[CSGibson]

Scoring: IMP

Uncontested Auction
1♥ 2♦
2♥ 3♥
4N* 5♥
5N 6♥

---

North explains after the auction that 4N both asks key cards and shows spade shortness. South interupts him to tell him that it's actually exclusion for spades (declarer is void in spades), after which North looks a little chagrinned.

Partner leads the ♣3 , playing 3rd/lowest leads. Declarer puts up the ♣J. Plan the defense.

[Simplicity]

Declarer is probably 0634 - Axxxxx KQx K9xx or similar and we need to cover this trick with the ♣Q and sit back for our 2 minor tricks in the end game. Winning the ace will rectify the count and allow declarer to cash out, squeezing us in the minors.

[zgrywus]

Simplicity, on Jan 30 2008, 09:24 AM, said:

Declarer is probably 0634 - Axxxxx KQx K9xx or similar and we need to cover this trick with the ♣Q and sit back for our 2 minor tricks in the end game. Winning the ace will rectify the count and allow declarer to cash out, squeezing us in the minors.

assuming that S own the 9♣, he can win anyway:
♠ -
♥ -
♦ A753
♣ 64




♠ -
♥ x
♦ KDx
♣ 9x
Now declarer plays ♥ (a club from dummy) and E is squeezed (♠ -♥ -♦ W862♣ A10)

[zgrywus]

Can I have more explanations about bidding? Especially what does 5NT mean? Looks like declarer thinks that they have all key cards and he’s investigating grand. What would be the meaning of 5 spades, an Q♥ asks? Is than 5NT asking for Kings outside spades (hard to imagine defense problem if declarer is missing a minor K). From the other side ♠- ♥ADxxxx ♦KDx ♣Kxxx isn't 6♣ proper call as the grand slam try?

[CSGibson]

Sorry, all I got as an expanation for 5N is confirming all of the non-spade key cards, trying for a grand, and 6♥ was nothing extra to show.

[whereagles]

Simplicity, on Jan 30 2008, 02:24 PM, said:

Declarer is probably 0634 - Axxxxx KQx K9xx or similar and we need to cover this trick with the ♣Q and sit back for our 2 minor tricks in the end game. Winning the ace will rectify the count and allow declarer to cash out, squeezing us in the minors.

How can someone named "simplicity" find such a contrived line of play?

[Simplicity]

<deleted>

[CSGibson]

whereagles, on Jan 31 2008, 01:36 AM, said:

Simplicity, on Jan 30 2008, 02:24 PM, said:

Declarer is probably 0634 - Axxxxx KQx K9xx or similar and we need to cover this trick with the ♣Q and sit back for our 2 minor tricks in the end game. Winning the ace will rectify the count and allow declarer to cash out, squeezing us in the minors.

How can someone named "simplicity" find such a contrived line of play?

Actually, he gave the right defence for the hand. The whole hand is as follows:

---

If you take your ace of clubs, then declarer is set for a double squeeze no matter what defense you conceive of. If you play the Q, then partner can keep both 3 diamonds and the K of spades in the endgame, while you keep 2 of each of the minors.

[gwnn]

so what was the misunderstanding?