Do the Best You Can


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

Keep the same number of cards that dummy shows, I have often exhorted my readers, which indeed, led to the institution of this category. But wait a minute! What if we start with fewer cards than dummy shows? How'n hell can we keep the same number. Real smart advice, fella.
No, that's right. When you start with fewer than dummy shows, you can't keep the same number. So I suppose I should add a qualifier: or all you can, when you start with fewer. I guess I just figured that anyone could figure that out. But no, it didn't seem the be the case with a sprinkling of defenders on this hand.
Opening, as given, declarer ruffing with the trey. The hand should really go down, since declarer would seem doomed to lose a trump trick, the A of clubs and two diamonds. But no, that didn't turn out to be the case. Declarer drew two rounds of trump, knocked out the A of clubs, East then cashing the Q of trump and returning to the heart suit, declarer ruffing, followed by cashing three rounds of clubs, sluffing a diamond from dummy -- as East "followed suit" by pitching a diamond himself. The hand then looked like this:

J
------
A J 8
Q 4 2
------ ------
8 6 Q J
Q 4 K 10
------ ------
------
------
9 7 5 2
------

And I hardly need "explain" how declarer got by with only one diamond loser. Why would anyone hang onto the Q & J of hearts when declarer has no more and necessarily must maneuver the diamond suit? Oh, because I needed only one guard to the K back of the Ace. Yeah, right. But you can use all you've got,fella. As it happened, declarer played low to the 10 of diamonds, and now if East only had the 3 of diamonds back, discarding one of those heart honors, he could win with the 10, get out with the 3 to his partner's Q, or even then play a heart honor (the closed hand is out of trump). But some cockamamie bug in his ear told him those high hearts were worth more than a mere 3 of diamonds, which wasn't the case.
Several defenders did substantially this, and since it's a matter of looking at dummy, I would like to give one case played from the opposite side of the table.
10 8 6 5 3
------
9 7 5 2
K J 10 7
Q 7 2 9
K Q J 10 7 A 9 8 6 5 4
K 10 3 Q 4
A 9 8 6 5 3
A K J 4
3 2
A J 8 6 Contract: 4 spades
Q 4 2 Opening lead: K of hearts

Here, the play was pretty much the same, though played from the other side of the table. A high heart, ruffed, two rounds of spades, not dropping the Q, knock out the A of clubs, whereupon the defender with the Q of spades cashses it and continues with a safe heart lead. Lemme see. There is one difference: the defender with 3 diamonds sluffed the "lowly" 3 at trick 8, whereas the above defender held onto it one more round. But the effect was the same. Well, also, this declarer cashed the A of diamonds (the above declarer lost the first round), and then led low toward the spots in dummy, West going up with his K, "capturing" his partner's Q, of course.
My first impulse was to say, "Hey, fella: if your partner doesn't have the Q, then declarer must and you can pick it up next round." But then I saw that he too had held onto two heart honors rather than that apparently useless 3 of diamonds and was at that point forced to play the K. Oh, me. Is it difficult to see that the innocuous-looking 3 of diamonds is worth more than the Q of hearts, that is, on this hand where declarer can ruff hearts, while sorting out the diamonds?
It would seem to have been so for some.