Big things in small packages

“For the want of a nail, the kingdom was lost”might well apply to many bridge hands where a seemingly insignificant card makes all the difference between success and failure for declarer.

If declarer doesn’t have the critical card, then he can’t be held accountable for the outcome. But if he has it when play begins and misuses it, he has no one to blame but himself for an unsatisfactory result.

Take this deal where South wound up in six spades after a highly competitive auction.

Pleased with his prospects, he ruffed the opening heart lead with the six, drew trump and then played the A-Q-K of clubs, setting the stage for an endplay.

If the clubs had broken 3-3, or if West had started with only two clubs, the plan would have succeeded. South would then have led a diamond to the jack, forcing a diamond return from West into the A-10 or a ruff-and-discard, either of which would have yielded the slam.

As it was, though, when declarer led a diamond to the jack, West won and exited with his remaining club. South ruffed and had to lose another diamond for down one.

As the cards lie, declarer could have made his contract by ruffing dummy’s club and leading the jack of diamonds from his hand.

But this would not have worked out well if East had started with one of the diamond honors.

However, given that the slam was a sure thing from the start regardless of how the opposing cards were divided, that declarer misguessed how to play at the end at least served the interests of justice.

To assure the slam, all declarer has to do is ruff the opening heart lead with any spade higher than the six.

After drawing trump and cashing the A-Q-K of clubs, he ruffs dummy’s last club high and then leads the six of spades to dummy’s seven. Now a diamond to the jack truly endplays West.

JUMBLE