Begging to be Led Toward


9 5 4
8 7 5 4 2
K 4 2
J 9
K 8 7 3 A Q J 6 2
Q 10 6
A Q J 10 3 8 7 5
Q 10 7 5 4 2
10
A K J 9 3 Contract: 4 hearts
9 6 Opening lead: 3 of spades
A K 8 6 3

Declarer had plenty of trump for ruffing after drawing the defense's trump but just didn't exploit his potential, losing a trick not because he drew too many trump, which some declarers have been known to do, but because he just didn't see the value there.
Anyway, East took the first trick and continued spades, declarer ruffing, followed by cashing two rounds of hearts, then the top two clubs. So far, so good. But now declarer took a wrong turn: he noted a "lucky" break, if that's the right word, and saw that the 8 of clubs was now high, and so sluffed a diamond one it! Since that diamond could've been ruffed, that play neither helped nor harmed him. Which cannot be said of his next play, for he followed that up with the six of clubs sluffing the four of diamonds!
East took that 6 of clubs at trick 8 and shot a diamond to his partner, who captured the K with the A, and the record ends here with declarer losing a spade, diamond and club. That doggoned 8 of clubs proved counter-productive, for without it, declarer almost surely would've found a diamond lead toward the K for an 11th winner. There are enough trump cards in dummy to allow declarer to ruff out the fourth round, establishing the 5th club.
A loser on a loser? It's my impression that that was declarer's intent, for I have seen any number of declarers resorting to such a play, an apparently worthless low card in one suit led, an apparent loser, if you will, followed by the discard of a loser in another suit from the other hand. And this not too rarely comes with a touch of self-congratulation, as if that was a clever, advanced play. Unfortunately, there's nothing magic about it: you don't gain a trick by playing losing cards by and large though the first hand above demonstrates and my summing up hints at situations where it can work to declarer's advantage.
And this case was a double-header, so to speak, for either the third diamond could've been ruffed and the second diamond could've functioned as a productive guard to the K, or in the closed hand, the fourth club could've been ruffed out (or the 3rd & 4th if the 8 hadn't been high), producing a long club. No, declarer didn't lose two tricks by a play that costs a trick whether you count out from dummy or from the closed hand. Just one trick. But one that shouldn't have been kicked away. For indeed, a valuable card from each hand was played there.
In any event, there's no point in coughing up a trick to the seven of clubs -- the seven for heaven's sake -- when you've got the big boy in diamonds just begging to be led toward.