🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <43s9sg$p35@news.hal.com>, Dale Johannesen <dale@hal.COM> wrote:
>In article <43qiis$1vt@sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au>, doug@Deakin.Edu.Au (Douglas Newlands) writes:
>|> 
>|> The next hand was bid speculatively by the opps 1C-1H-2C-3N-6C
>|> 
>|> 		       82
>|> 		       10873
>|> 		       K108642
>|> 		       3
>|> 
>|> 	    Q974              A65
>|> 	    J952              A6
>|> 	    AQ3               7
>|> 	    KJ                AQ107642
>|> 		       KJ103
>|> 		       KQ4
>|> 		       J95
>|> 		       985
>|> 
>|> On the night, I led the 5D but you may like to ponder the question as to
>|> whether the declarer or the defence should prevail in general.
>
>Interesting hand.  Double dummy I think declarer can always make 
>(I can post more about this if there's some interest).  Single
>dummy I would probably hook the QD at trick 1 and go down.

I say I can beat it.  If you run trumps, I will pitch D, D, S for
my first 3 pitches.  I won't play my SK until declarer plays
his second low spade.  And as for my pitch on the last trump,
I'd like to know what dummy's discard on the sixth trump was.

Henry Rich

In article <43qiis$1vt@sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au>, doug@Deakin.Edu.Au (Douglas Newlands) says:

>I always have trouble playing poorish contracts and was faced with 3NT by S on the
>following: IMP pairs,All vul after (effectively) 2n-3N and the lead of the 2D

>       984
>       1093
>       Q753
>       J97

>
>       AQ103
>       KQ74
>       K10
>       AK5

I hope that lead is fourth best.

I don't want to play a S, H or C, so how about continuing with the KD.  If
West wins and plays a third diamond, win the Q, pitching a spade, and run
the H10.  Later, you play AK and another club, and hope that someone has
to give you a spade finesse at the end.  You'll take 2S, 3H, 2D and 2C.
If West plays something other than a diamond at trick 3, it might give you
a trick, and you can play it by ear from there on.

In article <43qiis$1vt@sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au>, doug@Deakin.Edu.Au (Douglas Newlands) writes:
|> 
|> The next hand was bid speculatively by the opps 1C-1H-2C-3N-6C
|> 
|> 		       82
|> 		       10873
|> 		       K108642
|> 		       3
|> 
|> 	    Q974              A65
|> 	    J952              A6
|> 	    AQ3               7
|> 	    KJ                AQ107642
|> 		       KJ103
|> 		       KQ4
|> 		       J95
|> 		       985
|> 
|> On the night, I led the 5D but you may like to ponder the question as to
|> whether the declarer or the defence should prevail in general.

Interesting hand.  Double dummy I think declarer can always make 
(I can post more about this if there's some interest).  Single
dummy I would probably hook the QD at trick 1 and go down.

dale@hal.COM (Dale Johannesen) wrote:
>
> In article <43qiis$1vt@sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au>, doug@Deakin.Edu.Au (Douglas Newlands) writes:
> |> 
> |> The next hand was bid speculatively by the opps 1C-1H-2C-3N-6C
> |> 
> |> 		       82
> |> 		       10873
> |> 		       K108642
> |> 		       3
> |> 
> |> 	    Q974              A65
> |> 	    J952              A6
> |> 	    AQ3               7
> |> 	    KJ                AQ107642
> |> 		       KJ103
> |> 		       KQ4
> |> 		       J95
> |> 		       985
> |> 
> |> On the night, I led the 5D but you may like to ponder the question as to
> |> whether the declarer or the defence should prevail in general.
> 
> Interesting hand.  Double dummy I think declarer can always make 
> (I can post more about this if there's some interest).  Single
> dummy I would probably hook the QD at trick 1 and go down.

I am tempted to say double, but lets just say I am interested. It seems 
that ruff a diamond spade to the queen gives you an eleventh trick, but 
no entries for a squeeze.


David King

In article <43s9sg$p35@news.hal.com>, dale@hal.COM (Dale Johannesen) writes:
|> In article <43qiis$1vt@sol.ccs.deakin.edu.au>, doug@Deakin.Edu.Au (Douglas Newlands) writes:
|> |> 
|> |> The next hand was bid speculatively by the opps 1C-1H-2C-3N-6C
|> |> 
|> |> 		       82
|> |> 		       10873
|> |> 		       K108642
|> |> 		       3
|> |> 
|> |> 	    Q974              A65
|> |> 	    J952              A6
|> |> 	    AQ3               7
|> |> 	    KJ                AQ107642
|> |> 		       KJ103
|> |> 		       KQ4
|> |> 		       J95
|> |> 		       985
|> |> 
|> |> On the night, I led the 5D but you may like to ponder the question as to
|> |> whether the declarer or the defence should prevail in general.
|> 
|> Interesting hand.  Double dummy I think declarer can always make 
|> (I can post more about this if there's some interest).  Single
|> dummy I would probably hook the QD at trick 1 and go down.

Oops, I spoke too soon.  The defenders can prevail after several
opening leads.  It does get complicated.