Justifiable Castigation

Dealer: North
Vuln: Love All
Scoring: IMPs

  1. spade10 8 6
  2. heart
  3. diamond10 5 4 3
  4. clubK Q 9 7 5 4
  1. spadeK 7 4 3
  2. heart8 7 4 3
  3. diamondK 9 8 6
  4. clubA
club diamond heart spade NT
N - 2 - - -
S - 2 - - -
E - - - 3 1
W 1 - 1 5 2
Green square in centre
  1. spadeA Q J 9 2
  2. heartJ 9 2
  3. diamondA
  4. clubJ 10 6 3

Contract: 4spadex
Declarer: East
Lead: heartK

  1. spade5
  2. heartA K Q 10 6 5
  3. diamondQ J 7 2
  4. club8 2
Double dummy analyser: makeable contracts
West North East South
3club 3spade 4heart
4spade Dble Pass Pass
Pass
This is where my brain ceased to function. There can be little excuse for ruffing this, because if declarer has the ace I would be ruffing a loser, but that is exactly what I did. If you try to imagine a layout where ruffing would be correct, it is almost impossible. If partner does not hold heartA then it better to hope that partner has another entry and can cash hearts when he gets in.

Look what happens if you discard all your diamonds on four rounds of top hearts. Declarer cannot cross-ruff his way to ten tricks because you will ruff diamondA, and if he does draw trumps there are not enough trumps remaining in dummy to cope with all his club losers. Plus 100 instead of minus 590, and justifiable castigation from all!
Previous page

This section is a placeholder for the forum. For the time being it will be a noshow class.