[nige1]

Deal B1. Level 5. West leads ♥9 against South's 6♥. Bridge Master recommends the avoidance play of a small ♦ at trick 2.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Slightly better to draw West's trumps, Test spades, if they are 4-2, then ruff them out, and advance ♦K. Which works against the above layout.

---

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
But also gives you a chance to recover against some more pathological distributions.

---

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another interesting wrinkle: There are some layouts, like this, where you should test spades, before drawing the 4th round of trumps.
When ♠ are 5-0, you need to retain dummy's 3rd ♦, so that you can recover with a minor suit squeeze.

---

This post has been edited by nige1: 2020-August-09, 12:36

[broze]

Funny you should say this. I played this problem yesterday and took the line you suggest (although assume you mean K♦ not Q).

[smerriman]

A low diamond still works in your second case though, doesn't it? Is there a case where it differs?

[nige1]

broze, on 2020-August-07, 14:59, said:

Funny you should say this. I played this problem yesterday and took the line you suggest (although assume you mean K♦ not Q).

Thank you, brose now corrected . I've also found that you can sometimes cope with a 5-0 ♠ break (see edited OP).

[nige1]

SMerriman "A low diamond still works in your second case though, doesn't it? Is there a case where it differs?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SMerriman is right. On reflection, It's hard to construct remotely plausible deals, where it makes any difference. My main point is that the line suggested in the OP is simpler, equally effective, and will sometimes save an extra undertrick.

I also found that you can sometimes recover with a minor-suit squeeze when ♠ break 5-0. (see edited OP).

---