Sluff & Ruff: Uppercut
A look at a sluff and ruff, along with the uppercut.
|
 7 5 2 |
|
 A Q 3 |
|
 A 10 4 |
|
 A 9 6 3 |
| A K 9 |
|
Q 10 6 4 |
| 6 5 |
|
J 10 8 |
| Q 8 5 3 2 |
|
K J 6 |
| Q 8 2 |
|
10 5 4 |
|
| |
|
|
J 8 3 |
|
K 9 7 4 2 |
|
9 7 |
|
K J 7 | | |
Two declarers got identical leads to the first four tricks. One went down in 2 hearts, while the other (bid and) made 4. Now how do you account for that? The first four leads were all spades, the last coming from East, of course.
I first took an interest in this hand from wondering how anyone could start with 8 top tricks, with nothing real fancy in the offing, and wind up with 7! -- down one in 2 hearts. And I found out: declarer ruffed the 13th spade with the deuce! Now, first of all, on that sluff and ruff, which may or may not turn into a gift, you want to sluff your diamond loser. There's absolutely no reason to hang onto it, is there? Just toss out the diamond loser and see what happens. And if you do any ruffing, you want to ruff in the short hand, not with long cards that eventually figure to be winners. The opponents might or might not have to give up a valuable trump to inhibit your winning that trick cheaply. As it turns out, they do not -- it would cost if coming from the 3-card holding on a 3-2 split -- but it won't cost you a thing to try.
The deuce can't be right, however. You know it's going to be overruffed, now, don't you? And if it's overruffed, it's not a winner -- which it should be as a long card, or perhaps as a ruff of a diamond lead from dummy. But you don't want to let that deuce slip by without being a winner. That's how you wind up with only 7 tricks. The rest of the hand is academic. The club hook is off, hearts break evenly. For the record, West overruffed the deuce with the 6, and declarer sluffed a diamond from dummy!, which did no good, leaving him still with a diamond loser.
The other declarer properly sluffed a losing diamond, ensuring that whatever West did, this wasn't going to cost him -- and he still might benefit from it, and did. West also sluffed a diamond, and declarer was able to ruff with the three. It only remained for him to pick up the club suit, which he did in this manner: He ran all his trump, getting a club discard from his LHO, who seemed to forget that before you can cash the high diamond, you've got to get the lead, and declarer subsequently dropped the queen. Bid and made 4.
West should certainly ruff that fourth spade lead. He expends the 5 to get the queen? That's not a good enough card to chase out of the hand with a five? You've got to be kidding. This would have ensured a trump trick for the defense if declarer overruffs, and at least picks up the diamond loser if he doesn't. With an otherwise useless trump. It's an uppercut (q.v.) of magnificent proportions. And certainly should not be missed.
In a rational society, the 4th spade here would not have meant anything to the hand. Declarer throws his diamond loser, which he was always going to have to lose anyway, so that doesn't hurt him, and when West ruffs with his 6, declarer can sluff a diamond, as one declarer did, to preserve the top three trump, or overruff, hoping for now 2-2 trump split, which he doesn't get. In other words, the defense will pick up that diamond loser either by way of West's 6 of hearts if declarer doesn't overruff, or by East's three-card trump holding if he does.
So this sluff&ruff stands in a rather unique position. In the context of good play all around, it neither helps nor hurts either side. Declarer sluffs a diamond, but the defense gets that trick back with an uppercut that promotes a trump trick. In actual play, however, it caused one declarer to lose a valuable trick when his deuce of trump, which should have been a winner eventually, is captured, and so was a productive s&r. While it allowed another declarer to pick up an extra trick by sluffing a diamond, ruffing in dummy with the 3! and so was a costly s&r. (The 10th trick was another matter, though perhaps indirectly induced by the s&r from declarer's ability to run 9 top winners without hindrance.)
One last thing about that uppercut: West doesn't know of his partner's J 10 low, now, does he. But you don't hafta know. In fact, I'd say the percentage of times those who uppercut "know" they'll thereby promote a trick must approach zero, and the times they're near certain must surely be in a small minority. That's not the criterion by which you want to decide on an uppercut.
Rather, there are two other criteria you'll want to give consideration to: first, are you likely to get anything of value. You don't want to "uppercut" with a 6 4 trump holding if dummy (on your left) is showing a 7 5 holding (with higher trump). It's pointless. Here it's too obvious to belabor that the 5 would either hold or knock out a pretty good piece of trump. And the second criterion is, can you afford the trump you uppercut with (given the uncertainty that it will promote anything). So if you've got the long trump, or if you're going to give declarer a free finesse against the jack or queen, it probably won't avail you of much. But here?
If I had a 10 doubleton, the other card being the deuce, I'd uppercut with the 10 because I've got the short holding. I don't know that it'll help us, but it might, and the 10 otherwise would get lost on trump leads. You know that, with a ten doubleton. Cashing your trump separately is often the name of the game, both as declarer and as defenders. If my partner has as little as J 9 low, we've got a turmp trick coming, whether I'm overruffed or not. So with a five or 6 in the short hand, yes, you certainly want to throw out one of 'em before A Q 3 for whatever difficulty it throws in declarer's path.