Jeff Lehman

If only I could peek …

Having received some help from the defense of an inexperienced pair, I was in great position to land a no-play slam on Board 24 of today’s matchpoint duplicate.

W
West
QJ108
J5
AKQ7
AJ2
 
E
East
AK742
K76
10865
8

 

I responded 1 to partner’s 1 opening bid.  Partner chose to rebid 4, presumptively denying a hand that could splinter.  Recognizing the potential of slam but running out of science to begin to describe my hand, I bid 4NT keycard.  Receiving a “two with” reply, I jumped to 6.

South chose to lead the A and then follow with a small heart as her partner played up the line.  Surprisingly, the J won Trick 2.

Expecting an easy time at the play, I reconsidered after the Q from dummy revealed that South was void in spades.

I next played the A and ruffed a club.  I led a spade to dummy and ruffed another club.  I cashed my remaining high spade and knew that I was now facing a potentially key decision.

If one opponent owns Jxxx of diamonds, my best chance now is to cash the K to pitch dummy’s fourth diamond.  A diamond to dummy would then allow me to draw the last trump and claim.

On the other hand, if hearts are 6-2 (would the inexperienced North player have high-lowed if owning a doubleton heart?), a lead of K to pitch a diamond will be ruffed for the setting trick.  In that case, I should now lead a diamond to dummy, without first playing the K.

The odds favor playing diamonds, I think, but the signaling favors playing hearts.

I played a diamond to dummy, winning the trick with the A but seeing no J.  I drew the last trump, pitching a small diamond from hand, and cashed a second high diamond.  And North failed to follow …

-50.

I don’t really wish I could peek.  But it would be nice to have taken advantage of the defense from the first two tricks to score +980.

However … when engaging a post mortem with benefit of the hand records, my partner on the hand, Barry Black of Brookline, MA, made a point I had not considered: if I were going to play for a twelfth trick in diamonds and not hearts, why not draw all trumps right away and then play on diamonds? This line would establish a twelfth trick in diamonds not only when diamonds are 3-2, or 4-1 with the stiff jack, but also when …

 

 
24
None
West
N
North
9653
982
9
K9754
 
W
West
QJ108
J5
AKQ7
AJ2
A
E
East
AK742
K76
10865
8
 
S
South
AQ1043
J432
Q1063
 

Oh! A 4-1 diamond break with a stiff nine, allowing me to have played two rounds of diamonds and then enter hand with a club ruff  to take a proven diamond finesse against the J.  THAT was not a blip on my radar screen!

By the way, would I have had choices how to play the hand, had South — even after having led the A at Trick 1 –, continued with the Q to blot the jack and establish her  T at Trick 2?

 

 


3 Comments

Dave Memphis MOJOAugust 4th, 2015 at 4:54 pm

Cute hand.

I think the West hand is worth only 3S at his second turn. It has just 18 HCP and 6 losers with two aces and two queens. My two cents.

slarAugust 4th, 2015 at 8:38 pm

I have an occasional habit of out-foxing myself and finding the only way I could go down. Testing the diamonds seems so…normal yet I could easily see my self doing the same thing.

@Mojo I see your point. While I like the pointy suits, the jacks aren’t doing much for me. In matchpoints there are a lot of ways this could go wrong.

PhasmidAugust 6th, 2015 at 3:41 am

This is a very common overbid, at least at the club where Jeff and I hang out. I don’t really know where it comes from: weren’t we all taught on our mother’s knee that it takes 26 points to make a major-suit game?

But back to the play, Jeff. I don’t know who the actual opponents were but it’s a cast-iron certainly that an inexperienced North would high-low with a doubleton. The fact that South is not going to be on lead again (unless the contract is already down) wouldn’t occur to them.

Leave a comment

Your comment