[wclass___]

Apollo81, on May 3 2009, 01:41 PM, said:

wclass___, on May 2 2009, 02:49 AM, said:

Is this really a problem?

Yes there are some MPs riding on this pitch

LOL

[gnasher]

Apollo81, on May 3 2009, 07:44 PM, said:

gnasher, on May 2 2009, 06:54 AM, said:

I don't see what I'm supposed to do here.  If declarer has Qxx 10xx AK9x Kxx, we're going to get a good result whatever I do, because the normal 4♥ is likely to make or go one down.

If declarer has Qxxx 10xx AK9x Kx, 4♥ is going down on a spade lead or switch, so somehow I have to persuade declarer to go down by taking a third-round diamond finesse.  However, declarer also knows that 3NT making is a good score, so he won't risk this.

It's MPs, so even if declarer is always making or always going down there are some points riding on the number of over/under tricks.

I spent one paragraph talking about our matchpoint expectation if declarer is 3343. Then I devoted another paragraph to our matchpoint expectation if he's 4342, and declarer's proper matchpoint strategy if that's the layout. It seems rather odd to respond to that by telling me what the form of scoring is.