[1eyedjack]

A few got this wrong at the table:

Scoring: IMP

E...S...W...N
P...P...2♣..P
2♦..P...3N..P
P...P

---

You receive a heart lead and are marginally disappointed to find yourself in the inferior game, 4♠ being secure even on an adverse 4-1 trump break. Still, you are not playing particularly sophisticated bidding methods, you have a balanced hand, your 5 card Spade suit is not particularly robust, and you are a bit strong to make a non-forcing 2NT rebid, so 3NT is where you play (and on a review of the traveller after the event you are, in that respect, in good company). 6♠ is a contract that has play but is odds against, requiring precisely Kx(x) of Spades over the Ace.

So much for the review of the position to date. The rest is up to you.

[vuroth]

I NEVER get these right, but sac the first round of spades, win second with the ace. This should give me count on the suit. I can handle any 3-2. I can handle south having Kxxx. Anything else, I think I'm up the creek without a poodle.

[brianshark]

Your line won't handle ♠K third offside if they continue hearts after you duck a spade.

My line:

Spoiler

Cash all my minor suit winners and then play spade to the ace and spade to the Q (unless LHO shows out then I duck and pray).

Realistically, I win any 3-3 clubs break, diamond Q dropping singleton or doubleton, or any spade king onside.

[inquiry]

At the table, I would probably play this line without much more thought...so it might not be right.

Win ACE, cash three clubs.. if clubs are 3-3 you have 9 tricks (4C, 1S, 2H, 2D),
If clubs don't split, cash top two diamonds, if diamond queen falls, you have 9 tricks (3C. 3D. 2H, 1S)
If neither of those happy events occurs, lead a spade to the ACE, and play a spade back. playing RHO for the SPADE KING.

They might be able to get their 1S, 1C, and 1D, but then they will have to lead a heart or a spade...

[1eyedjack]

Yes, Brian and Ben both got this, of course. Only slight modification might be to lay off the club suit after 2 rounds if someone shows out But obviously you would.

Quite a few just gave up on the potential in the minors and just went for "longest suit". It is just another hand where you need to count your tricks and realise that you can combine your chances without needing to rely solely on the Spade suit. This time around the Kxx of Spades was sitting over the Queen, but the Clubs broke 3-3.

Even at Matchpoints you might as well cash the AKQ of Clubs. If they break 4-2 you have a useles Heart to discard on the the last club that they cash when they get in with their Spade, so it is not costing an overtrick. Not quite sure whether you should cash the AK of diamonds after the Clubs misbehave (at Matchpoints, this is). Any views on that?

[y66]

We have 8 tricks off the top and plays for a 9th in clubs, if 3-3, diamonds, if queen drops, and spades, if king onside.

Win HA, try top clubs, then top diamonds. If nothing good happens, small spade to ace, then back to queen.

[1eyedjack]

Just going back to my previous post where I consider any variation in the best line if the scoring were Matchpoints, I think at MP scoring you should win trick 1 and duck a Spade at trick 2.

Rationale: If Spades are behaving you are always losing out to those who are in 4S. So you should be praying that Spades misbehave but that you can still make your 3N by way of an extra minor suit trick. Ostensibly that would argue for playing precisely as you would in IMP, which is to cash out your Clubs, then failing that Diamonds. However I think you may gain a small edge by ducking a Spade first, because if there is Kx doubleton Spade sitting over the Queen you still have a chance of catching up with those in 4S. It is true that a world class defender might win their Spade at trick 2 and lead back another Spade at trick 3, prematurely cutting you off from the dummy before you have unblocked your minor suit honours, but in reality I reckon the world and his dog will just punch back a Heart at you, at which point you can revert to unblocking the minors before going back to the Spade Ace.

The Matchpoint analysis may not be appropriate for the B/I forum, but having started this thread I thought I would stick within it.

[cherdano]

I think the MP analysis is inappropriate since you specified IMPs in the original post...

[1eyedjack]

cherdano, on Apr 14 2008, 06:43 PM, said:

I think the MP analysis is inappropriate since you specified IMPs in the original post...

I thought that it was of some interest. That, to my mind is the only qualification of relevance. It is not as if anyone is being awarded marks.

Yes, with hindsight I possibly could have added it as a "part 2" of the original post, but the interest in the MP play did not occur to me until after I had started the thread. And yes I could have put it into a different thread. That's a borderline call.