[blml] Who's afraid of the ...

[Adam Beneschan]

Richard wrote:
 
> Imps
> Dlr: West
> Vul: All
> 
>                JT2
>                KQJ3
>                AQ94
>                96
> 95                           Q84
> AT65                         ---
> 52                           KT8763
> QT752                        AKJ3
>                AK763
>                98742
>                J
>                84
> 
> WEST      NORTH     EAST      SOUTH
> Pass      1D        Pass      1S
> Pass      1NT       Pass      2C(1)
> Pass      3S        Pass      4S
> Pass      Pass      Pass
> 
> (1) Double Checkback

What's "double checkback"?  
 
> 4S made four, +620 for North-South.
> 
> The defence took two club tricks and then
> shifted to a spade.  Declarer drew one
> round of trumps and claimed ten tricks,
> saying "You get the heart ace."  East-West
> acquiesced (Law 69A).
> 
> After the match, East-West approached the
> Director saying they believed they should
> have gotten a second heart trick (if West
> had again ducked the heart ace when a
> small heart was lead towards dummy at
> Trick 6).

Richard, this description is a little baffling.  First of all, who led
the trump at trick 3---East or West?  If it was East, what actually
happened---did declarer guess to duck?  Next, when you said declarer
drew one round of trumps, does this mean that he led a round himself
at trick 4, after the round that the defense led at trick 3?

Assuming that something like this happened---after trick 4, two rounds
of trumps had gone and declarer had found the queen.  I'm assuming
that declarer (and the defense) assumed that a third round would have
been drawn at trick 5 so that hearts won't get ruffed.  OK, so at
trick 6 declarer leads a small heart toward dummy: what do you mean by
the word "again" in "if West had *again* ducked the heart ace"?

Fine, I'll assume the "again" was a typo or meant something other than
what I read into it.  Assuming it goes 2, 5, K, discard, on the first
round of hearts, declarer would then lead the queen from dummy, then
ace and a diamond ruff back to hand, then lead a heart; West needs to
rise and lead a club to beat it.  If we assume, based on this
statement:

> East-West are international experts, a
> class of player for which almost all
> errors in play are irrational errors.

that any other play would be considered irrational---AND that West
pitching a heart on the third round of trumps would have been
irrational (keeping in mind that West didn't know that South had a
heart suit at that point)---then I guess the director would have to
award the trick to East-West.

However, if East-West are players "for which almost all errors in play
are irrational errors", then: (1) why the heck did they acquiesce in
the first place---surely that was a grosser error in play than any of
the possible defense errors that could have happened, and (2) why
didn't they beat the contract off the top with a heart ruff?  (OK,
maybe that last wasn't an error, but I'd think that an international
expert East could find a way to play the clubs in order to get his
ruff.)

                                -- Adam