You can now play the hand of the day on BBO+ and compare how you get on with the players in the article.
The Aces On Bridge by Bobby Wolff
Opening Lead: ♥2
In today’s deal the contract of four spades looks to be very straightforward on a heart lead. But beware, there are breakers ahead! It looks natural enough to win the first trick and cash the diamond ace and king – which is indeed the essential start to the play. But next declarer must ruff a diamond to hand to try to score his small trumps in hand as safely as possible in case of bad breaks.
Now the next thing to insure is taking the club ruff in dummy. Declarer leads a club, and East wins cheaply, cashes the heart king, and leads the heart queen. Declarer must ruff high as West pitches a diamond and a club. Now comes a second club. East wins and plays the diamond queen. Declarer is again forced to ruff high, and when West discards, declarer knows West started with five red-suit cards. When he leads a third club from hand, West is down to just his four trumps. He ruffs low and declarer overruffs, leads dummy’s remaining heart, and ruffs with his remaining high trump. He then leads to dummy’s spade K-9 and takes the “sure” finesse.
The key move was to ruff a diamond at trick four. If he doesn’t, declarer will never be able to score his small trumps safely. If West is allowed to discard two diamonds early on in the play, the defenders cannot be prevented from arranging a trump promotion.
Lead with the aces
Answer: ♣ Lead
In my regular partnerships I believe this double should be played as penalty, suggesting a spade stack. Looking at my hand, though, I know that this cannot be the case. Partner must have a light takeout double, and it must therefore be right to remove to two hearts.
This Hand of the Day was originally published on aces.bridgeblogging.com.
You can now play the hand of the day on BBO+ and compare how you get on with the players in the article.
The comments have got out of sync with the hands on these bidding problems. Any chance of sorting them out? Perhaps something to do with the missing Jan 1 column.