Communication
			by Jos van Kan.

A lot of defense and declarer play centers around communication.  Various 
strategic moves like ducking one or more tricks to exhaust one opponent
of a suit, blocking an opponent's suit, letting the non-danger hand win are
well known. But it is like speaking a foreign language: you may know all the
techniques, but that is not the same as being able to use them when it counts.
It all comes together in the following innocent looking deal:
     
     S A932           N      S         N       S          N     S
     H 652                   1C                1N               1H
     D AQ6           1S      1N        3N                 1S    1N
     C K85           3N                                   3N

     S 654
     H A743
     D K75
     C AQ3

South deals, vulnerable and as you can see, there is more than one way leading
to Rome. The first sequence you'd be likely to see in the US, the second one in
the UK (where 1NT typically promises 12-14, and maybe some North players would
use Stayman after that) and the third sequence in the Dutch standard beginner's
course, where they teach fourcard majors and a strong No Trump.

But whatever the system, chances are, that you will end up in 3NT. Against this
contract W leads SQ. (Normal leads)
1) Who has SK?
2) If East holds two spades, how can you block the suit? Under what
   circumstances can you profit from a spades block?
3) Is there another way to cut opponents communication? Under what
   circumstances can you profit from that?
4) Can S be 3-3? What is your plan of play?
5) How many times can you afford to lose the lead after SA has been dislodged?
















1) East. W's lead shows QJT(x)(x). W would have led the K holding KQJ(x)(x).
2) If E has a doubleton S you can block the suit by going up with SA. East
   cannot afford to unblock SK, because that promotes your S9 into a trick.
   You can profit from a S block if you have to lose the lead 
   1) exactly once
   2) more than once, if you can steer the lead into the non-danger hand (E)
      on subsequent plays.
3) You may also cut communications by ducking. This is also very effective,
   provided you duck the second S too. This effectively prevents opponents
   from establishing S. You now may lose the lead to any opponent. After S have
   been established, you still may steer the lead into the non-danger hand.
4) Especially against bidding sequences I and III where the lead has been made
   against a bid suit it is improbable that S will break. So your plan of play
   has to be to set up a H for your ninth trick.
5) That depends. You may always lose the lead to the non danger-hand, that is,
   the hand that has no spades left. When you block the suit you may lose the
   lead ONCE after SA has been dislodged to the dangerous opponent.

So whether you block the S suit or cut the communications by ducking, after you
lost the lead once by ducking a Heart, you must steer the lead on subsequent
plays into the East hand. We already are playing for H 3-3. 

6) Under what circumstance can we guarantee that only E will obtain the lead on
   subsequent H plays? How do you continue?




















6) East must hold HK. After ducking the first H you take the continuation in
   dummy and play a second H towards your Axx. If E goes in with HK you let it
   hold, if he does not, you play AH and continue H.

   The whole hand:

               S A932 
               H 652 
               D AQ6
               C K85
   S QJT7                S K8
   H QT8                 H KJ9
   D J83                 D T942
   C T74                 C J962
               S 654
               H A743
               D K75
               C AQ3

When this hand was discussed at the bar, there were some surprises. First of
all it does not seem to make any difference whether you go in with SA in the
first trick or duck twice. But it does. At one table where declarer choose to
block the S suit by winning SA immediately, E quite effectively countered his
subsequent H play by putting in the K!!! His reasoning was: if declarer has HAQ
my play makes no difference, but if he lacks one of those cards I must preserve
my partners entry! Now turn and twist as he might, declarer could not prevent W
from gaining the lead after S had been cleared. Down one! So ducking the first
and second S trick is better: after that there is no defense.

A second remark that has to be made is, that (especially at IMPs) if you choose
to lead against a *bid* suit from a holding like QJTx(x) or KQJx(x) a small card
is often better than the top of the sequence. The reason for that is, that you
are leading into known length, so most of the time you're setting up opponent's
spot cards. But is your partner has HELP in the suit you are leading you are
making yourself vulnerable to blockage by leading the high card. If W
leads a small S the contract stands virtually no chance.

Copyright (c) 1997 by Jos van Kan. All rights (especially movie rights)
reserved.