This hand is all about accurate declarer play and defence. The bidding was simple, in second seat West opened a weak NT and everyone passed. This hand demonstrates the advantages of the weak NT as it got East/West to a reasonable contract in one bid and kept North/South out of the bidding. If South played a system where 2 of a minor shows that suit and a higher suit then a brave South could try a 2D bid. That would become the final contract and make +90 or +110 to North/South. The difference could be very crucial as best defence can defeat 1NT for +100 to North/South.

 

Now to the play in 1NT. I was on lead as North. If I was clairvoyant I would have chosen the HK followed by the HQ which would give us 4 heart tricks and easily beat the contract. In real life I tend to lead a major rather than a minor. There is a reason for this - opener is more likely to have a 5 card minor than a 5 card major and responder would normally remove 1NT to a 5 card major but not to a 5 card minor which would need to be at the 3 level.

 

So I led a small spade and the play continued as follows -

 

Declarer played the SQ winning the trick.

A club was led to declarers hand.

A second club honour was won by the CA in South.

South returned a spade and declarer played small so that I won the SK. 

 

4 tricks have been played, but how many mistakes have been made?

 

Let's start with declarer's play of the contract. It is obvious that clubs are the source of tricks but there is a problem as the suit is blocked by the CKQJ in hand. It would be good if the defenders could be persuaded to duck until the third round as dummy has potential entries to the other two clubs. On this hand South has only the CAx so does not have to be perceptive enough to win the second round to block the suit.  

 

So declarer wins the SQ, and plays two rounds of clubs. South wins the second round and returns a spade. What should declarer do? Our declarer decided to duck the ace even though it was clear that the SK was on the left. That would have been fine if I had won the SK and continued the suit. However I could see that the clubs were blocked so I switched to a diamond which removed dummy's entry whilst the clubs were still blocked and 1NT went down one for a good score for North/South.

 

But declarer should have won the SA, unblocked the other club honour and led a diamond thus making the contract for a good score for East/West. So the contract is cold on a spade lead?

 

Well no - if we look back to trick 3 when South wins the CA it can be seen that the clubs are blocked so the winning play is for South to switch to a diamond to remove the entry to the clubs before they can be unblocked, and the contract goes down. So the contract should go down on a spade lead?

 

Well no- if we go back to trick 1 when I led a small spade. Dummy holds SQJ3 and we hold SA92. We can see that dummy will need entries to get to the clubs and so we play the S3 from dummy. On a very good day North will have lead from S10xxx when South will play the SK giving us 3 spade tricks and plenty of entries to dummy

 

On this hand South plays the S10 and we win the SA and knock out the CA. Dummy still has an entry in spades and an entry in diamonds so the defenders cannot knock them both out before we unblock the clubs nor can they cash 7 tricks with the entry to the long hearts, the  CA being removed early in the play. So declarer makes 4 clubs, 2 spades and 1 or 2 diamonds to make the contract.

 

At Brunton the board was played 12 times with the following results -

 

N/S +200 twice - 1NT down 2?

N/S +100 three times - looks like 1NT down 1.

N/S -90 five times = so 1NT was made.

N/S -120 twice so the defence lost their way.

 

This is the sort of board that sorts out the winners and losers. The best pairs defeat the contract or make it if declaring and gain a good score for doing so.