On 4/25/2008 3:54 PM, Adam Beneschan wrote:
> On Apr 25, 4:47 am, Dave Flower <DavJFlo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> Match-points, N/S vul., dealer E
>>
>> I was actually declarer on this deal, but it seems an interesting
>> defensive problem.
>>
>> K Q J
>> 5 3
>> K J 7 4
>> 10 6 4 2
>> A 9 7 5 3 2
>> 9 7 5 3
>> 8 6
>> A
>>
>> E S W N
>> p 1D 1H 2D
>> 2S 3D p p
>> 3H 4D all pass
>>
>> Opening lead S6; SJ, SA, S8
>>
>> (If you decide to cash CA, it continues C3, C5(attitude), C2)
>>
>> How do you defend ?
>
> Do we have any standards for how defensive problems are supposed to be
> posted? It took me a good long time to figure out what the heck was
> going on here.
>
> First of all, you neglected to tell us which compass direction we're
> sitting (East). I'm sure this was just an oversight. But it took me
> some time to figure out.
>
> Second, you didn't tell us which of the posted hands we're holding,
> although that became clear when you said "if you decide to cash CA".
>
> Third, I can't tell from the diagram what compass position each of the
> posted hands is. When dummy and a defender's hand are shown, it's not
> immediately clear which is which, and which hand is over the other.
> The way the hands appear, the center of the table could be "above" the
> lower hand, meaning the hand with KQJ of spades is to the left of the
> other hand; or it could be to the left of the lower hand, meaning the
> hand with KQJ of spades is to the right of the lower hand.
>
> My suggestion, besides making sure you tell us that we're East or
> whatever, would be to label the two hands by their compass direction---
> i.e. put the labels "North" and "East" above the two hands, which
> should make it easier for us to figure out. It might be even better
> if, in addition, you put a blob of asterisks or something somewhere
> where the middle of the table would be, to make it even clearer what
> the layout is; but it's probably not necessary.
>
> From what I recall, when publishers publish defensive hands in books,
> they usually print them the way you would view them while sitting at
> the table---in this case, with your hand at the bottom and dummy at
> the right, which is where the dummy actually would be at the table.
> But I guess either way is fine, as long as it's clear.
>
> OK, enough ranting about presentation.
>
> I object to the 2S bid. I would have just sup****ted hearts at some
> level, probably 4 at this vulnerability. I can understand the bid,
> because with this auction it may be our hand and I may need to bid
> constructively rather than preemptively, and it could play better in
> spades. But this spade suit is too moth-eaten to make it worthwhile
> to bid it, when you have this much heart sup****t.
>
> As for the defensive problem: Declarer sounds like he has six
> diamonds, and I'm not going to play partner for two singletons after
> he has bid this tamely at this vulnerability. So after ca****ng the CA
> and getting a low attitude signal, I'm guessing that he wants a heart
> through.
>
> -- Adam
I agree that the presentation here is less than optimal, though the
questions asked clear things up quickly: we must be the hand with CA,
and since we played third to trick one (SA), we must be third hand. That
means the other hand shown is dummy, on our right. All the same, it
would save a bit of detective work if OP had been more clear. It would
also be nice if the bidding were ordered WNES, as is customary, rather
than ESNW, which makes it very hard to follow what's going on.
Also, every defensive publication I can recall read puts the defenders
in the East and West seats, rather than South as you suggest.
And now, having made no real contributions to this thread, I'm going to
retreat, as I'm much better at complaining about layout than I am at
solving defensive problems.
--
Cheers,
Alan (San Jose, California, USA)
|
