I tried cashing the clubs before tackling the diamonds to see if there was a squeeze, and there was: on declarer.
That said, as an old rubber bridge duffer, I think I would have made this hand against best defense. Reasoning that there’s far less difference between down one and down two than between making a slam and down 1, I would have taken the first diamond finesse. Then, when the king held, I would have tried cashing the spades, reasoning that putting the DA in either hand meant a slightly lower chance of that player having the fourth spade.
Bob Lipton
bobbywolffSeptember 7th, 2023 at 2:10 pm
Hi Bob,
No doubt you gave an honest assessment of what would likely happen with you at the helm.
Furthermore, I believe that an excellent and responsible player as yourself can better decide on what others (if you even have just limited experience of playing against them) are likely to do better than most, since yes, you are very much into our game and openly are greatly interested in the by product of psychology.
In addition and thoughtfully, sometimes there is a real possibility of a good defender ducking
his ace in the fourth position after declarer has gambled leading to an unsupported king early, the fact,from West’s position by counting partner’s minimum number of points by his 1NT opening, tends to deny that possibility.
Thanks to your post we all become satisfied that West should have (a phrase used too often with our superior game), after having learned to do the same amount or more of reasoning before embarking on the play usually provided by a careful declarer soon after the dummy appears.
It also rubber stamps the accepted notion of declarers who concentrate at warp speed actually do create advantage for themselves, due to their being able to look at all 26 assets while the defense is restricted to only about the thirteen they are dealt, plus, of course thirteen in the dummy, proven to be advantage, declarer.
Robert LiptonSeptember 7th, 2023 at 2:22 pm
It just goes to show that the poor player sometimes makes the hand through poor play, where the good player goes down. It happens often enough that lesser players always have a few stories about the time they put one over the professional, and keeps us playing!
Bob Lipton
jim2September 7th, 2023 at 3:04 pm
I think cashing the clubs might not be a bad idea, just so long as you cash only three of them.
You could even cash a couple more winners. The insight you would gain is that neither defender is short in a suit. That might be enough to convince you to test the spades before trying diamonds.
The beeeeg Q is if West would play the JS on the second round more often if you played the clubs, etc first.
Iain ClimieSeptember 7th, 2023 at 3:05 pm
Hi Bob, Bobby,
I remember Hugh Kelsey admitting to going off in a hand where anyone from Mrs. Guggenheim to a good club player would have made the contract. After careful assessment he came up with an echelon play which he later calculated as 96% or even more (as opposed to a finesse, 3-2 break, other combined play or whatever). Sure enough, the 4% bit him in the backside – but then hard luck stories are part of the fun of the game – although I might not voice that opinion to Bob Hamman after that hand against the French where was on lead vs a doubled grand slam with two aces. One lets the contract through, one gets it one off. If even the best players can suffer such a fate, although rarely, the ret of us cn only grin and bear it. Recently I held 1098xx Q9 AK AJ10X, and opened 1S (4 card majors), 2D on my left 4S after some thought from partner 5D on my right and this is an easy double if ever I saw one. Better yet, pard leads the CK only for dummy to have x AKJxxxx J10xxx none. Partner had decided that 4S was the most sensible compromise with Jxx xx None KQxxxxxx and I have some sympathy and we even salvaged a 25% score on the board. It was against a weak pair and my joking comment when dummy hit the deck of*+750 when you make it ” after the CK lead didn’t look quite so ironic when dummy went down. I managed not to revoke through tears of laughter which was something I suppose and our oppo will dine out on that.
Any better alternatives to 4SS (trap pass, perhaps) gratefully received.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
I tried cashing the clubs before tackling the diamonds to see if there was a squeeze, and there was: on declarer.
That said, as an old rubber bridge duffer, I think I would have made this hand against best defense. Reasoning that there’s far less difference between down one and down two than between making a slam and down 1, I would have taken the first diamond finesse. Then, when the king held, I would have tried cashing the spades, reasoning that putting the DA in either hand meant a slightly lower chance of that player having the fourth spade.
Bob Lipton
Hi Bob,
No doubt you gave an honest assessment of what would likely happen with you at the helm.
Furthermore, I believe that an excellent and responsible player as yourself can better decide on what others (if you even have just limited experience of playing against them) are likely to do better than most, since yes, you are very much into our game and openly are greatly interested in the by product of psychology.
In addition and thoughtfully, sometimes there is a real possibility of a good defender ducking
his ace in the fourth position after declarer has gambled leading to an unsupported king early, the fact,from West’s position by counting partner’s minimum number of points by his 1NT opening, tends to deny that possibility.
Thanks to your post we all become satisfied that West should have (a phrase used too often with our superior game), after having learned to do the same amount or more of reasoning before embarking on the play usually provided by a careful declarer soon after the dummy appears.
It also rubber stamps the accepted notion of declarers who concentrate at warp speed actually do create advantage for themselves, due to their being able to look at all 26 assets while the defense is restricted to only about the thirteen they are dealt, plus, of course thirteen in the dummy, proven to be advantage, declarer.
It just goes to show that the poor player sometimes makes the hand through poor play, where the good player goes down. It happens often enough that lesser players always have a few stories about the time they put one over the professional, and keeps us playing!
Bob Lipton
I think cashing the clubs might not be a bad idea, just so long as you cash only three of them.
You could even cash a couple more winners. The insight you would gain is that neither defender is short in a suit. That might be enough to convince you to test the spades before trying diamonds.
The beeeeg Q is if West would play the JS on the second round more often if you played the clubs, etc first.
Hi Bob, Bobby,
I remember Hugh Kelsey admitting to going off in a hand where anyone from Mrs. Guggenheim to a good club player would have made the contract. After careful assessment he came up with an echelon play which he later calculated as 96% or even more (as opposed to a finesse, 3-2 break, other combined play or whatever). Sure enough, the 4% bit him in the backside – but then hard luck stories are part of the fun of the game – although I might not voice that opinion to Bob Hamman after that hand against the French where was on lead vs a doubled grand slam with two aces. One lets the contract through, one gets it one off. If even the best players can suffer such a fate, although rarely, the ret of us cn only grin and bear it. Recently I held 1098xx Q9 AK AJ10X, and opened 1S (4 card majors), 2D on my left 4S after some thought from partner 5D on my right and this is an easy double if ever I saw one. Better yet, pard leads the CK only for dummy to have x AKJxxxx J10xxx none. Partner had decided that 4S was the most sensible compromise with Jxx xx None KQxxxxxx and I have some sympathy and we even salvaged a 25% score on the board. It was against a weak pair and my joking comment when dummy hit the deck of*+750 when you make it ” after the CK lead didn’t look quite so ironic when dummy went down. I managed not to revoke through tears of laughter which was something I suppose and our oppo will dine out on that.
Any better alternatives to 4SS (trap pass, perhaps) gratefully received.
Regards,
Iain