Skip to main content

2017.11.06 Online Training


It happened in our online training on 6th Nov,2017.
It seemed to be a normal game contract to defender, however it was easy to fall into declarer's trap.


Board 13
Both Vul

      West    North    East    South     
                    1♢        3♠       Pass     
      Pass      3NT       AP                     
                                                           

      3NT   North

Trick     1     2     3     4
   1      ♠T   ♠7   ♠6   ♠J
   2      ♢9   ♢4   ♢Q  ♢3
   3      ♡Q   ?

East leads the ♠T and the declarer wins the ♠J in hand. Then declarer plays ♢9 to Dummy's ♢Q. After that, the declarer plays ♡Q from table quickly. How to play?

It seems that declarer holds ♡A. It is common knowledge that K should be played on the second trick to prevent partner's T from finesse on the next trick. Does common knowledge work well in this deal?

East plays ♢4 on the second trick, indicating that East holds odd cards in diamond. Obviously, East holds singleton. By analyzing the leading, declarer holds AQJ or KQJ or AKJ in spade. If declarer holds ♠AKJ, the contract is immortal. If declarer holds both ♡A and ♠KQJ, he will play spade on the second trick to knock out ♠A from West and hope that West holds ♡K as well as East doesn't play club when he wins on the second trick. So, declarer must hold ♠A through his play routine. If declarer holds ♡A, he will win 5♢, 2♡, 2♠ at least. In hence, ♡A in East is a necessary condition for defeating the contract. West should play ♡K immediately to protect partner's entry.

The full deal:
Board 13
Both Vul











Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NOTICE: Suspension of publication

Dear readers:     For some personal reasons, I am sorry that the blogger would not be updated for a long time, at least one month. Thank you for your understanding. Best Wishes!                                                                                                  X. Li                                                                                             2018.9.30                                    ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Online training: An unexpected but reasonable ducking

HAHAHA, after one month off bridge, I'm back!!! This deal happened in our weekly online training, Nov 5th, 2018. First of all, I have to admit my mistake. Hahaha, to be honest, the training was quite boring. After 12 boards, the scores were still 2:2. Although I knew X was not allowed and I would be fined if 3♣X was brought home, I still couldn't help to doing that. Board 13 Dealer: North Vul: Both North    East    South    West  Pass     Pass      1♢         2♢*   2♡*      2♠       Pass       Pass   3♣         X         AP 2♢: Michael 2♡: ♣ suit, better than 3♣ Lead: ♡3 (if hasn't raised, count has a priority. That is to say, xxx lead the smallest card) Table followed ♡9. Normally, you would play ♡Q causally. Would it be correct in this case? Leading analysis: Eas...
Post a Comment
Read more

Interactive Hand Testing

Fu Bo shared this deal with me. This deal happened in the open pair qualify of the 15th Would Bridge Series. She asked me could you find out the defense even if you saw 4 hands. Interactive hand analysis was interesting and played an important role in improving bridge technique. Although double-dummy analysis always stood on a God view, it was essential in a post-mortem analysis. This was first time to show a interactive hand analysis here. I'd appreciate if you could share any interesting double-dummy with me. How to defend 4♠? In this case, defenders should prevent declarer from ruffing ♣ or from winning 3♢. How to cut the connection between table and hand became a serious problem. Timing and speed were the crucial point. 1. Leading ♣     A slow step, losing an upper hand. Declarer could win with the ♣A and sent out small ♣. Even if the defender shift to trump, the declarer was a step ahead. (a) Returning small trump, won by North, ruffing a small ♣ and finessing ...
Post a Comment
Read more