This hand requires a lot to fall in place. East must have the KC for starters. After that though, we also need West to have Tx or Txx. Even West with four to the ten is going to be able to take us down.
I am looking at the spot cards East has in clubs. Is there any sequence he could play that might convince declarer that he started with KTxx and, therefore, the 9C must be finessed on round 2 (for example, 5-7)? Or is the JC the percentage play so you must simply ignore your devious opponent’s carding?
Best,
Jeff
Iain ClimieAugust 3rd, 2023 at 11:03 am
Hi Jeff, Bobby,
If clubs are 3-3, what if East plays the CK on the second round with West having C10xx? If South goes back to table, leads another club and East now turns up with a small one, this leads to a potential Grosvenor coup (which I mention nearly as often as Jim2 does Flannery) – of course East shouldn’t / wouldn’t / can’t defend like that with CK10xx but suddenly declarer has a losing option because he knows there is a way to make 4 tricks here. I suppose East might even play the same way with CKxx by playing the K on the first round. CKx doesn’t help of course.
In similar vein, we all know that with AJ109x opposite xxxx the %age line is 2 finesses (thank you the rule of restricted choice and the Monty Hall problem, while the hand under the Ace might have KQx or KQxx). So you take the first finesse, losing to the Q, then on the second round the other x appears. Now there is a guaranteed way home but….
regards,
Iain
bobbywolffAugust 3rd, 2023 at 1:16 pm
Hi Iain,
Methinks, while intending to stress a highly capable opponent of potential clever false carding, have overlooked the numbers game of taking advantage of adding to 13. IOW, unless I am missing something big, I think simple arithmetic will prevent the declarer from falling victim.
However I well may have faltered and if so, please let me know. Thanks always for all your
time spent to help so many of us, to allow life to interfere with the love we have for our
ever challenging enterprise.
bobbywolffAugust 3rd, 2023 at 1:38 pm
Hi Jeff,
First, please forgive my usual order of first come, first responded. Just a careless error.
Not really, but if holding only xxx opposite AQJ9 and needing to play for 4 tricks, it is an
entirely different story since that holding needs to be guessed correctly and the nine finessed early enough, if the K10xx or K10xxx is onside. And to do so would be highly unusual as well as anti-percentage, until and unless the bidding or the count suggesed length with that long hand.
Iain ClimieAugust 3rd, 2023 at 2:41 pm
Hi Bobby,
I think we’re at cross-purposes here – or am I missing something. Certainly as the cards lie there is no problem but, if South uses his entries to take repeated club finesses, on the 2nd one, up pops the CK and West follows small (having started with 10xx). If he goes back to table and plays another club now East plays the missing Cx. Of course he’s got CKxx – unless he’s had yet another RR moment and played the K from K10xx on the 2nd round when now South is now able to cope with the Grosvenor coup. Of course South should play the CJ now unless East has made a despairing grab to stop the CK hitting the table on the 2nd round.
Thinking about it, imagine SB as dummy, East accidentally flashing the CK and it gets forced to be played from CKxx on the 2nd round. Now Karapet (or even Jim2) has an extra losing option available….
I’m getting even more twisted than usual in my old age here.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
This hand requires a lot to fall in place. East must have the KC for starters. After that though, we also need West to have Tx or Txx. Even West with four to the ten is going to be able to take us down.
I am looking at the spot cards East has in clubs. Is there any sequence he could play that might convince declarer that he started with KTxx and, therefore, the 9C must be finessed on round 2 (for example, 5-7)? Or is the JC the percentage play so you must simply ignore your devious opponent’s carding?
Best,
Jeff
Hi Jeff, Bobby,
If clubs are 3-3, what if East plays the CK on the second round with West having C10xx? If South goes back to table, leads another club and East now turns up with a small one, this leads to a potential Grosvenor coup (which I mention nearly as often as Jim2 does Flannery) – of course East shouldn’t / wouldn’t / can’t defend like that with CK10xx but suddenly declarer has a losing option because he knows there is a way to make 4 tricks here. I suppose East might even play the same way with CKxx by playing the K on the first round. CKx doesn’t help of course.
In similar vein, we all know that with AJ109x opposite xxxx the %age line is 2 finesses (thank you the rule of restricted choice and the Monty Hall problem, while the hand under the Ace might have KQx or KQxx). So you take the first finesse, losing to the Q, then on the second round the other x appears. Now there is a guaranteed way home but….
regards,
Iain
Hi Iain,
Methinks, while intending to stress a highly capable opponent of potential clever false carding, have overlooked the numbers game of taking advantage of adding to 13. IOW, unless I am missing something big, I think simple arithmetic will prevent the declarer from falling victim.
However I well may have faltered and if so, please let me know. Thanks always for all your
time spent to help so many of us, to allow life to interfere with the love we have for our
ever challenging enterprise.
Hi Jeff,
First, please forgive my usual order of first come, first responded. Just a careless error.
Not really, but if holding only xxx opposite AQJ9 and needing to play for 4 tricks, it is an
entirely different story since that holding needs to be guessed correctly and the nine finessed early enough, if the K10xx or K10xxx is onside. And to do so would be highly unusual as well as anti-percentage, until and unless the bidding or the count suggesed length with that long hand.
Hi Bobby,
I think we’re at cross-purposes here – or am I missing something. Certainly as the cards lie there is no problem but, if South uses his entries to take repeated club finesses, on the 2nd one, up pops the CK and West follows small (having started with 10xx). If he goes back to table and plays another club now East plays the missing Cx. Of course he’s got CKxx – unless he’s had yet another RR moment and played the K from K10xx on the 2nd round when now South is now able to cope with the Grosvenor coup. Of course South should play the CJ now unless East has made a despairing grab to stop the CK hitting the table on the 2nd round.
Thinking about it, imagine SB as dummy, East accidentally flashing the CK and it gets forced to be played from CKxx on the 2nd round. Now Karapet (or even Jim2) has an extra losing option available….
I’m getting even more twisted than usual in my old age here.
Regards,
Iain