Kxxxx
Kxx
xx
Q82
AQxxx
Ax
AQx
Axx
Bidding went
p - p - p - 2nt
p - 3H - p - 4S
p - 4NT - p - 5C (1 or 4 keycards)
p - 6S - ap
This is a make or break contract as I was playing in MP. Most people in the field will play in 4S, either because South does not super-accept or north fear that a slam is too anti-percentage. As the cards lie, it seems like the slam is only making on 2 finesses.
Fortunately, opponent led a diamond 10. So it all boils down to the club play. I drew trumps and stripped the hands to arrive at this position:
x
-
Q82
-
x
-
Axx
-
There are two possible lines of play from here: either cash the ace and play towards the queen, or play small to 8 and endplay east. The former will work if west held the king and the latter will work if east held the king. Thus far, west has played 4 hearts, 1 spades and 4 diamonds while east has played 4 hearts, 2 spades and 3 diamonds.
Figuring that a singleton king is to rare to occur and cashing the ace will void the endplay, I played small and west followed with a 3. I took some time to think and eventually played the queen. The king was onside and I made the 6S and this deciding board scooped us a 1st in the event. Why queen? Why not play 8 and endplay east? My reasoning on the spot was west could have played a spot card larger than the 8 if she did not hold the king of club. This will prevent her partner from being endplayed. However, she played the 3 nonchalantly, suggesting that she did not have such concern and hence hold the king of clubs!
Such deductions are subtle but gratifying. However as it turns out, west did not even have a spot card larger than 8 :( My deduction was, to a large extent, fallacious. I guess this is just a small step in improving my declarer play...
No comments:
Post a Comment