Some Plus 7, Some Minus 1 in Six


A Q
A 10 5
K 10 9 7 6
A Q 6
10 9 8 6 4 2
Q 4 2 J 9 7 6 3
J 5 4 Q 2
7 4 10 9 8 5 3
K J 7 5 3 2
K 8
A 8 Contract: 6 no, 7 no
A 10 5 Opening lead: 10 of spades

Some declarers couldn't make 6 on this hand, while others were pulling in 7, three having bid the grand, two as an overtrick for a not inconsiderable 27 more matchpoints (on a basis of 100). So this could be put in several categories. But I'll start with the most obvious of blunders, which was to kick away an easy make in 6 no.
We'll start with counting: let's see, there'll be five spades, three clubs, two hearts and two diamonds for 12. Okay? Except that we learn on the second round of spades that there won't be five spade winners. Well, now. Where are we going to get a 12th winner? We can't get more than 3 clubs and though it's mathematically possible to find 3 heart winners, that's highly unlikely, leaving just one suit where it's mathematically probable that we'll get the necessary winners, no?
I don't think anyone will accuse me of hindsight to say you must go after those diamonds. And in so doing, you'll want to think of leading low to the 10, in case West has four diamonds headed by Q J, as a precaution. This works also if you finesse into a stiff honor in East's hand. The A would then uncover a marked finesse. These are just thoughts that an experienced declarer would consider, but in any event, anything other than hitting the diamond suit is just delaying a task you must get to pretty soon.
Well, there's hardly any need for discussion. As soon as spades show their ornery 5-1 split, it behooves declarer to lose a diamond and then run his 12 winners. He would indeed have a redundant winner then, with 13 "winners" established, which can't be cashed when they have one. But who's complaining?
So how did declarers go down? Well, a couple of ways. One declarer discovered the bad spade break at trick two, came to the K of clubs to cash two more spades and then . . then lose a spade to the 8! I guess he lost count. Or did West's play of the 9 on the preceding trick fool declarer into thinking West was finished with good spots? Who can say? It's rather amazing, however, in that East's showing out at round two should've indicated the 5-5-2-1 split that existed.
But that was one way. Another declarer with a heart opening lead, cash dummy's spades, getting the bad news, and now cashed three rounds of clubs (!) and then two rounds of spades (! ! !) before getting around to the diamonds. He could've survived the foolishness of cashing out his clubs by making West take their diamond winner. But in cashing out his top spades, declarer made sure that whoever won the diamond trick the defense has coming to them, they'll get two tricks. As it happened, declarer ducked a diamonds to East, who now cashed a club (not two, since he'd sluffed one on the J of spades).
I've inveighed against cashing top winners a zillion times unless you have a good reason. It's hard to understand why declarer wouldn't go after those diamonds. The odds favor enough winners in losing a diamond, there just aren't enough winners without the diamonds (yes, yes, barring an improbable break in hearts). I just don't understand it. It's not that establishing a diamond would involve the setting trick (as is often the case with declarers afraid to take a simple finesse). I just don't understand how anyone would wanna cash out club and spade winners as if they might run away.
One more? Okay. Round 2 in spades unveils the bad break. Declarer finesses a diamond into the J at trick 3! I look again at the contract. Yes, it's 6 no. At the result. It's down one. How'n the world does he go down with that promising start? Lemme see.
Back comes the 7 of clubs . . . holding! Oh, that's how. I guess declarer just lost concentration or something, but with the top four clubs, he played the 6 in dummy and deuce in the closed hand. Expensive.
As for those declarers who made 7, that involves a defensive error, and I'll plug the hand into some category there.