Match 2 - Board 39

Board 39
Both sides vulnerable

♠ K 8 6 5 ♥ 8 7 4 3 2 ♦ K ♣ A 6 2

I pass, LHO passes, and partner opens one notrump (12-14) in third seat. I bid two clubs, and partner bids two hearts. I was intending to pass two spades. But, with a ninth trump, my hand is worth a raise. I bid three hearts, and partner goes on to four. RHO leads the queen of clubs.

	NORTH ♠ K 8 6 5 ♥ 8 7 4 3 2 ♦ K ♣ A 6 2
	SOUTH ♠ Q 2 ♥ A Q J 10 5 ♦ 7 5 3 ♣ K 7 4

West	North	East	South
	Pass	Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♣	Pass	2 ♥
Pass	3 ♥	Pass	4 ♥
(All pass)

Not your classic weak notrump opening. But it worked out OK.

I have four potential losers. I need the heart king to be onside, or I need to be able to establish a second spade trick for a club discard. I may be able to do that if East has ace doubleton or tripleton of spades. I will need some luck for this to work, like the opponents' unaccountably not continuing clubs or perhaps five-two clubs with the diamond ace favorably located. But it doesn't hurt to try. I can always fall back on the heart finesse if necessary.

I win with the club ace. East plays the eight, and I play the four. The eight presumably shows the ten. I play the five of spades--four--queen--ace. So much for developing a second spade trick. I expect West to continue clubs, since East's signal has told him it is safe to do so. But he plays the jack of spades--king--seven--deuce. Jack tends to play up the line after his initial count signal. So it looks as if East has nine-seven-four of spades and West has ace--jack--ten--three.

I could take a heart finesse now. But I don't see any reason not to exit with the king of diamonds first. If I put the opponents on play, maybe they will do something stupid. Perhaps West will win with the ace and try to cash the ten of spades, crashing his partner's nine. Even if they don't do anything stupid, it's always a good idea to gather information if you can.

I play the king of diamonds--ace--five--ten. East plays the club ten--king--three--deuce. I ruff the three of diamonds to dummy, intending to take a trump finesse. To my surprise, West contributes the queen; East plays the deuce. Can West really have queen-ten doubleton of diamonds? It's possible, but I doubt it. That would mean East passed twice with ace-jack seventh. Even if he chose not to pre-empt in second seat, he could have overcalled with two diamonds on the next round. So I suspect what is going on is West has queen-jack-ten of diamonds. If so, he surely has only three. With longer diamonds, he would have preferred a diamond lead to a club lead from queen-jack-nine.

The fact that West has at most three diamonds means it is likely he has five clubs, which opens up an interesting possibility. If East is out of clubs, there is no need for me to take a heart finesse (unless hearts are three-zero). I can strip the hand and cash the heart ace. If the king drops, great. If it doesn't, I play another heart, endplaying East. Can I determine for sure whether East is out of clubs?

I know West has two or three diamonds. If he has two hearts, either I'm down or East has a singleton king and I have nothing to worry about. So I might as well assume he has a singleton or void in hearts. I also know he has no six-card suit, since East has already followed twice to each black suit. Thus there are only four relevant patterns West can hold: 4-1-3-5, 5-1-3-4,  5-0-3-5, or 5-1-2-5.

The latter two patterns, while possible, are unlikely, since West probably would have bid over one notrump with five-five in the black suits and an opening bid. 5-1-2-5 is particularly unlikely, as I said earlier, since it requires East to have passed twice with seven diamonds. So I'm going to focus on handling the first two patterns. If I can handle the latter two as well, fine. If not, I'm not going to worry about it. I should start by ruffing a spade to my hand to get a count in that suit.

(A) If East follows (as I expect him to, given his count signal), then I know West is 4-1-3-5 (or he has two hearts, in which case my play doesn't matter). I cash the heart ace. If the king doesn't drop, I ruff my last diamond and play a heart, hopefully endplaying East.

(B) If East shows out, he probably has another club. So there is no endplay, and I need the heart king to be onside. I ruff a diamond to dummy and play a heart to the queen. If West follows low, I'm home. If he shows out, I don't have an entry to repeat the finesse. But I don't need one. If East has three hearts, he is out of clubs. I cash the heart ace and play a third heart to endplay him.

What happens if West does have a doubleton diamond?  When I try to ruff the third round of diamonds to dummy, he may ruff in front of dummy with the nine or king. If so, I can pitch dummy's club loser. But if East is out of clubs, West can lead a club for an overruff. That means if West is 5-1-2-5 with a singleton king or nine or hearts, I'm going down.

I don't mind going down if he has a singleton king. My alternative line of taking an immediate trump finesse would not have worked either. But if he ruffs in with a singleton nine, I've gone down on a hand where the more straightforward line would have worked. As I said, I'm not going to worry about that. I think West is very unlikely to be 5-1-2-5.

So my discovery play of the king of diamonds paid off. I'm now going to make this on some layouts where West has a singleton king of hearts. Obviously, I didn't envision this when I chose to exit with the king of diamonds. When you embark on a journey of discovery, you never know where it might lead you.

I play a spade from dummy. It turns out, East did give false count in spades. He shows out, but, instead of pitching, he ruffs with the six of hearts. That makes it easy. I overruff and cash the heart ace, dropping West's king. Making four.

	NORTH ♠ K 8 6 5 ♥ 8 7 4 3 2 ♦ K ♣ A 6 2
WEST ♠ A J 10 9 3 ♥ K ♦ Q 10 ♣ Q J 9 5 3		EAST ♠ 7 4 ♥ 9 6 ♦ A J 9 8 6 4 2 ♣ 10 8
	SOUTH ♠ Q 2 ♥ A Q J 10 5 ♦ 7 5 3 ♣ K 7 4

So East did pass twice with ace-jack seventh of diamonds! And West passed over one notrump with five-five in the black suits and an opening bid! What got into Jack? Not only that, East handed me the contract by ruffing the spade. I was expecting to go down on this particular layout. Giving East an opportunity to misdefend was a bonus for my line that I hadn't even considered. If I ever use this problem in an article, I'll switch the eight and nine of hearts, so I needn't rely on misdefense.

Every table played four hearts. Half the declarers made it; half did not. Strangely, everyone who went down failed by two tricks. Where does the extra loser come from? Somehow East must manage to ruff a winner. It took me awhile to figure it out, but I think I have it. Club queen to the ace. Spade to the queen and ace. At my table, West played the spade jack, perhaps hoping his partner had a singleton spade. What happens if, instead of a spade, West plays another club? I win and play a diamond to the king and ace. East then plays a heart. If I finesse, West wins, cashes his club, allowing East to pitch a spade, then gives East a spade ruff. Down two.

Should I finesse the heart in that position? I don't think I would. I would probably assume from East's failure to play a club that he doesn't have one. In which case, I would rise with the heart ace and, if the king doesn't drop, go for the strip and throw-in. It would take quite an imaginative East indeed, holding another club and the king of hearts, to envision that refusing to cash the club presents declarer with an attractive losing option.

Score on Board 39: +620 (9 MP)
Total: 315 MP (67.3 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 38

Board 38
Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 6 2 ♥ A 8 7 ♦ Q 8 2 ♣ J 10 7 6

RHO opens one notrump (15-17) and buys it.

After one notrump--three notrump, it would be normal to lead a major, hoping to hit a five-card suit in partner's hand. Against one notrump--pass, however, the situation is different. For one thing, since partner didn't balance, he is more likely to have a long minor than a long major, particularly when playing Astro. For another, when you are looking for seven tricks rather then five, there is less urgency in finding partner's long suit right away. You rate to have more entries defending one notrump than defending three, so you may have an opportunity to correct your course later on, and there is less reason to speculate at trick one.

This is a long-winded way of saying I'm leading fourth from my longest and strongest: the six of clubs.

	NORTH ♠ A K 10 5 ♥ 10 5 4 ♦ 10 6 4 ♣ 9 8 3
WEST ♠ J 6 2 ♥ A 8 7 ♦ Q 8 2 ♣ J 10 7 6

West	North	East	South
			1 NT
(All pass)

Declarer plays the eight from dummy, partner plays the queen, and declarer wins with the ace. Partner has eight to ten high-card points, and I've just seen two of them. So he has six to eight unaccounted for.

Declarer would usually duck the first trick with only the ace. So it is a fair inference that either (A) declarer has the club king as well or (B) there is a shift declarer is afraid of. If (A), as we've seen before, declarer would have done better to win with the king. Then neither partner nor I could draw this inference.

Declarer leads the heart queen. If partner has the king, I'd rather he win this trick so I can retain my entry to the long clubs. If declarer has the king, there is probably no hurry. This doesn't look like the kind of deal where he wants to sneak one trick through, then switch to a different suit. I play the seven--four--deuce. If the deuce is honest count, then declarer has king-queen-jack fourth or king-queen-nine fourth. If the latter, he is not taking his best play in hearts, so there is an inference he has some communication problems. With, say, queen fourth of spades, he might have used dummy's spade entries to lead up to his hearts twice.

Declarer plays the spade three. I play the six (routinely giving false count with the jack)--king--seven. As I said, I don't think partner has two small spades. I suspect partner has either queen-seven, queen-third, or nine-eight-seven. If declarer has the queen, then, when he cashes it and sees my deuce, he will know that either I gave false count with jack third or partner gave false count with jack fourth. If he thinks the latter, then perhaps he has some sort of endplay available against partner, in which case we will have given him a losing option.

Declarer plays the heart ten--jack--king--ace. If declarer had king-queen-nine fourth, he would have led low from dummy in case partner had jack doubleton. So it appears declarer has five hearts.

I also know that partner has at least one high diamond honor. This conclusion comes from the inference I drew earlier: either (A) declarer has the club king (in which case both diamond honors would give him 19 high-card points) or (B) there is some shift declarer is afraid of, which could only be diamonds.

If declarer has the spade queen, we are in a cashout situation. Declarer has at least nine cashing tricks (four spades, four hearts, and the club ace) and might easily have a tenth (the club king or diamond ace). So we should try to cash as many tricks as we can before giving up the lead. Partner can still have as many as seven high-card points that I haven't seen yet. So there is room in partner's hand for the club king or for the ace and king of diamonds. Either minor could be running:

(A) ♠ Q x x ♥ K Q 9 x x ♦ A x (x) ♣ A x (x)

If we cash out our clubs, we hold declarer to nine tricks. If we don't, he makes ten.

(B) ♠ Q x x ♥ K Q 9 x x ♦ J x (x) ♣ A K (x)

If we cash our diamonds, we hold declarer to seven or eight tricks (depending upon whether partner has four or five diamonds). Again, declarer takes ten tricks if I don't find the right shift.

Rather than win this trick and guess which suit to shift to, I could duck again, so that partner can signal when I win the heart ace. Can I afford to do that? How many tricks might declarer take if he abandons hearts? At most, he has two hearts, four spades, the club ace, and one more minor-suit trick, bringing his total to eight tricks. The only time we can hold him to fewer than eight tricks is if partner has ace-king fifth of diamonds, so ducking, while not always best, at least works out better on balance than a blind switch.

Accordingly, I duck. Declarer continues with the six of hearts--ace--ten--three. So declarer had only four hearts after all! Maybe I was hasty in assuming declarer would lead low from dummy with king-queen-nine fourth. Can leading the ten ever be right?  I suppose it would be right if partner had jack-eight fourth. But few defenders would duck with an offside doubleton ace. If I were declarer, I would rate that layout unlikely.

Partner wasn't able to signal on the heart ace, but I did find out declarer has one trick fewer than I thought he did. That makes a club shift less attractive. If declarer has only nine tricks to cash, there is no hurry to cash our three club tricks.

Could it be right to lead a club for some reason other than to cash out, perhaps because breaking diamonds gives away a diamond trick? How about this layout:

♠ Q x x ♥ K Q 9 x ♦ A J ♣ A x x x

The diamond shift establishes a diamond trick for declarer. That wouldn't matter if the minors were three-three. But with this pattern it costs a trick because the clubs are blocked. Still, the fact that I had to work to construct this layout suggests that a diamond shift is the percentage choice.

The question now is which diamond? A low one gives partner an impossible problem if he has the very hand I am hoping for: ace-king fourth or fifth of diamonds. How is partner supposed to know whether I am leading from the jack or the queen? If I lead low, partner might reasonably play ace, king, and another, playing declarer for queen doubleton. Leading the queen would make things much easier for partner.

Of course, the queen could be a spectacular failure. Imagine, for example, that declarer has

♠ x x x ♥ K Q 9 x ♦ K J x x ♣ A K

But I'm not so sure I should worry about that. The queen is wrong only when leading diamonds is the wrong idea altogether. If I'm going to lead the wrong suit, how much worse is it to lead the wrong card as well? Better to make sure I maximize my advantage if I happen to have made the right decision.

I shift to the diamond queen. Partner takes his ace, and declarer drops the five. Partner returns the five of clubs, declarer wins with the king, and I play the seven. The five is the highest outstanding club, so declarer began with three or four clubs. His hand is probably some variation on:

♠ Q x x ♥ K Q 9 x ♦ K x x ♣ A K x

That's 17 high-card points, so there isn't room for the diamond jack. But he might have the diamond jack if he's missing the spade queen. Let's hope not.

Declarer cashes the nine of hearts. I pitch a diamond; dummy and partner pitch clubs. If I'm right about declarer's hand, he's down to

	NORTH ♠ A 10 5 ♥ -- ♦ 10 6 ♣ ---
	SOUTH ♠ Q x ♥ -- ♦ K x ♣ x

His spades are good, so he has four of the last five tricks. But he doesn't know that. If he thinks I have the diamond jack, his best play now is a spade to ace, then back to the queen, strip squeezing me. This gives him four tricks any time I have the diamond jack, regardless of the lie of the spade suit. As the cards lie, he will be disappointed to take only three tricks. My queen of diamonds may have been a serendipitous choice.

I don't know if declarer doesn't see this line or if he is simply unconvinced that I have the diamond jack. For whatever reason, he banks on spades coming home. He cashes the spade queen, then plays a spade to the ace. My jack drops, so dummy's spade is good. It looks as though we are going to score partner's jack of diamonds at trick thirteen. That is, unless declarer has the nine of diamonds and finesses. That's a scary thought. Wouldn't partner have ducked my queen if he didn't have the nine of diamonds? Who knows? Maybe he was afraid I had king-ten fourth of clubs. If declarer does have the nine, let's hope he thinks I've come down to a singleton jack of diamonds and a winning club for my last two cards.

No worries. Partner has the nine of diamonds. Making four.

	NORTH ♠ A K 10 5 ♥ 10 5 4 ♦ 10 6 4 ♣ 9 8 3
WEST ♠ J 6 2 ♥ A 8 7 ♦ Q 8 2 ♣ J 10 7 6		EAST ♠ 9 8 7 ♥ J 3 2 ♦ A J 9 3 ♣ Q 5 2
	SOUTH ♠ Q 4 3 ♥ K Q 9 6 ♦ K 7 5 ♣ A K 4

Four pairs held one notrump to nine tricks. It looks to me as if it takes an initial diamond lead to do that. I shouldn't think that would have been such a popular choice.

One pair reached three notrump, so we wind up with three matchpoints.

Score on Board 38: -180 (3 MP)
Total: 306 MP (67.1 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 37

Board 37
Our side vulnerable

♠ Q 9 2 ♥ A 7 3 ♦ K 9 7 ♣ 9 7 6 2

Two passes to me. I pass. LHO passes. Oh, well.

	NORTH ♠ K 8 7 3 ♥ K J 9 ♦ 5 2 ♣ Q J 10 5
WEST ♠ 6 ♥ Q 10 4 2 ♦ Q 10 6 4 ♣ A K 8 4		EAST ♠ A J 10 5 4 ♥ 8 6 5 ♦ A J 8 3 ♣ 3
	SOUTH ♠ Q 9 2 ♥ A 7 3 ♦ K 9 7 ♣ 9 7 6 2

West	North	East	South
	Pass	Pass	Pass
Pass

The opponents can make three diamonds, but it's hard to get there. If RHO opens, as he would have done in the old days (he does have two and a half-plus honor tricks after all), he would probably wind up in two notrump going down. Every other table passes it out as well, so we wind up with six matchpoints.

Now that we have some time on our hands, let's go back to last week's deal. I glossed over the play of this suit, and it bears some further discussion:

	NORTH ♥ K Q 9 8 3
	SOUTH ♥ 7 2

In the post, I said simply that I led the deuce of hearts from my hand. What I didn't say was it would have been an error to lead the seven. To see why, note what happened. West took the ace, and East, holding ten-four and not wishing to waste his honor, played the four. West was now unable to read the lie of the heart suit. East might have ten-four or he might have ten-seven-four. Had I led the seven, West would have known the count. He might not know whether his partner held ten-four or four-deuce. But he would know his partner held at most two hearts. There is no three-card holding East would play the four from. This was no accident; I led the deuce precisely for this reason.

In this particular case, concealing the heart count from West made no difference. But it might matter on a different deal, so it's worth discussing how one knows that the deuce will be less revealing than the seven. One possibility is to tabulate all of East's possible holdings and figure out which play makes East's card unreadable in the greatest number of cases. Of course, this method is laborious and time-consuming. An easier way (and one less apt to generate late-play penalties) is to follow a few simple rules:

Rules for Scrambling the Opponents' Count Signals

In the ensuing discussion, I will use the name 'Fred' to refer to the defender from whom you wish to conceal information. I will use the name 'Ethel' to refer to his partner, that is, the defender whose holding you are trying to obscure. Sometimes you know ahead of time which defender is which; sometimes you don't. Sometimes Fred may be, for example, whichever defender holds the ace.

Rule 1 - If you wish to represent a particular holding for Ethel, signal as if you held that holding.

Most players know this rule when it comes to attitude signals. Declarer should play high to encourage and low to discourage (or the opposite if the opponents signal upside down). Many players do not know, however, that the rule works with count signals also.

	NORTH ♣ Q J 10 9
	SOUTH ♣ 7 6 2

Fred leads the king of clubs against a heart contract; Ethel plays the four. If Ethel has four-three doubleton, you want Fred to think that it is possible she has three clubs. So you signal as if you had three clubs (which, by sheer coincidence, you do). Since the opponents play standard count, you play low. ("Low" means any card lower than the card Ethel played. If you have choices, you should choose among them at random.)

Suppose, however, you want Fred to continue clubs. Perhaps you know--for whatever reason--that Ethel has three clubs (presumably eight-five-four), and you want Fred to waste a tempo cashing his club ace. You want to represent a doubleton in Ethel's hand, so you signal as if you had a doubleton. Since the opponents play standard count, you play high. Any card higher than Ethel's will do. By concealing the deuce, you leave open the possiblity that Ethel has four-deuce.

Rule 1 is fine if you have a specific objective in mind. But what if you don't? What if you just want to play the card that has the greatest chance of scrambling the opponents' signals? In that case, you need Rules 2 and 3.

Rule 2 - With three or more cards, play your lowest or second lowest card, choosing whichever is closest to middle in rank. If the opponents signal upside down, choose similarly between your highest or second highest spot card. 

For example,

	NORTH ♣ K Q J 10
	SOUTH ♣ 8 5 2

Which card should you lead toward dummy to scramble Ethel's count signal? Assuming standard signals, your choice is between the deuce and the five. The five, being a middle-ranking card, will work more often. Playing the deuce is right only if Ethel has four-three doubleton, since it leaves open the possibility that she has eight-five-four. Playing the five is right anytime Ethel has three clubs, since it leaves open the possibility she has a doubleton.

Note that if dummy had the nine of clubs instead of the ten, the five would work in even more cases. It would work against against any three-card holding and against any even holding that includes the ten (provided Ethel is unwilling to signal with the ten), since it leaves open the possibility she has ten-eight third.

	NORTH ♣ K Q J 10
	SOUTH ♣ 9 8 4

Now the choice is between the four and the eight. Again, the middle-ranking card, the four, is the percentage play. The eight will create an ambiguity only if Ethel has seven-six-five. The four will create an ambiguity any time Ethel has an even number.

Rule 3 - With a doubleton, give correct count with one exception: If Ethel is apt to have a card she doesn't want to part with, give false count. 

Why should you usually signal an even number with a doubleton? Because, in general, it is easier to scramble Ethel's odd signal than it is to scramble her even signal. To scramble her odd signal, all you need to do is to conceal one card lower than the card she plays (or higher if they signal upside down). To scramble her even signal, you must conceal two cards higher than the card she plays (or lower if they signal upside down).

	NORTH ♣ K Q J 10
	SOUTH ♣ 9 2

Signal as the opponents would. Play the nine if the opponents play standard signals; play the deuce if they play upside down. You hope that Ethel has an odd number of clubs, in which case playing the proper card will make it possible that she has a doubleton. It is impossible to create an ambiguity when Ethel has an even number of clubs.

	NORTH ♥ K Q 9 8 3
	SOUTH ♥ 7 2

In this layout, there are two cards outstanding that Ethel might well choose not to signal with: the jack and the ten. Ethel is apt to have one or the other of them, so the exception applies, and you should give false count.

Why does this situation create an exception? Because there are now many three-card holdings from which Ethel's play is automatically ambiguous:

♥ J 6 5

♥ J 6 4

♥ 10 6 5

♥ 10 6 4

Ethel will play low from any of these holdings, but she will also play low from:

♥ J 5

♥ J 4

♥ 10 5

♥ 10 4

(Actually, it doesn't matter whether she will play low from these doubletons or not. All that matters is that, from Fred's point of view, she might play low.)

Normally, against standard carders, you want to retain the deuce when you hold a doubleton. That way, if Ethel plays low from three, it will be possible she holds a doubleton. But if Ethel holds the jack or ten, you don't need to do that. It is already possible that she holds a doubleton. Her signal from three cards is already ambiguous without your having to do anything.

Therefore, you need to shift your attention to scrambling her signal when she holds an even number. And, as we have seen, the way to do that is signal an odd number. If Ethel plays her highest spot card from:

♥ J 6

♥ J 5

♥ J 4

♥ 10 6

♥ 10 5

♥ 10 4

♥ J 6 5 4

♥ 10 6 5 4

then retaining the seven leaves open the possibility that she has three. (If they signal upside down and she plays the lowest spot card, then retaining the deuce leaves open that possibility.)

One addendum: Declarer's choice of equals rarely matters. So, whatever card the above rules instruct you to play, you are free to play any other card of equal rank. Randomizing among equals will help to keep Fred from  exploiting these rules to divine your holding.

Am I being too cautious in saying "rarely" instead of "never"? No. I can't think of a case where declarer's choice among equals matters for an even-odd ambiguity. But it can certainly matter for a two-or-four ambiguity:

	NORTH ♣ K Q J 3
	SOUTH ♣ 9 8 2

You lead the king from dummy, and East plays the seven, presumably from seven doubleton. By Rule 1, if you want to represent three cards in East's hand, you should play low; if you want to represent four cards (so that you might have a singleton), you should play high. But, if you play high, you must play the eight. The nine will not work, since East would play the eight from eight-seven fourth. This falls under the heading of "playing the card you're known to hold."

So there you have it. A simple set of guidelines for scrambling the opponents' count signals. What's particularly nice about these rules is that the opportunity to apply them typically comes up several times per session. So, if you didn't know these rules already, your expected per session score has just gone up perhaps a couple of matchpoints.

Score on Board 37: 0 (6 MP)
Total: 303 MP (68.2 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 36

Board 36
Both sides vulnerable

♠ J 10 9 3 ♥ K Q 9 8 3 ♦ 7 3 ♣ 9 7

Partner opens one spade, and RHO overcalls with two diamonds. I'd like to bid a pre-emptive three spades, but our convention card says that's a limit raise, so I have to settle for two spades. I suppose it's just as well I was prohibited from bidding three, because two spades ends the auction. West leads the ace of diamonds.

	NORTH ♠ J 10 9 3 ♥ K Q 9 8 3 ♦ 7 3 ♣ 9 7
	SOUTH ♠ A K 8 5 ♥ 7 2 ♦ 6 4 2 ♣ A K Q 2

West	North	East	South
		Pass	1 ♠
2 ♦	2 ♠	(All pass)

East plays the nine of diamonds, and I play the deuce. West continues with the king of diamonds, East dropping the ten, then the queen of diamonds. I doubt West sold out to two spades with six solid diamonds. But if I ruffed low and he did, I'd feel pretty silly. It looks as if I can afford to ruff with the jack, so I do. East follows with the diamond jack.

If East was unwilling to offer a single raise with jack third of diamonds, he can't have much. Surely he doesn't have the heart ace. (Although only a few deals ago I made an assumption like that that proved to be wrong). It's also suspicious that West sold out. It's seldom a good idea to let the opponents play at the two level when you know they have a fit. West would surely have balanced with spade shortness, so I have a strong suspicion he has three spades. (Against five-card majorites, three small spades would be a plus for balancing, since you can infer shortness in partner's hand. But when the opponents might be in a four-three fit, as is the case here, balancing with three trumps is more dangerous. This is one of the advantages of playing four-card majors: It makes the opponents' life more difficult in low-level competitive auctions.)

I have to play a heart sooner or later. It's hard to see the harm in getting the play out of the way early. I have to confess to being a little bit lazy here. I'm relying more on instinct than on analysis. I haven't actually constructed a deal where an immediate spade finesse presents any danger. It just looks more convenient to play a heart first.

I play a club--four--king (the most ambiguous of my three choices)--three. Someone gave false count, probably because he has a doubleton honor. My guess is East has five and West has the doubleton. If it were the other way around, West would have balanced. So it looks as if West is 3-3-5-2. I play the deuce of hearts--ace--three--four. East's four is consistent with my picture. It appears he has three hearts (unless he also has a doubleton honor).

West plays the ten of clubs--nine--five--ace. The obvious play now is to ruff my deuce of clubs and float the ten of spades. Is there anything wrong with this plan? East can't really have four spades. But West can. What if he's 4-2-5-2? (This requires East to have given false count in hearts, but that's hardly impossible.) If I lead a low club, West will pitch his heart. Now, when I lose the spade finesse to him, he can play another diamond. If I ruff in the dummy, I can't get to my hand to cash the club queen. If I ruff in my hand, I'm tapped out and can't score my heart trick.

Can I cash the heart before ruffing a club? If I do, then how do I get off dummy? A spade to the ace? To the eight? The club shift, killing the entry to my hand, was a nice play on West's part. A heart continuation would have made the hand easy for me. Cashing the heart might work, but it's complicated. I'll come back to this line later if necessary. First, let me see what happens if I lead the club queen instead of a low one. If that works, I may save myself a headache.

If I lead the club queen and West pitches a heart, I'm OK. I can continue with the club deuce, ruffing in dummy, and take a spade finesse. Now if West wins and leads a diamond, I can ruff in dummy and pitch my heart, leaving me with high trumps in my hand.

The danger in leading the club queen is that West ruffs it. Can I handle that? I overruff and cash the king of hearts, reaching this position:

	NORTH ♠ 9 3 ♥ Q 9 8 ♦ -- ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ A K 8 5 ♥ -- ♦ -- ♣ 2

Now I lead the heart queen and pitch my club if East follows. If West began with queen fourth of spades, he ruffs with his natural trump trick, and I have the rest. If West follows as well, then he was 3-3-5-2. The remaining spades are two-two. So, again, I have the rest. If East ruffs the queen of hearts, then West was 2-4-5-2. I can overruff, ruff the club in dummy, and claim. This line loses a trick unnecessarily only if East began with a singleton queen of spades and West began with four small. I doubt I can find a line that does any better.

I lead the queen of clubs, and West pitches the five of diamonds. I continue with the deuce of clubs, and he ruffs with the four of spades. Now he ruffs? OK. Be that way. I overruff and finesse East for the spade queen. Making four.

	NORTH ♠ J 10 9 3 ♥ K Q 9 8 3 ♦ 7 3 ♣ 9 7
WEST ♠ 4 2 ♥ A J 6 5 ♦ A K Q 8 5 ♣ 10 3		EAST ♠ Q 7 6 ♥ 10 4 ♦ J 10 9 ♣ J 8 6 5 4
	SOUTH ♠ A K 8 5 ♥ 7 2 ♦ 6 4 2 ♣ A K Q 2

West was wrong to sell out. He should double two spades. If his partner bids clubs, he can correct to diamonds, showing a secondary heart suit. In practice, I would bid three spades directly over the double, which would end the auction.

Is the field going to reach game? I doubt it. One notrump--two clubs--two spades--pass looks like the normal auction. But, when I check the scores, it appears I'm wrong. Four pairs did reach four spades. Fortunately, one declarer found a way to go down. I can't imagine how he did that. The other two pairs played a heart partscore, making two. They transfered to hearts rather than bid Stayman? Perhaps they were playing Puppet Stayman. Anyway, plus 170 is dead average.

Which brings up an interesting point. Game is roughly 50%. Normally you would think you should bid such a game or at least that it would be a toss-up whether to bid it or not. But I got six matchpoints when the game made, and I would have gotten twelve if it had gone down. So my expectation in avoiding game was nine matchpoints. Had I bid game, I would either share a top or share a bottom with the other pairs who reached game, so my expectation would be six matchpoints. Clearly the percentage action is to avoid game. But why?

The reason is that not everyone found the spade fit, which means simply playing spades at all gets you ahead of the field. I'm not sure how you could predict that on this particular deal, but it's a point worth remembering.

Score on Board 36: +170 (6 MP)
Total: 297 MP (68.8%)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 35

Board 35

Opponents vulnerable

♠ J 8 2 ♥ 8 6 4 ♦ A K J 8 7 4 ♣ 9

This is an awkward hand when you aren't playing weak two-bids. It's dangerous to pass with a suit like this, and the hand is too good to open with a non-vulnerable three diamonds. So one diamond wins by default. It's only a tad light for a one-bid. If the spade jack were the queen, I would open one diamond even if a weak two diamonds were available.

I bid one diamond, LHO doubles, partner bids one spade, and RHO passes. I raise to two spades. I believe a two-diamond rebid should flatly deny three-card spade support. While I do have concrete reasons for believing this, it would be hard to do the argument justice in a few sentences. Perhaps I'll devote an entire post to it at some point.

LHO doubles again, and partner bids four spades. RHO, who wasn't willing to bid at the two level, now chimes in with five clubs.

Is a pass by me forcing? I don't think so. Nothing about this auction indicates it's our hand. But, more importantly, I don't care. As is almost always the case, I would make the same call either way. I know many people would double if they thought pass was forcing, because they have a "bad" hand. But that doesn't make sense to me. In a high-level competitive auction, "pass" should mean I have better offense than defense, and "double" should mean the opposite. And this should be true whether pass is forcing or not. With a singleton in the opponents' suit and all my high cards in my own suit, I have much better offense than defense. So I can't even consider doubling in front of partner. I pass, and partner doubles.

What should I lead? Our agreement is to lead ace from ace-king. Even when I have that agreement, I generally have a further agreement that, at the five level or higher, we lead king from ace-king and that partner is supposed to give count routinely. Jack doesn't play this way, however, so I lead the diamond ace.

	NORTH ♠ K 6 ♥ K Q J 10 7 ♦ 10 2 ♣ A Q J 4
WEST ♠ J 8 2 ♥ 8 6 4 ♦ A K J 8 7 4 ♣ 9

West	North	East	South
1 ♦	Double	1 ♠	Pass
2 ♠	Double	4 ♠	5 ♣
Pass	Pass	Double	(All pass)

What was the double of one diamond all about? One heart seems pretty normal. Would North really worried one heart was going to be passed out and that he would have missed something if it were?

What kind of hand does South have to bid five clubs when he wasn't willing to bid two clubs on the previous round? I doubt I would bid his hand this way whatever he has. But clearly he doesn't have much in the way of high cards. In fact, if he has enough shape to bid at the five level, I doubt he has either ace or the club king. Any one of those cards would give him an easy two club bid on round one.

Partner plays the nine of diamonds and declarer plays the six. If partner were carding sensibly, I would know to try to cash another diamond. Partner would not have queen-nine fourth of diamonds and the ace-queen of spades and encourage at trick one. But Jack's carding isn't so context-sensitive. His diamond card here simply shows or denies the diamond queen. So all I know is that either he has the diamond queen or the nine is a singleton.

When does my play matter? (A) If declarer has a singleton diamond and partner has the ace-queen of spades, I must shift to a spade. (B) If partner has a singleton diamond, I must cash the diamond now. Otherwise I will lose it, since I have no entry. In all other cases, I don't think it matters which suit I play next.

Let's try to construct scenario (A). Declarer will have something like

♠ x x ♥ x x x ♦ x ♣ x x x x x x x

and partner will have

♠ A Q x x x x ♥ A x ♦ Q 9 x x ♣ K

It's hard to believe partner wouldn't have made a slam try with that. Given all the high cards partner must have, perhaps there is an inference he does have a singleton diamond and that the misfit persuaded him to bid conservatively. So let's try (B).  Declarer will have something like

♠ Q ♥ x x ♦ Q x x x ♣ x x x x x x

and partner will have

♠ A x x x x x x ♥ A x x ♦ 9 ♣ K x

Note that I had to give declarer the singleton queen of spades.  If partner had the spade queen, he would have a slam try despite his singleton diamond. (In fact, it's not so clear he wouldn't have made one even with this hand.)

While it is true that (B) is more consistent with partner's bidding, it's also true that an error on my part would be less costly on (B) than on (A). If I mistakenly shift to a spade on (B), I convert 800 to 500. If I mistakenly play a diamond on (A), I convert 500 to 200. Since we are non-vul, 500 is the number to aim for. Can I adjust (B) so that the wrong shift would net a mere 200?

Let's give declarer

♠ Q ♥ x ♦ Q x x x ♣ x x x x x x x

and partner

♠ A x x x x x x ♥ A x x x ♦ 9 ♣ K

We're really reaching now. We have to deal out two singleton honors to make this scenario plausible.

(A) is looking like the more likely scenario, provided we can construct some layout where partner doesn't have such a clear slam try. Let's try taking away a spade from partner's hand. That gives us

♠ x x x ♥ x x ♦ x ♣ x x x x x x x

and

♠ A Q x x x ♥ A x x ♦ Q 9 x x ♣ K

Holding three spades does make declarer's save less attractive. But this is still the most believable construction I've come up with so far.

All right. I've convinced myself. I shift to the deuce of spades. (By the way, in this situation, it is critical that partner has count in spades right away. So I would never lead a hard-to-read third best from four. I would lead my highest spot from four and my lowest spot from three.)

Declarer plays the six from dummy, partner plays the ace, and declarer plays the nine. Oh, well. Let's hope partner doesn't have a singleton diamond. No, he doesn't. He returns the diamond deuce. Declarer ruffs, plays a club to the ace, dropping partner's king, and loses a trick to the heart ace for down one. It didn't matter what I did at trick two. But, given how hard I had to work to construct a  hand where it did matter, I guess that's no surprise.

	NORTH ♠ K 6 ♥ K Q J 10 7 ♦ 10 2 ♣ A Q J 4
WEST ♠ J 8 2 ♥ 8 6 4 ♦ A K J 8 7 4 ♣ 9		EAST ♠ A 7 5 4 3 ♥ A 9 5 ♦ Q 9 5 3 ♣ K
	SOUTH ♠ Q 10 9 ♥ 3 2 ♦ 6 ♣ 10 8 7 6 5 3 2

We collected only 200, but the save was a phantom. Four spades is down two on a heart lead and down one (after imaginative play by declarer) on a club lead. As expected, I don't care for declarer's bidding. I would have bid two clubs on the first round. And, even if I hadn't, I would not have bid five clubs on the second round holding queen third of spades.

The results are a little surprising. One pair bid a spade game and made an overtrick. Two other pairs played a spade partscore, making five and tieing our result. Everyone else went down in a variety of diamond contracts our way, probably the result of an ill-advised three-diamond opening.

It's hard to see why every declarer who played spades made eleven tricks. I guess the queen of spades lead lets declarer make eleven tricks. But that seems unlikely. How about a rather silly singleton diamond lead? Declarer wins and plays ace and a spade. Instead of shifting to a heart, North gives his partner a ruff with his natural trump trick (or perhaps with a non-natural trump trick if South hopped with the spade queen on the second trump). South then returns a heart. This is how the play went at three tables? I'd almost rather believe they all led the queen of spades.

One other point worth thinking about. I should have followed Lowenthal's Second Law of Opening Leads: "The lead of a low card promises an honor sequence somewhere in the hand - either in the suit led or in some other suit." If I'd led a spade at trick one, I wouldn't have had any problems on defense. Partner would have cashed whatever spades were cashing and would have shifted to a diamond. I must admit a spade lead never occurred to me. But perhaps it should have. How hard is it to envision my trick two problem?

Score on Board 35: +200 (9 MP)
Total: 291 (69.3 %)

Current rank: 1st

Match 2 - Board 34

Board 34
Our side vulnerable

♠ K 7 6 5 2 ♥ 8 3 ♦ A K 10 8 5 ♣ A

RHO opens with one club. I bid one spade. LHO makes a negative double, partner passes, and RHO bids one notrump. I bid two diamonds. LHO passes, and partner corrects to two spades. Partner doesn't need much to raise over a negative double. So either he has a terrible hand or a misfit. We may be too high already.

Fortunately, RHO takes us off the hook. He bids two notrump. Since opener is limited, this bid has little value as a natural call. It should be unusual, suggesting a 2-2-4-5 pattern. Responder should have length in one minor or the other for his negative double. So the knowledge of a minor-suit fit and the doubleton spade makes it incumbent upon opener to bid with that pattern. (Given my two diamond bid, the minor-suit fit is proabably in clubs, but it doesn't have to be.)

Jack did not alert two notrump, so presumably he does intend the bid as natural. Perhaps he worked out, by dealing out random hands for his partner, that it was right for him to bid, and two notrump was least committal way to compete. If so, then I still have a strong suspicion that he's 2-2-4-5. What other "balanced" pattern could he have that would make it the percentage action to compete unilaterally?

I pass, and two notrump ends the auction. A diamond looks like our best lead. Since I expect partner to be short in diamonds, it's better to lead low than to lead an honor. A typical layout might be

	NORTH ♦ x x
WEST ♦ A K 10 8 5		EAST ♦ 9 x
	SOUTH ♦ Q J x x

or

	NORTH ♦ x x
WEST ♦ A K 10 8 5		EAST ♦ J x
	SOUTH ♦ Q 9 x x

The systemic lead is fourth best. But I'm afraid the diamond eight may look high. Partner may think I'm leading a high spot to induce a spade shift when he gets in. To make sure he knows diamonds is our source of tricks, I lead the diamond five. Partner knows declarer doesn't have five diamonds. So, the five should not confuse him.

	NORTH ♠ 9 8 3 ♥ Q J 9 5 4 ♦ J ♣ Q 10 9 6
WEST ♠ K 7 6 5 2 ♥ 8 3 ♦ A K 10 8 5 ♣ A

West	North	East	South
			1 ♣
1 ♠	Double	Pass	1 NT
2 ♦	Pass	2 ♠	2 NT
(All pass)

Great! Dummy has a stiff jack. Should I have led an honor? Actually, I guess it didn't matter. I need partner to have an entry anyway to come to six tricks. So a low diamond lead is just fine. Even if I had led an honor, I would be leading low at trick two. So what's the difference?

I must say I don't care for dummy's pass over two diamonds. A singleton diamond and a club fit? Why not bid two hearts? Wasn't he planning on bidding two hearts if I had passed? Why should my bidding his singleton make his hand suddenly better suited for defense?

Partner plays the three and declarer follows with the four. Partner's card should be attitude, indicating that he doesn't have the ten.

What is declarer's shape? Partner would not have corrected to spades with four diamonds, so he must have three diamonds  and declarer must have four. Further, he probably would not have corrected with 2-3 in my suits. (He might give a false preference with a good hand, but I know he doesn't have a good hand.)  So he must have three spades, giving declarer either a 2-2-4-5 pattern or a 2-3-4-4 pattern. As I said before, declarer's unilateral action makes more sense if he's 2-2-4-5, so that's what I'm going to assume. I also suspect declarer has the ace-queen of spades to have bid two notrump in the teeth of partner's two spade bid (although that wouldn't be true if two notrump were intended as unususal). So that gives declarer

♠ A Q ♥ ? x ♦ Q x x x ♣ K ? x x x

and leaves partner with

♠ J 10 x ♥ ? x x x ♦ x x x ♣ ? x x.

The opponents are playing 16 to 18 notrumps. So declarer might have up to 15 HCP for his one notrump rebid. That means he could have either the ace or the king of hearts. But if partner has the heart ace, he has a two spade bid over the negative double. So I'm inclined to place declarer with the heart ace and partner with the heart king and the club jack. Not bad for trick one! I know everyone's shape and can place every honor down to the ten of spades!

Of course, I'm wrong. At trick two, declarer leads the four of hearts from dummy, partner plays the ace, and declarer plays the king. I give count with the eight. Hmmph. Partner should have raised with jack-ten third of spades and an ace. If he had, I would have made a game try of three diamonds, and we would have reached three spades. If three spades makes, there's not much I can do about it. But if three spades is going down one, plus 50 will be a fine score. That seems like what we're destined to get. Partner will play a diamond, and we'll take four diamonds and our two aces.

Wrong again! Partner plays the jack of spades--queen--king. I can clear diamonds myself to come to a different six tricks. But maybe we can do better. What if I play a spade to declarer's stiff ace? Declarer has four heart tricks (assuming from his unblock that he has the heart ten), one diamond, and one spade. Down two. He can't afford to knock out the club ace, or I will play a spade to partner for a diamond return, and we can run both our suits. Nice spade shift, partner. You found a way to beat it an extra trick.

I cash the diamond ace just to clarify the diamond suit for partner. Declarer pitches a club from dummy, partner plays the six, and declarer plays the deuce. I switch to the seven of spades--eight--ten--ace. Oops. What happened? How can declarer have three spades? Does he have

♠ A Q 4 ♥ K 10 ♦ Q x x x ♣ K J x x

or

♠ A Q 4 ♥ K ♦ Q x x x ♣ K J x x x ?

I can't see bidding over two spades with either hand. But Jack and I don't always see eye-to-eye about these things. These layouts would make partner's bidding more sensible. I was wondering why he didn't raise with jack-ten third of spades and the heart ace. Perhaps he doesn't have three spades. Perhaps he did give a false preference.

Now I've let them make this, trying for an extra undertrick. And what exactly did I expect that extra undertrick to be worth? There may be some minus 100s our way. There might also be some minus 110s, since I think more people will be defending club partscores than notrump partscores. So there may be a huge difference between our beating this one and allowing it to score. Furthermore, we may well be the only pair with a chance to go plus 50 or plus 100, so there may be no difference at all between down one and down two.

Declarer plays the deuce of clubs--ace--nine--three.  I cash the diamond king and concede the balance. Making two.

	NORTH ♠ 9 8 3 ♥ Q J 9 5 4 ♦ J ♣ Q 10 9 6
WEST ♠ K 7 6 5 2 ♥ 8 3 ♦ A K 10 8 5 ♣ A		EAST ♠ J 10 4 ♥ A 7 6 2 ♦ 7 6 3 ♣ 8 4 3
	SOUTH ♠ A Q ♥ K 10 ♦ Q 9 4 2 ♣ K J 7 5 2

So declarer was 2-2-4-5.  Partner's spade ten was clueless. Not only should he know from the auction that declarer has the spade ace, but my carding told him as well. I cashed the diamond ace to clarify that suit, then I led my highest spade to assure partner that I didn't have a spade honor.

As it happens, my assessment of our matchpoint position was wrong (making me wrong for the third time on this deal - or is it the fourth?). There is no difference between plus 50 and minus 120, and there is a difference between plus 50 and plus 100, although a small one. The one pair who played a club partscore their way made four, scoring 130. And no one was minus 100 our way. Most East-West pairs reached game and went for between 200 and 800. Minus 120 is worth eight matchpoints. One other pair defended two notrump and beat it two tricks, so we could have scored nine matchpoint had we done the same.

Even though my play turned out not to matter--and stood to gain if partner hadn't lost his mind--I still think it was wrong. I didn't stop to assess the risk-reward ratio of my play. Even though it's unlikely declarer has three spades, it's hardly impossible. So I think I should have settled for down one. I just got lucky that there was no difference between plus 50 and minus 120.

Score on Board 34: -120 (8 MP)
Total: 282 (69.1 %)

Current rank: 1st

Von Zedwitz

I'm going to pause at this point in the match to report on an actual deal, from the finals of this year's Von Zedwitz Double Knockout. For those of you unfamiliar with the format of this event, it operates similarly to a standard knockout, except that you must lose twice before you are eliminated. The finals generally consists of one undefeated team and one once-defeated team. If the undefeated team wins, it has won the event. If the undefeated team loses, then there is a rematch, and the winner of the the rematch wins the event. In other words, if you make it to the finals as the undefeated team, the only way not to win the event is to lose two matches in a row.

Back when I was actively playing, I found myself in this position twice. Both times, my team lost both the first match and the rematch to come in second. The second time this happened, the final match was particularly exciting. The critical deal - and the match and the event - hinged on whether or not declarer held the eight of hearts.

This year, my partners at Gargoyle dragged me out of retirement to play in the event again. And, last week, I found myself once again entering the finals as the only undefeated team (the team consisting of Josh Parker, Bruce Rogoff, Eric Robinson, Marty Fleisher, Jeff Aker, and me).

Fortunately, history didn't repeat itself. We won the first match, rendering the rematch unnecessary, despite the fact that I butchered the deal I'm about to show you.

Board 9
Opponents vulnerable

♠ A K 5 4 ♥ J 8 2 ♦ K 7 ♣ K Q J 4

I open one notrump (15-17) in third seat, and partner bids two hearts, a transfer to spades. I think the right bid is three clubs, showing four spades, a maximum in high cards, and concentration in clubs. But we haven't discussed pre-acceptances. Some people play that three clubs in this auction shows a doubleton. I'm also not sure what a three-heart rebid by partner would mean. Would it be a re-transfer or a heart suit? I decide to keep the auction simple by bidding a straight-forward, if misdescriptive, three spades. Partner raises to four, and LHO leads the nine of hearts, showing the ten or shortness.

	NORTH ♠ Q J 6 3 2 ♥ A Q 7 4 3 ♦ 10 8 6 ♣ --
	SOUTH ♠ A K 5 4 ♥ J 8 2 ♦ K 7 ♣ K Q J 4

West	North	East	South
	Pass	Pass	1 NT
Pass	2 ♥	Pass	3 ♠
Pass	4 ♠	(All pass)

If spades are three-one and hearts are three-two, I shouldn't have any trouble. My biggest concern is four-one hearts. I could duck this trick and hope the opponents can't take the first four tricks. But there are lots of ways they would be able to do that: (1) if the nine is singleton and East has the diamond ace, (2) if the nine is singleton and East has queen-jack of diamonds, or (3) if East has a singleton king and West has the ace of diamonds. In addition, what do I do if East wins the heart king and plays a small diamond? If the nine was a singleton, I must play low. (East can't have the diamond ace, or he would have beat me by force, so low guarantees my contract.) But if the king was a singleton, I must rise, hoping the diamond ace is onside.

What happens if I go up with the heart ace at trick one? I draw trumps (let's assume I must draw three rounds) and play a heart from dummy. First, suppose East shows out. I play the jack. West wins and plays a low club. I ruff in dummy and play a diamond. If the diamond ace is onside, I'm home. If it isn't, West wins and plays another club. This one I can't afford to ruff. I have to duck and hope West has the club ace. So, if I go up with the heart ace and West has king-ten-nine fourth of hearts, I need either two-two trumps or one of the minor-suit aces onside.

What if East follows when I lead a heart toward my jack? If I play the jack and West shows out, I can no longer establish hearts. Again, I will need to find one of the minor-suit aces onside. Of course, I could insert my old nemesis, the heart eight. West would have led the ten from ten-nine doubleton. So, once East follows low, the only possibilities for West are a singleton nine or king-ten-nine tripleton, the latter being a rather unattractive holding to lead from. Wouldn't it be great if this turned out to be the critical deal of the match and the eight of hearts again proved to be key? Except this time I would be on the receiving end of the eight's favors.

All in all, hopping with the ace looks like a better idea than ducking. I call for the ace, and East follows with the six. I play a spade to the ace, and West pitches the deuce of diamonds. Oops.

Given the diamond pitch, West's likeliest pattern is 0-4-5-4, leaving East with 4-1-3-5. King-ten-nine fourth is not an attractive lead. So there is a fair chance West has both minor-suit aces. Personally, I would bid over one notrump with that hand. But the opponents, for some reason, aren't playing Astro, so West probably doesn't have a suitable action.

Except for the fact that I must draw four rounds of trumps instead of three, the play would appear to follow pretty much the same lines as I envisioned early. I am going to need to find one of the minor-suit aces onside. I draw four rounds of trumps and play a heart to the jack. West wins and shifts to a low club. I pitch a diamond, and East follows low. Now I'm home. I win with the jack and pass the eight of hearts. Now club king--ace--ruff and run the hearts. If the diamond ace is onside, I can make an overtrick if I guess East's pattern. If he comes down to two diamonds, I must hold king-doubleton of diamonds. If he comes down to the diamond ace and a club, I must hold one diamond and one club. I see no reason to think my original assessment of his shape was wrong, so I play accordingly. The diamond ace is offside, so I make only four.

	NORTH ♠ Q J 6 3 2 ♥ A Q 7 4 3 ♦ 10 8 6 ♣ --
WEST ♠ -- ♥ K 10 9 5 ♦ A 5 4 3 2 ♣ A 10 3 2		EAST ♠ 10 9 8 7 ♥ 6 ♦ Q J 9 ♣ 9 8 7 6 5
	SOUTH ♠ A K 5 4 ♥ J 8 2 ♦ K 7 ♣ K Q J 4

At the other table, West leads the diamond ace, so declarer has no problems.

I said at the beginning of this post that I butchered this deal. Do you see my error? Neither West nor I noticed that I gave him a chance to beat me in this position:

	NORTH ♠ 6 ♥ Q 7 4 3 ♦ 10 8 6 ♣ --
WEST ♠ -- ♥ K 10 5 ♦ A 5 ♣ A 10 3		EAST ♠ -- ♥ -- ♦ Q J 9 ♣ 9 8 7 6 5
	SOUTH ♠ -- ♥ J 8 ♦ K 7 ♣ K Q J 4

When I lead a heart to the jack, West must win and play the club ace, not a low one. I can't afford to ruff this; I must pitch a diamond. West now exits with the ten of hearts, smothering that pesky eight, and I'm left with two diamond losers.

To make this by force, I must arrange to be in my hand when we reach this position. Then I lead the club king and, whether West covers or not, pitch a diamond. Now there is no defense.