each) at the cost of J-Kxx (6.22%)

[nige1]

Trick13, on 2018-March-28, 15:53, said:

To my surprise, in isolation, low to the 9♠ is even better (81.35%). It picks up both 4-0 breaks (4.78% each) at the cost of J-Kxx (6.22%)

Suppose East follows and ♠9 loses to ♠J. If West follows low to the next ♠, declarer might go wrong.

[PhantomSac]

nige1, on 2018-March-28, 16:39, said:

Suppose East follows and ♠9 loses to ♠J. If West follows low to the next ♠, declarer might go wrong.

You will play low to the ace and lose to KJx on your left, just like if you had played ace then low. Trick is correct that you lose to 1 holding to gain to two when comparing low to the 9 vs ace then low if looking at the suit in a vacuum (obv not really relevant on this hand).

[Trick13]

PhantomSac, on 2018-March-28, 17:18, said:

You will play low to the ace and lose to KJx on your left, just like if you had played ace then low. Trick is correct that you lose to 1 holding to gain to two when comparing low to the 9 vs ace then low if looking at the suit in a vacuum (obv not really relevant on this hand).

Except that East played that low spade with such nonchalance. When I lead towards the A♠ later, I ask myself did he/could he/would he duck from ♠Kx? Nige1 is right. I could go wrong.

[nige1]

Trick13, on 2018-March-28, 15:53, said:

To my surprise, in isolation, low to the 9♠ is even better (81.35%). It picks up both 4-0 breaks (4.78% each) at the cost of J-Kxx (6.22%)

PhantomSac, on 2018-March-28, 17:18, said:

Trick is correct that you lose to 1 holding to gain to two when comparing low to the 9 vs ace then low if looking at the suit in a vacuum (obv not really relevant on this hand).

Should have gone to Specsavers Bridge CC Analyser

[gszes]

Trick13, on 2018-March-28, 15:53, said:

To my surprise, in isolation, low to the 9♠ is even better (81.35%). It picks up both 4-0 breaks (4.78% each) at the cost of J-Kxx (6.22%)

How do you get to the dummy to lead low toward the 9?