When you really need to go, badly …
A club game hand presented an opportunity to induce partner to switch suits so as to set a 1NT contract.
Playing weak notrumps (where a strong notrump hand is typically opened 1 of a suit and then 1NT is rebid over partner’s one level response), I opened 1♦ in the West chair and heard the bidding close with North’s 1NT overcall. Partner East led the ♦3, declarer called for the ♦2 from dummy South. This is what I saw:
| Dealer: 12-W
Vul: NS |
North
♠ ♥ ♦ ♣ |
|
| West
♠ AQ8 ♥ KJ53 ♦ AQJ7 ♣ 62 |
 |
East
♠ ♥ ♦ (3) ♣ |
| South
♠ K52 ♥ Q7 ♦ 94(2) ♣ JT953 |
| West | North | East | South |
| 1♦ | 1NT | All pass |
What is your defensive plan?
Partner is marked with 0-2 HCP. Yet, I want him to be on lead so that he can play a major suit through dummy. Seemingly his only potential entry cards are the ♣Q and the ♦T.
I began by playing the ♦Q at Trick One, the best I could do to discourage a diamond return should partner gain entry. Declarer North won the king, and led one major himself, passing the ♠J. I won the ♠Q and returned the ♦7. Partner won the ♦T. At this point, had partner returned a heart, we will set 1NT, by multiple tricks. Admittedly, that is not an easy play, but the whole hand was:
| Dealer: 12-W
Vul: NS |
North
♠ JT963 ♥ A96 ♦ K86 ♣ AK |
|
| West
♠ AQ8 ♥ KJ53 ♦ AQJ7 ♣ 62 |
|
East
♠ 74 ♥ T842 ♦ T53 ♣ Q874 |
| South
♠ K52 ♥ Q7 ♦ 942 ♣ JT953 |
With apologies for the bathroom-like sound of the title of this blog, I really needed partner to go (on lead and to switch to hearts)!
Addendum: my partner on this hand has since pointed out that I could have defended so as to have made the heart return easier to find. When I am in with the ♠Q, if I first cash the DJ before leading a small diamond to partner’s DT, partner, having no more diamonds, must switch suits and is thus more likely to find the winning heart switch. “Building a fence around partner” is a high level bridge skill, and, without regard to whether partner should have returned a diamond on the at-the-table defense, I would have been well-advised to have adopted the defense pointed out by partner.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Given that you are gambling on partner having started with DTxx rather than DTxxx, or Dxxx(x), cashing a high diamond first is a no-lose play and should have been fairly clear (in my humble hindsight-aided opinion). OTOH, partner should be able to work out that a shift is required, given the curious incident of the diamond Ace. “Ah, but the diamond ace had not yet been played,” you say. “That was the curious incident,” I reply.