[Chamaco]

Scoring: MP

Contract is 4S with opps silent

---

Dealer South, Matchpoint, none vuln.
Bidding was a straightforward 1S:2S:4S, opps silent.

Lead was K of H, followed by HQ, ruffed.

After 2 rounds of trumps I ruffed another heart in hand and established the clubs.
On the 4th round of clubs both opps discarded hearts and on the 5th LHO discarded a diamond and RHO the H Ace.

T this point I Knew that:

1) west had started with 4 diamonds, exactly xx-KQJx-????-xxx
2) east had started with exactley 3D, exactly: xx-Axxxx-???-Qxx

I had to play the diamond suit for the overtrick, holding T9 opposite KJxx in dummy.
I had to find the A or the Q of diamonds.

I knew opponents: west is an international player, who would have doubled, only holding BOTH the diamond Ace AND the DQ (in which case it does not matter what I play);
East is a local expert, who would never think of bidding anything over 2 spades, unless he held both AQ of D (in which case, it does not matter what I play).
So the only info from the bidding i that probably honors are split.


The only small extra info is the length in diamond: West is longer than East.
this means that West has 4 probabilities out of 7 of hlding a specific keycard, and East has 3 probabilities out of 7 of holding the same keycard.

If I apply this reasoning to the Ace, then the result is that West is more likely to hold the Ace and I sholuld play low to the K.
If the Ace is in the right hand and I play to the K, I do not need to know where the Q is.

However, I might also make the same reasoning for the Q: the Q is also a keycard, and as a result, if I neglect the position of the Ace, it is also more likely to be in West.
If the Queen is in the right hand and I play to the J, I do not need to know where the A is.

In short, is it a TOTAL GUESS ?

PS- I played low to the King assuming West's extra length made it slightly more likely he held the Ace.... :-(

[hotShot]

If West would hold KQJ of ♥ and AQ of ♦ he'd hold 12 HCP
If East would hold ♥Axxxx ♦ADx ♣Dxx he'd have 12 HCP.
Would both your opps still be silent with this?
If not, it is not a total guess any longer. There is evidence of split honors in ♦. But knowing this does not help a lot.

[awm]

Looks to me like a total guess.

I might try leading the ♦T at trick three and watching LHO's tempo. After all, it could be right to cover with the queen if my hand is something like:

♠AQxxx
♥x
♦Txx
♣AKxx

Usually in these situations there are some negative inferences from the failure to lead diamonds, but KQJx of hearts looks like a pretty obvious lead...

[Chamaco]

awm, on Apr 28 2005, 09:10 AM, said:

Looks to me like a total guess.

I might try leading the ♦T at trick three and watching LHO's tempo.

LHO was Facchini, an ex World Champion, I doubt I could rely on his tempo ... LOL

[Chamaco]

Justin thanks of the analysis :-)

[luke warm]

why is it a complete guess? if you run the ten, don't you make 2 diamond tricks by force?

[daswallow]

The probability theory you use breaks down once you assume the honours are split. Both then have a 50/50 chance of holding each particular card, not 3/7 and 4/7. It is true that West is more likely to hold each honour if you do not assume the honours are split.
It must be slightly better to play 10 to K, as West may cover with the Q if he has it whereas he certinly will not if he does not have it - ergo, when he does not cover he is more likely to hold A than Q. This seems like an unusual application of PRC.

[EricK]

Unless I have not followed the play correctly, at the stage when the ♦ is played, everybody has a complete count of the hand, so nobody would be putting up any honour in second position.

Eric

[pclayton]

Even a good played will give you a wiggle when you play a ♦ from hand at T3.