Yes, thanks for taking the time to show where 2nd seat plays high, instead of the expected low, in order to defeat the contract.
However, present me a player who would resort to making that brilliancy and I’ll show you one, who represents a first class world beater.
And do not think for one minute that there are not good enough players to do so and for the right reason.
At least to me, the above, thanks to Jim2’s post, is just one of the issues, which, at least to me, singles out bridge as the greatest mind game of all time.
jim2December 7th, 2021 at 2:42 pm
YAQW, of course, but my point was more that leading the 9C could fail no matter which defender held the QC.
Iain ClimieDecember 7th, 2021 at 3:21 pm
HI Jim2,
(W)right or Wrong at the end of YAQW, or something else e.g. typo? With your luck, West would have HK alone and East the DK (maybe singleton too?) when maybe a total switch of tack might work – until you tried it
Regards,
Iain
Jeff SDecember 7th, 2021 at 3:25 pm
I think that it is worth noting that South should not be greedy. After the JC holds, he clears diamonds and takes the heart return in dummy, it would be a mistake to lead the 9C to the 10C only to find West held up the QC on the first round hoping for just such a continuation.
But…if the scoring method rewards overtricks, are you required to risk the contract and pay off to West in that line?
A V Ramana RaoDecember 7th, 2021 at 3:59 pm
Dear Mr Wolff and all
Personally I feel that this hand should be played in five diamonds. I could be wrong, perhaps the wisdom of our host should elucidate
Regards
jim2December 7th, 2021 at 5:05 pm
YAQW = You Are Quite Welcome.
Our Host had said TY.
Iain ClimieDecember 7th, 2021 at 5:24 pm
Hi Jim2,
Of course, and I didn’t think either of the offerings I came up with were that likely. I’ve had one of those days in the office where the brain starts to ossify, to be found by palaeontologists in the future perhaps? I need a break!
Regards,
Iain
Michael BeyroutiDecember 7th, 2021 at 5:29 pm
Jim2, I must be missing something.
If East covers 9C with QC, declarer wins ace, repeats diamond finesse, takes 4 diamond tricks, 3 clubs and 9 in all.
(However, the article rightly points out that 9C is inferior play in case QC is with West whereas JC from dummy is better.)
jim2December 7th, 2021 at 5:36 pm
You did not.
bobbywolffDecember 7th, 2021 at 6:57 pm
Hi Everyone,
Sometimes wires get crossed keeping in mind that sometimes an overtrick is worth much, but often very little.
In any event our game, whether IMPs or matchpoints is worth talking about individual tricks as either sacred, or if not, still close.
This particular hand could be easily changed so that the contract itself depended on both the declarer and/or the defense performing well.
However, the above cop-out is no excuse for me not previously mentioning it.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
East could also cover the 9C with the QC.
Hi Jim2,
Yes, thanks for taking the time to show where 2nd seat plays high, instead of the expected low, in order to defeat the contract.
However, present me a player who would resort to making that brilliancy and I’ll show you one, who represents a first class world beater.
And do not think for one minute that there are not good enough players to do so and for the right reason.
At least to me, the above, thanks to Jim2’s post, is just one of the issues, which, at least to me, singles out bridge as the greatest mind game of all time.
YAQW, of course, but my point was more that leading the 9C could fail no matter which defender held the QC.
HI Jim2,
(W)right or Wrong at the end of YAQW, or something else e.g. typo? With your luck, West would have HK alone and East the DK (maybe singleton too?) when maybe a total switch of tack might work – until you tried it
Regards,
Iain
I think that it is worth noting that South should not be greedy. After the JC holds, he clears diamonds and takes the heart return in dummy, it would be a mistake to lead the 9C to the 10C only to find West held up the QC on the first round hoping for just such a continuation.
But…if the scoring method rewards overtricks, are you required to risk the contract and pay off to West in that line?
Dear Mr Wolff and all
Personally I feel that this hand should be played in five diamonds. I could be wrong, perhaps the wisdom of our host should elucidate
Regards
YAQW = You Are Quite Welcome.
Our Host had said TY.
Hi Jim2,
Of course, and I didn’t think either of the offerings I came up with were that likely. I’ve had one of those days in the office where the brain starts to ossify, to be found by palaeontologists in the future perhaps? I need a break!
Regards,
Iain
Jim2, I must be missing something.
If East covers 9C with QC, declarer wins ace, repeats diamond finesse, takes 4 diamond tricks, 3 clubs and 9 in all.
(However, the article rightly points out that 9C is inferior play in case QC is with West whereas JC from dummy is better.)
You did not.
Hi Everyone,
Sometimes wires get crossed keeping in mind that sometimes an overtrick is worth much, but often very little.
In any event our game, whether IMPs or matchpoints is worth talking about individual tricks as either sacred, or if not, still close.
This particular hand could be easily changed so that the contract itself depended on both the declarer and/or the defense performing well.
However, the above cop-out is no excuse for me not previously mentioning it.