OCP Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Abuse of this Forum will not be tolerated

Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Loser-on Loser  (Read 383 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

OliverC

  • Sifu
  • Administrator
  • Hog
  • *****
  • Karma: +17/-1
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1552
    • View Profile
    • Pigpen
Loser-on Loser
« on: September 02, 2017, 09:51:13 AM »

Sometimes Opps give you opportunities to make a contract that should always be "off" and you need to grab those opportunities with both hands.

Love All, Dealer South

You are North, holding

North
!S K
!H AKQ9762
!D 104
!C A102

Partner passes, West opens a weak 2 in Diamonds, and you bid 4 !H. Everyone passes. West leads the Jack of Diamonds and Partner puts down a disappointing collection:

South (Dummy)
!S 109742
!H 85
!D Q3
!C K654

J !D led

North
!S K
!H AKQ9762
!D 104
!C A102

You cover the Diamond Jack in Dummy. West takes the AK of Diamonds and now plays the 9 !D. What do you do?

It should be absolutely automatic to discard the !S King on this trick. You're going to lose the King of Spades anyway. Yes, maybe West started with 7-card Diamonds and East is going to ruff with the 10 or Jack, but West only opened 2 !D so they might have only 6, in which case East started with !D Jxx and this will allow you to ruff in Dummy and void the Spade loser. What have you possibly got to lose? The fact is, you can only possibly gain by discarding the King of Spades on this trick.

On this hand there was no fairytale Club position. West held !H J10x and when Partner (in the North seat) ruffed the 3rd Diamond with the Queen of Hearts she was doomed. East did, in fact, have 3 Diamonds so the high ruff in hand was entirely unnecessary. Partner still had the King of Spades to lose, but now had to lose a Heart as well. In fact, she should have been -2, but a defensive error towards the end of the hand allowed her to escape for -1. The simple loser-on-loser play at trick 3 would have allowed her to make this contract for +6½ IMPs rather than being -1 for -5 IMPs.
Logged
Oliver

wijelonata

  • Piglet
  • *
  • Karma: +1/-0
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
    • Pregnancy see: sideroblastic deprivation ethos.
Re: Loser-on Loser
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2018, 10:31:51 AM »

doxycycline-cheapbuy.site.ankor <a href="http://onlinebuycytotec.site/">onlinebuycytotec.site.ankor</a>

lute57

  • Hog
  • *****
  • Karma: +14/-2
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1135
    • View Profile
Re: Loser-on Loser
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2018, 02:29:15 AM »

nice example (and much easier on the brain than paritywood - inside humor - no offense Brian)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up