I almost agree with Frances...in fact, I do agree that we should cash the
♠Q, but not for all of her reasons.
1. Beating the contract would be nice, but giving up an avoidable overtrick would be as bad as going plus will be good... this is mps
2. I'm not at all sure that we ought to have given false-count at trick 2: had we done so, and partner held the desired K82, why should he give us a smith echo now.... ? Unless he reads us to be false-carding, and there is no compelling reason he should, he doesn't want us cashing the Q from Q9... of course, we wouldn't be doing that anyway, since we'd know that declarer had 10xxx... but this would not be a Smith situation anymore. We were correct, I think, to show the 5th spade, precisely so that partner can tell us that the suit is 5332.
3. If declarer is 3=3 in the blacks, with partner holding both black Kings, that gives declarer good holdings in the red suits... at least 15 hcp there. And at least a 4-3 fit in one of them. I wouldn't expect him to, essentially, concede the 5th defensive trick by ducking a club from 10xx... we run our spades, and what does he discard? He can't be certain that he'd read the situation correctly, or that it is readable. I think he'd be playing a red suit at trick 3 if he had no
♣K. And this assumes that partner played low from K7 without apparent thought.... and while he should, this is a tougher play than declarer concealing the spade 2...see below.
4. I agree with the possible inference from the concealed spade 2: but that depends on who is sitting to my right... I think most experts conceal the 2 without conscious thought... this is such a familiar situation, I suspect most experts would have to consciously select the 2 in order for it to be played early
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari