Board 61
Both sides vulnerable
Both sides vulnerable
♠ 5 3 ♥ K Q 6 5 ♦ A J 9 2 ♣ 9 8 4 |
Partner opens three spades, and everyone passes. West leads the six of diamonds.
NORTH
♠ 5 3 ♥ K Q 6 5 ♦ A J 9 2 ♣ 9 8 4 |
||
SOUTH
♠ A Q 10 8 7 4 2 ♥ 10 4 2 ♦ K ♣ J 2 |
West | North | East | South |
3 ♠ | |||
(All pass) |
That looks more like a one spade bid to me. But I guess there was no harm done. Even if we make four, we wouldn't have reached game after a one spade opening. I play the nine from dummy (no reason to advertise my singleton). RHO covers with the ten, and I win with the king.
If I were content to take nine tricks, I would evaluate the merits of cashing the spade ace. But I see no particular reason to think that simply going plus will be a good score, so I'm not willing to give up on bringing home the spade suit. I play the heart deuce, intending to take a spade finesse on reaching dummy. But a funny thing happens on the way to the dummy. I reach it sooner than I expected. West plays the heart nine, dummy plays the king, and East plays the seven.
I can't imagine why East would duck the heart ace, nor can I imagine the opponents' giving false count in a cash-out situation. So I assume that West has the ace and that hearts are four-two. (I suppose it's possible West has ace-nine-three and East has jack-eight-seven, since the hand with the ace can get away with falsecarding. But Jack isn't that sneaky, so I'm dismissing that possibility.)
Why would West duck the heart ace? It makes no sense if he has the diamond queen. But, if he doesn't, it could be right to duck if I have two hearts and three small diamonds. West hopes to play another diamond before dummy's hearts are established. On the actual layout, however, ducking enables me to dispose of a club loser. I cash the diamond ace--three--club deuce--diamond four.
I was intending to take a trump finesse. But now that I know I'll run into a heart ruff if the finesse loses, I'm not so sure I want to do that. (I had anticipated pitching a heart on the diamond ace to forestall the ruff. I wasn't expecting to be allowed to pitch a club.)
Whether or not to take the spade finesse turns out to be a more subtle problem than I realized when I played this deal. With the advantage of knowing that ahead of time, I suggest you pause to decide what you would do. As usual, making the right decision isn't enough. To get full credit, you must make the right decision for the right reason.
I reasoned as follows: If I find a doubleton king on my right, finessing gains a trick. If I find a doubleton king on my left, finessing loses a trick by allowing the opponents to take their ruff. Those cancel out. If West has a singleton spade, finessing loses if it is the king and gains otherwise. Since West will have a singleton king one time in four, finessing is the percentage play.
I play the spade three from dummy. My intentions prove immaterial, since East plays the king. I play the ace, and West follows with the six. I cash the spade queen. West plays the nine, and East, surprisingly, follows with the jack. I lose a heart and a club, making five.
NORTH
♠ 5 3 ♥ K Q 6 5 ♦ A J 9 2 ♣ 9 8 4 |
||
WEST
♠ 9 6 ♥ A J 9 8 ♦ 6 4 ♣ K Q 7 6 3 |
EAST
♠ K J ♥ 7 3 ♦ Q 10 8 7 5 3 ♣ A 10 5 | |
SOUTH
♠ A Q 10 8 7 4 2 ♥ 10 4 2 ♦ K ♣ J 2 |
Now I need to figure out why East hopped with the spade king. Of course! He hopped because he didn't know who had the ace. If West holds the ace, East must hop with the king to take his heart ruff. If he allows his partner to win with the ace, he will score his ruff with a natural trump trick. In fact, if West has the spade ace, hopping with the king beats three spades and ducking allows it to score.
That means my analysis above was flawed. If I play a spade from dummy and East plays low, I have good reason to think he doesn't have king doubleton of spades. If I rule out king doubleton onside, then there are four ways the finesse can lose (three offside king doubletons and one offside stiff king) and only three ways it can gain (king third onside). The odds are four to three in favor of refusing the finesse.
Of course, I can't rule out king doubleton onside entirely. East might decide his partner would have acted over three spades with the ace, so there is no point in hopping; or he might simply make a mistake and play low without giving it much thought. So I must judge the frequency with which East will play low with king doubleton and add that to the "finesse" column of the balance sheet above. Since there are three ways for East to hold king doubleton, if I judge he will play low more often than one time in three, I should finesse. Otherwise, I shouldn't.
Fortunately, I know my opponent pretty well, so this judgment is easy. One of Jack's weaknesses is the inability to draw negative inferences, and one of his strengths is that he never falls asleep. So I think I can count on Jack to hop. Therefore, I should have decided to refuse the finesse if East played low.
Why did I make this mistake? I focused too intently on my own problem and forgot to think about the deal from East's perspective. It's hard to examine deals consistently from your opponent's seat rather than from your own, but this deal shows how important this practice can be. I was lucky that East had king doubleton, else I might never have noticed my mistake. If the king had been offside and I had suffered a ruff after finessing, I would have chalked it up to bad luck.
Score on Board 61: +200 (12 MP)
Total: 488 (66.7 %)
Current rank: 1st
No comments:
Post a Comment