On May 4, 4:06 pm, henrysun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On May 3, 5:34 pm, henrysun...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>
>
>
> > You hold, against a top notch expert pair, the following:
>
> > xxxx
> > KJTx
> > KJ98x
> > VOID
>
> > And hear this auction (you and partner are silent):
>
> > Opener Responder
> > 1c(1) 1d(2)
> > 2s(3) 2nt(4)
> > 3c(5) 4c(6)
> > 5nt(7) 7c(8)
> > all pass
>
> > 1c = Precision
> > 1d = negative
> > 2s = natural, GF
> > 2nt = neutral
> > 3c = second suit
> > 4c = sup****t
> > 5nt = grand slam try
> > 7c = accepted
>
> > How would you are a spade lead, a heart lead, and a diamond lead?
>
> > The hand and accompanying story to follow anon.
>
> > Henrysun909
>
> Thanks to all who responded. Here is the full hand (see April 2008
> Bridge World) and my observation:
>
> T2
> Q6
> Q542
> QT985
>
> 764 J5
> JT952 K843
> KJ98 AT763
> K 64
>
> AKQ983
> A7
> VOID
> AJ732
>
> Auction (repeated for convenience):
>
> 1c 1d
> 2s 2nt
> 3c 4c
> 5nt 7c
>
> Author Rosenberg writes,
>
> One North-South pair in the Bermuda Bowl reached seven clubs, which
> was destined to succeed. Or was it? In the Venice Cup ... one South
> reached seven clubs [on the auction above]. On the heart jack lead,
> declarer covered with dummy's queen, but East, England's Michelle
> Brunner, _ducked_. Declarer found herself "conveniently" in dummy to
> take the trump finesse. This deserved to win the award for the Best
> Defense of the tournament. Since there was no such awards, applause
> will need to suffice.
>
> **********
>
> There is no doubt that Brunner's ducking of the KH was a brilliancy,
> but I am not convinced that South should not have sniffed it out
> anyway. Would West, on the actual auction, really be leading from the
> KJT of hearts? Note that I constructed the hand in such a way as to
> provide no really safe leads; a spade lead is going straight into
> declarer's main suit and a diamond lead, like hearts, is from the
> King. Had West held the JT9 of diamonds and the KJT of hearts, I have
> no doubt that everyone would have led a diamond.
>
> So the point of the post was simply this: If, holding a hand with a
> club void (to justify the non-trump lead) and the KJT of hearts, we
> are not leading hearts, then it is at least reasonable for declarer to
> ask whether it is more likely that West has made a very dangerous lead
> against 7C or that East has ducked to give declarer an entry for a
> losing club finesse.
>
> My money would be on the duck by East being more likely by a pretty
> big margin over a lead away from the KJT.
>
> Henrysun909
I disagree. Leading a black suit is nuts, and leading a heart or
diamond from KJ10x carries very little risk.
First, the heart lead. Does declarer bid 7C with AQ of hearts facing a
weak dummy needing to score a trick with the Q? Of course not. If
declarer has any red losers it must be that, as on the actual hand
Michelle Brunner defended, declarer expects to ruff them in dummy
after taking discards on the spades. Therefore laying off the red suit
lead is playing for the very specific point that the bad club break
will kibosh the discarding plan.
How does a red suit gain? By being neutral. If I lead a spade the suit
establishes with fewer ruffs and declarer has more flexibility to
pickle partner's hypothetical troublesome trump holding.
Michelle Brunner's duck was a novel play, unheard of in my experience.
Therefore at the table I would 100% be fooled. I would not even
consider the truth.
(Sorry I didn't see the problem in time to respond before you posted
the spoiler. However possibly I've posted my wrong answer, after
seeing the spoiler, enough times to have credibility that the analysis
above preceded my reading the end of the thread.)
Charles
|
