Declarer play How to play trumps in a Grand Slam
#1
Posted 2015-March-09, 07:09
♠A42
♥AK542
♦Q
♣Q965
♠KQ9
♥-
♦AK6
♣AJ108432
Full auction was:
E S W N
P 1♣ 3♥ X
P 5♣ P 7♣
P P P
The 1♣ opening bid was Precision, showing an opening bid of 17 or more points.
N's X showed at least a game going hand.
#2
Posted 2015-March-09, 08:25
Anyway, assuming that W preempted at 2 level, showing 6 card suit, due to number of vacant places finesse is correct imo. I may be wrong, because I don't know how to calculate the odds due to vacant places, but my instincts tell me that having shown at least 6 card in the preempted suit while RHO has one or two of them makes RHO hold K7 more probable.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#3
Posted 2015-March-09, 09:54
#4
Posted 2015-March-09, 10:53
Thus we need to know the exact auction, including initial passes, if any, and the vulnerability. Saying that W 'pre-empted' is of limited help. Knowing that he bid 2 or 3 or 4 would be information available to a declarer. Knowing he was red v white or white v red, etc, would be known to the declarer.
Posting incomplete information is akin to giving us a hand and saying: the opps are in 7N...what card do you lead? Nobody would answer that question without knowing how they got there.
[/rant]
As for the OP question, assuming West bid 3♥, I think the hook is correct. If West bid only 2♥, and we infer a 7 card suit, then I think that I'd play for the drop if West were white, on the basis that with a void he'd be more likely to bid 3♥ even on a crap suit, and more likely to bid only 2 if he held the club K, stiff. While there are too many variables to deal specifically with all other combos (see rant), I think that I would tend to hook on most other layouts.
#5
Posted 2015-March-09, 12:23
So it is not even close. Even if W showed only 5 cards, odds are still significantly better for finesse. Even when W has shown no suit at all, odds are in favor of drop only by %2. (after Q is played and we saw 7 from rho)
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#6
Posted 2015-March-09, 12:39
#7
Posted 2015-March-09, 12:41
PhantomSac, on 2015-March-09, 12:39, said:
Damn good point!
And if they don't ruff, from a stiff 7, pretending like he holds K7, he deserves to beat me, which I would have finessed anyway.
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#8
Posted 2015-March-09, 14:03
PhantomSac, on 2015-March-09, 12:39, said:
I agree, in principle, but that play doesn't work when you just discarded the ♦A on the first heart (as declarer did, according to the OP). If he would have discarded an innocent ♦6 it could work, though.
Rik
The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds the new discoveries, is not “Eureka!” (I found it!), but “That’s funny…” – Isaac Asimov
The only reason God did not put "Thou shalt mind thine own business" in the Ten Commandments was that He thought that it was too obvious to need stating. - Kenberg
#9
Posted 2015-March-09, 16:25
But it costs nothing to cash ♥K first. If he's false carded with Jx and so trying to encourage the finesse, I'd do the opposite.
I can't see anyone ruffing the ♥K but you never know.
#10
Posted 2015-March-09, 17:07
wanoff, on 2015-March-09, 16:25, said:
Depends on the level of the opps of course, but even if they don't ruff you might gain something based on how long they think about ruffing (I suspect it would take an average defender a lot longer to pitch with a stiff trump than with Kx of trumps). Also obviously agree with trinidad, pitching the ace of diamonds was not good... pitching a spade is best imo (like we are going to pitch 2 spades, of course this is not possible since we woulda pulled trumps first, but the defender would have to figure it out which might take them a little bit, again depending on their level). Anyways if nothing interesting happens we can just revert to the finesse but seems like a cost free way to maybe gain something as you say.
#11
Posted 2015-March-09, 17:40
is still a heck of a lot more likely to open 2h 3h 4h than xxx xxxxxx(xx) xx void
Once it looks like the heart QJ are at best split there are no more HCP for lho to hold aside from the club K. Vacant spaces is fine but hcp requirements are usually better.
I echo MIKEH /rant about entirely too much information is missing.
#12
Posted 2015-March-09, 18:22
gszes, on 2015-March-09, 17:40, said:
is still a heck of a lot more likely to open 2h 3h 4h than xxx xxxxxx(xx) xx void
Once it looks like the heart QJ are at best split there are no more HCP for lho to hold aside from the club K. Vacant spaces is fine but hcp requirements are usually better.
I echo MIKEH /rant about entirely too much information is missing.
I love this comment. Stiff K makes it a reasonable preempt, but void does not. Why did I not think of this?
"It's only when a mosquito lands on your testicles that you realize there is always a way to solve problems without using violence!"
"Well to be perfectly honest, in my humble opinion, of course without offending anyone who thinks differently from my point of view, but also by looking into this matter in a different perspective and without being condemning of one's view's and by trying to make it objectified, and by considering each and every one's valid opinion, I honestly believe that I completely forgot what I was going to say."
#13
Posted 2015-March-09, 18:25
remnart, on 2015-March-09, 07:09, said:
YOU ♠ K Q 9 ♥- ♦ A K 6 ♣ A J T 8 4 3 2
(_P) 1♣ (3♥) _X
(_P) 5♣ (_P) 7♣
(_P) _P (_P)
The 1♣ opening bid was Precision, showing an opening bid of 17 or more points.
N's X showed at least a game going hand.
I spotted this hand in one of the Camrose Trophy matches over last weekend. After an auction in which S had shown a strong hand with a long ♣suit and W had pre-empted in ♥ NS ended up in 7♣. W led the 10♥ which went A, J, ♦A. S led the ♣Q from dummy, E played the 7 and, after considerable thought, S played low and lost the trick to W's singleton ♣K. Did declarer play correctely?
Unless RHO ruffs ♥K, take MrAce's advice to finesse ♣Q
#14
Posted 2015-March-12, 09:28
MrAce, on 2015-March-09, 18:22, said:
When was the last time you preferred to open a weak 2 with say Jxxxxx xxx xxxx void ? would you make the same case for Jxxxxx xxx xxx K. IMHO one is much more likely to open a weak 2s with the latter. The former contains a couple of surprises that is beyond anything partner might suspect in a bidding situation. The realm of probability becomes so wide (and that is just a weak 2) that essentially even opening a weak 2 becomes a game of chance much more than a technique for expressing a hand. When we extend that our to the 3 level Jxxxxxx xx xxx K vs Jxxxxxx xxx xxx void the range of hands now includes anything from AQJxxxx xx xx xx to xxxxxxx x(xx xx)xxx void with no room left to explore how is it even close to reasonable for your partner to ever make anything but a WAG no matter what kind of bidding there is. This same principle does not hold as much sway when one opens at the 4 level because a wide variety of holding becomes reasonably probable there and at least the partnership is in game.
I do not pretend to say one method is superior to the other. My contention is that hughmongous ranges take away from one of the greatest aspects of this fine game and that is the use of brain power. If every bid is a crap shoot we might as well take up backgammon or just retire to a casino rather than waste time pushing cards around the room. So this becomes more a decision based on what you think your opps are normally going to do rather than strictly a case of open spaces. If you are playing against me play for the drop:)
#15
Posted 2015-March-12, 10:06
gszes, on 2015-March-12, 09:28, said:
Then you miss the point about wide-ranging preempts. It is not about making every hand a crap shoot but rather making it a crap shoot when the odds would otherwise be against us and thereby improving the odds in our favour when they might otherwise have been even. I would not open a 1st/2nd seat weak two with the hands you posted either because the odds are not right for it. But 3♠ in 3rd might well go through my head at green as would throwing out an overcall over a strong artificial opening. Sometimes you use your brain power deciding whether to throw the dice rather than on something at the 4 or 5 level. Treating such a style as thoughtless is more than a little insulting.
#16
Posted 2015-March-12, 17:31
gszes, on 2015-March-12, 09:28, said:
Strongly disagree - I'd much rather have the former hand.
#17
Posted 2015-March-13, 03:54
Further if E have x only in club and J only in hearts then many of those hands will open preempt and that further reduce (since it didnt happend) that E have x only in cl...If he have for ex 5-1-5-2 he vill prob s and probably not ruf the hK.. And finally we know more about W cards ie those heart he have that is not cl K.. Say if he got 7h he has if we think in "probability"(Dont like it:)) he has 6 places (unknown cards) and E has (after 2 trick first ha, then hK) 11 unknown cards.. so thinking in that way 2/3 chance to have the cl K, from that aspect.
I think we nshould throw spades instead of d because after the heart we will play for finesse ie we have and should then assume E have the K... Then it will be no danger att all to take the the S (A,K,ruff)... If w have the K we would go down anyway if we play clubs instead and finesse.. So we can spare 1 spade in hand and 3 dimonds and also ruff those and then we can get a read in some cases when w have the cl K... Atleaste it is no danger to do like that U get mor information before playing Clubs..In practise they can do wrong also...
We are "waiting" for more information simply(often this will not change the way,but it does anyway allways lead to a better grounds, argument for our play)..then
In this hand E can discard on hearts also, it may bee possible to get the exact distribution..And when it is calculated one cl for W (ie the king) then we can change our play some times so we can make som of the K single..
Remember the reason that we can do this is that it can not (well if not E steal over dummy in d (very unlikeley) and eaven if so that E overruff it could also happenes that he proved not to be able to overruff and in this cases we naturally places the K of cl to W..
I think that I misses and take "decition" instead of waiting for more info/grounds´, them lacking it will bee hard to be "wise", to do the best play, to get a better plan, better ideas...
Thx for mee... Probably i have missed some points here also...
Edit:We can eaven play a third heart in 3 trick and observe what E does/throw... Think this is best line to start... Finito.. thx
#18
Posted 2015-March-13, 08:23
I Completely AGREE WITH all that chose to take the losing finesse.
#19
Posted 2015-March-13, 09:07
#20
Posted 2015-March-19, 09:27
Both declarers ran ♣Q at trick two.
It's an interesting bidding problem after 1♣-(3♥), for various meanings of the 1♣ opening.