You say that S “must duck” the opening lead, in case W “has only one ace”. Well, if W only has the HA, S is going down whether he ducks or not. If W only has the DA, then he makes the contract whether he ducks or not, although having used the CA, the play goes on and on, whereas if he wins the SK at trick one, everything is very simple. So, in short, it does no good to duck the opening lead, although it’s hard to see that it would ultimately cost anything either. I am assuming D to be 3-2, but I believe that if W has singleton DA and E the HA it also doesn’t matter. So my only criticism is the use of the word “must”. Either way, S makes his contract if W has both red aces and D are 3-2, just that things are simpler if he doesn’t duck.

Hi David,

Although, as usual, you are correct in what you say about this specific hand, but the principle of ducking in this situation is one usually worth applying and, in effect, like eating chicken soup when one is “under the weather”, will not hurt.

As you will likely agree, the early learning in bridge often consists of a series of technical plays, not always necessary and some, at special times, even dangerous to make and possible losing strategies, but nevertheless and for overall learning experiences, worth considering.

Such, of course, is the goal of the column, although bridge being the game it is, complete with exceptions to the rule, make it mandatory that the willing student fully understands not only the proper technique, but and above all, the reason for it.

However, none of the above should prevent you from continuing to add your always worthwhile comments. By doing so, and assuming a conscientious and wise reader, you, at the very least, do not impede his understanding, but rather just add to emphasizing corollary points in the play, whether or not they are applicable on that hand.

Hi again David,

And what about if West held the QJ10973 in spades and only the heart ace, but not the diamond ace and, of course, decided to be deceptive on lead.

Sometimes must, after all, will reap the harvest.

Believe it or not, the thought that W led a false SJ (denying the Q) occurred to me, but it is one thing to lie in the play and another in both the play and the bidding. So if W chose to overall, vulnerable, with a 5-card suit headed by the J, surely he has both red aces, or if he had the hand you suggest why oh why did he only bid 1S? Surely he would have bid 2S, or just possibly passed. Note that on the actual hand, 1SX is down 2 (-500) and on the hand you suggest 2SX is also down 2, yet seemingly NS have no way to make W pay, despite S opening the bidding and N also having an opening bid.

Hi David,

I meant only to refer to the column’s use of must, usually meaning the right technique, which you thought was uncalled for and perhaps it sort of was, except for the unlikely exceptions noted.

BTW, many good partnerships do not play preemptive jump overcalls when they are vulnerable, yet there is, as almost always, an advantage to make some bid, if possible, so 1 spade would likely be the choice of most when holding a decent 6 card suit and only one side ace, at least in my judgment.

Sure, it would be unlikely for even a deceptive demon to false card with the jack, while holding the queen in sequence, but stranger things have happened, particularly when a good team is behind in the later stages of a match.

Of course, the idea is doing something different than one’s counterpart at the other table, and
though it is hard to predict, that particular play, whatever it is (bid, play or opening lead)
sometimes may become a bell ringer.

To begin with I had to read the books myself to see what
kind of information I would need to succeed with very
little money. Everybody needs money whether from full time job or
part time assignments, work on spare time
or other ways to make money online as a Domain affiliate or
working from home whichever time suites to you. You’re not only capable
of being the first in the customer’s mind, but literally owning a whole category for yourself.