How does the cover lose by force when West has QJ9 ?
If East wins and returns a club, west gets 2 more tricks but has no way to reach east for the setting club?

Hi Bry,

The above card combination is a well known source for table psychology, sometimes best described as cat and mouse.

1st-by covering LHO’s queen with the king, it enables the defense (EW) to take 3 club tricks.

2nd-by ducking the queen in dummy, the declarer is then guarding against your defensive combination of West holding QJ9, preventing the defense from scoring up those 3 club tricks (then covering the continuation of the jack, or if the nine is instead led, merely ducking in dummy).

3rd-The above descriptions then allow a cunning West to lead the queen from Q9x and if declarer covers with the king, East winning and leading a low one back from an original holding of AJx, enticing declarer to play low (expecting West to hold the jack) only to lose to the nine and a third one to East’s jack, completing the defensive coup.

The above is just another example of the great psychological battles which often occur at the higher levels of world class bridge. Try it, learn it, and you will grow to love it. However at the time, in order to love it, you MUST then win this fray. And all of the above will be different if West originally held AQx, leading the queen, declarer ducking and then a low one, again ducked to East’s jack and a third one back to West’s ace.

Aren’t we devils?

I believe Bry’s question is that the defense can take only 4 tricks and so South makes 9 tricks and the contract if West began with QJ9 and South covers the Q with the K. Hence, the post’s reference to the column parenthetical:

“(this loses by force only when West has eschewed a lead from QJ9 of clubs at trick one)”

Hi Jim2 & Bry,

Yes, of course, if the 13th card in whatever suit is in the right hand (or in this case wrong for the declarer) then contract made, but in the column hand it turned out in favor of the defense.

However, when talking in the abstract, it can be assumed, at least in bridge, that the contract is in jeopardy, but, even if not, a trick is a trick (check matchpoint scores to the value of each trick).

I do apologize for the misunderstanding and I should have been clearer, but the principle of manufacturing legal tricks is the gist of what the discussion is about, whether it is done straight up or by making the opponents guess and not becoming a standing target for the cleverness of those worthy foes.

All in good fun, although sometimes the emotion becomes simple anger when one feels out smarted. POKER, anyone?

BTW, we didn’t even discuss leading the Jack from Queen Jack and have a wonderful partner join with the subterfuge in enabling a set from an unsuspecting opponent.

hi Mr. Wolff

I have used a similar mislead. I wonder if it is also called cat and mouse.

Declarer has, say, 5 spades, headed by the A and dummy has 4 spades, headed by the K. The A and K could be in opposite hands of course. Declarer also has T98, etc, in combined hands.

I hold QJ of spades, doubleton.

I lead the J, my opening lead, and declarer thinks a few seconds, and plays the K in Dummy, and leads another spade, thinking of finessing the “marked” three-some Qxx from my partners hand.

Of course his or her mouth falls off when I win the now stiff Q. My partner kept an innocent face all along.

Does this play have a name?

Thanks

Hi Peter,

Yes, that gambit has a two word name, and they are (drum roll), “bad guess”!

The trick in bridge learning is that this guess has almost nothing to do with percentages, but everything to do with who the players are, particularly the one who made the opening lead (yes, that means YOU).

Terence Reese used to call leading the jack of trumps from QJ doubleton “the old chestnut” referring to a ruse.

However, since those early days of Contract Bridge 80+ years ago, there have been wholesale changes in bidding, learning how to become as good as a person’s talent will allow him, and above all, useful bridge psychology.

Dealing with that old chestnut, what opening leader would risk giving up several different ways to lose a natural possible trick in trumps by actually leading an unsupported singleton jack. Rarely would one lead in trump be effective enough to risk losing a full trump trick when partner has the king, sometimes the ace, and oft times the queen or queen ten.

Remember for that lead to work, declarer will know at crunch time that it is either an unsupported jack (often a singleton) or the much safer queen jack doubleton.

All the above is not intended to talk you out of repeating that lead next time you are dealt that holding, but only to remind you that by doing so, usually save if for when you are playing against inexperienced declarers and gullible to boot.

Thanks for your tale of success. More power to you and far be it from me to criticize what you (and many others) would think to be a more likely way to score up your queen.

The emphasis I am attempting is only to give an opinion on whether it will be likely to work, and you, depending on your cast of characters present, are much better placed to determine that, than I.

Thanks for bringing up what many may feel is a very worthwhile subject and continued good luck.