Not So Difficult
|
 A 10 8 5 3 2 |
|
 10 8 6 |
|
 8 4 |
|  9 5 |
| 4 |
|
K Q J 6 |
| 9 4 3 |
|
7 2 |
|
| K J 10 6 3 |
| 9 5 |
| 8 7 4 2 | |
K Q 10 6 3 |
|
9 7 |
|
|
A K Q J 5 |
|
|
A Q 7 2 |
Contract: 4 hearts | |
|
A J |
Opening lead: various |
More people went down in this contract than made, and indeed, there's one defense that seems to me to beat it whatever declarer does. But few were getting that lead. Rather they were going down owing to um-m-mm a lack of common sense rather than cards that couldn't perform.
Case 1: Opening lead the deuce of spades, declarer going up and leading another spade. Whoa! It's not the 4-1 split that does declarer in here. Just for the nonce, how many entries back to dummy does declarer have and how many would he need on the presumably hoped-for 3-2 split? And the answers are one and and two respectively. To be sure, by ruffing diamonds, declarer would have two remaining entries to dummy, but that's cold comfort, since you can't use long spades until all trump are out and thus cannot use any of dummy's 3 hearts for ruffing purposes if the intent is to establish and run spades.
Meanwhile, declarer has lost the entry needed to take the diamond finesse. Yes, the finesse is off anyway and you might think declarer could come out smelling like a rose simply by laying down the A of diamonds and losing a diamond -- or losing a diamond, keeping the Ace opposite a diamond in dummy. But East, on winning the second round of spades, switched to a club, wiping out a valuable entry to the closed hand. Actually, that wasn't to prove crucial here. (I'll give a later defense where that one-two punch of a heart, then a club from the defense did declarer in).
For declarer won the club lead with the ace, shot a club right back -- and got a diamond from East! Well, that was the suit declarer should've been wanting! The finesse lost, of course, as it did for everyone, and that was declarer's third lost trick. But he then had the contract in the palm of his hand -- and threw it away. West continued with the J of diamonds and the hand then looked like this:
|
10 8 5 3 |
|
10 8 6 |
|
------ |
| |
| ------ |
|
K Q |
| 9 4 3 |
|
7 2 |
|
| 10 3 |
| ---- |
| 8 7 | |
10 6 3 |
|
----- |
|
|
A K Q J 5 |
|
|
7 2 |
|
------ |
Where it should be evident that declarer need only ruff one diamond with the 8, come back on a trump lead, ruff another with the 10 and claim. He would then have K Q J 5 in trump with only three out and be dependent only on a now 2-1 split in trump, which he'll get. But he cashed the A of hearts himself, wiping out that very valuable re-entry. Now he got around to ruffing a diamond, back on ruffing a spade lead high, ruff another diamond, back on ruffing a spade lead high, cash the K of hearts -- and concede the setting trick to West's 9 of trump!
Before leaving this line of play, I might point out that had East led a trump instead of a diamond when in with the Q of clubs, he would be wiping out a valuable re-entry after the ruff of a diamond. Indeed, if West had led a trump when in with the losing diamond hook, declarer would get only one diamond ruff.
So it was rather sloppy play all around. Declarer offered the defense a chance to beat him by the totally useless continuation of spades at trick two, the defense said, Aw, no thanks, and handed back declarer's potential to make with that diamond lead, whereupon declarer said, Aw, go on and beat me.
Case 2: Spade opening lead, declarer wins and immediately hopped on that diamond hook, getting a club return, the Q drawing the A and now a diamond to the trump 6 -- overruffed! Oh, please. How many diamonds are you gonna ruff? I believe the answer is two. So why not ruff with your two highest trump in dummy, using the 6 for a re-entry? It's true that declarer has to sweat out one ruff with the 8 when the 9 is out, but hey, that's the nature of bridge, you bid and take your chances on whether the cards will accommodate your bid or not, and that's the nature of duplicate, that if you bidding has been sound, you'll have company if the cards just aren't right for that bid, only here declarer would've been in the company of the minority who made the contract.
Case 3: A club lead to the Q and A, spade to the A, diamond finesse losing, trump lead from West. Bravo! All around. Declarer simply cannot make the contract with that defense, with two lovely re-entries to the closed hand wiped out through no fault of declarer. Now declarer lost a spade, for whatever reason I don't know (in Case 1, I pointed out that even had spade split 3-2, there weren't enough of 'em to establish and run.
Another trump was led after East won the second round of spades. Declarer now got around to cashing the A of diamonds and ruffing a diamond, ruffed a spade high, draw West's last trump, cashed the 5 of trump and now had to lose a diamond to the J and a club from West to East's K for down one.
The play was good all around. It's true that declarer made a pointless lead of a small spade, allowing East to lead trump a second time, ensuring that there would be only one diamond ruff. But the damage had already been done with that one-two punch of a club opening lead and then a heart upon winning the diamond finesse. Before leading that spade, the hand looked like this: