Articles›Declarer Play›Interactive Problem 6
Interactive Problem 6
7 minutes
Mon, Oct 16, 2023Gavin WolpertDeclarer PlayVideo: Bridge Hand
Articles›Declarer Play›Interactive Problem 6
7 minutes
Mon, Oct 16, 2023Gavin WolpertDeclarer PlayVideo: Bridge Hand
Comments
Sign in to join the conversation — comments are open to members who've bought a lesson or class.
On whether to try to drop a stiff HJ on the left: Yes in the abstract a void is slightly less likely than a stiff J. But if you assume that W has 10 minor-suit cards there are now just 2 slots from the outstanding pool of 2 Spades and 6 Hearts. So the probability of the dangerous 2 Spades is 2/8 x 1/7 = 1/28, while the chance of a stiff HJ is 1/8 x 2/7 + 2/8 x 1/7 = 1/14, twice as likely. However, for his 5C bid without the CA, W should have 11 minor-suit cards, leaving just 1 slot. So the probability of the dangerous Spade is 2/8, while the chance of the HJ is 1/8, half as likely. Or maybe his 5C bid is based on a H void, another reason for not trying to drop the stiff HJ. On whether to go for the H finesse or the endplay: In the abstract the the endplay is less likely, but on the bidding, W, without the CA or anything (except maybe the HJ) in the majors must have the DKQ and the endplay will work. Is this right?
I definitely know people who would bid a vul 2NT on x xx Kxxxx KQJxx. Intermediate players *love* their Unusual 2NT.
Yeah this thinking is correct but its hard to know what people will do or won't do. People are nuts!
I’m liable t misplay trump, so I ruff 2nd club with the ace ♠😁
WOULD THIS BE CALLED LOSER ON LOSER PLAY. DISCARDING A DIAMOND LOSER WITH THE CLUB
A loser on loser play on this hand wouldn't help you. This needed a loser on a heart winner.
Hi Gavin, How about ruffing our the third club and leading a low diamond towards the 10 -- no hearts play needed?
I outlined that line of play (similar) in the video too. I am not sure which line is better , one needs the jack of hearts to be in the 4 or 5 card hand (must be 70+%) The other needs both the KQ with the 5 card suit. This feels like less than 70% unless you completely trust the opponents bidding.
For what it's worth, I have the Jack bridge program which won the world computer bridge championship 10 times. It is an extremely good card player because before every play it analyses hundreds of hands consistent with the bidding and current state of play. On this hand it doesn't do the heart finesse but tries to drop the JH in two rounds and then ruffs out the last club and executes the diamond throw-in. It looks like Jack expects reasonable suits for a vulnerable 2NT! I like the way it combinines the two chances.
Their result would entirely be based on their programmed definition for unusual 2NT. If in their definition requires good suits, they would assume the 2NT bidder has KQxxx of diamonds and therefore all of their simulations would make this line a winner. Thats a good idea to use a program to check their line, but be careful not to overly trust it to be correct. It could be right here though. I am not sure.