[manudude03]

---

MPs scoring.
Partner is known to be somewhat frisky. He leads the ♠A. If it matters, you play reverse count here. Do you unblock or not?

[MrAce]

I don't . He is trying to give me a ruff obviously and he believes he may have an entry.

Pd is short in hearts, HE may as well be 6133 (if he has 7 spades it hardly matters whether we unblock or not) Which makes declarer may not enjoy his clubs.
And how are we planning to defeat 4♥ anyway if pd does not have ♦A? Say 2 rounds of spade and then we get a ♠ over ruff ? Especially if declarer has 5 of ♥? We still need pd to hold ♦A in most cases, no?

I mean declarer will raise ♦A, ♣ hook, and run clubs, will over ruff when u ruff. Or simply clear trumps and finesse clubs if he has 2 clubs.

But look at the auction. It makes little sense to me. Pd should have 7th spade for his bidding but what does N have that he passed 3♥ and then bid 4? Something gave him hope when pd bid 3♠ which i am having hard time to construct. I don't think he bid 4 because his Qx ♠ improved! Maybe xxx? Something like xxx AKQJ5 Axx xx ? If so we can not set this. If he has 4♦ and 1]cl] then we can probably set by playing ♣ after our 3rd trick via overruff.

Most natural defense to me seems like win ♠K play ♦ and hope to get a ♠ over ruff. Or pd takes a trump trick+ diamond.

[WesleyC]

Unblocking might be necessary if partner holds a 6142 with ♠AQJxxx and ♣Kx or similar. But that hand is unlikely for most people, even if they're described as 'somewhat frisky'.

Declarer's delayed game bid and partner's balance make hands like [AJTxxxx J Ax xxx] or [AJTxxxx A xxxx x] more likely (where a trump promotion is our best shot).

Finally, partner might actually have this beating in his own hand. Holding [AJTxxxx --- Axxx Kx] or [AJTxxxx --- KQxx Kx]. All we have to do is not give away a trick!

On balance, not unblocking looks like the winner to me.

[MrAce]

 WesleyC, on 2015-August-07, 01:29, said:

Unblocking might be necessary if partner holds a 6142 with ♠AQJxxx and ♣Kx or similar. But that hand is unlikely for most people, even if they're described as 'somewhat frisky'..

I still can't see how unblocking will do any good for defeating with the above hand you constructed. Tell me a hand that unblocking works while blocking not.

 WesleyC, on 2015-August-07, 01:29, said:

Declarer's delayed game bid and partner's balance make hands like [AJTxxxx J Ax xxx] or [AJTxxxx A xxxx x] more likely (where a trump promotion is our best shot).

No, pd can not have those hands. Are you telling me that opener passed 3♥ initially with Qx AKQTx KQxxx K or Qx KQJTx AKQ K ? Come on.

 WesleyC, on 2015-August-07, 01:29, said:

Finally, partner might actually have this beating in his own hand. Holding [AJTxxxx --- Axxx Kx] or [AJTxxxx --- KQxx Kx]. All we have to do is not give away a trick!

Hmm...can you explain me how exactly are you planning to beat 4♥ when pd hold these hands?

 WesleyC, on 2015-August-07, 01:29, said:

On balance, not unblocking looks like the winner to me.

Now that I agree.

[PhilKing]

I just win the second spade and play the diamond nine. If partner has the diamond ace without the queen, he will know the only chance is a third spade.

Maybe partner's hand is AQJTxx x ATxx Kx, giving declarer xxx AKQJT KQx xx. Declarer bid 4♥ as a sacrifice, hoping we would not double.

Unblocking is clearly potty, since pard can have seven spades and the ♦AQ.

[WesleyC]

All of my analysis is rubbish because I had the deal rotated incorrectly. Please ignore

[wank]

it is matchpoints so it's not quite so obvious, though playing to restrict the overs (Aqj10xx Q Kjxx kx would make sense for partner's hand for example) against a game you pushed them into would be a trifle negative.

[rmnka447]

The key here is that you're playing MPs.

If you unblock and partner ♠ holding is something like ♠ AJ9xxx(x), it unnecessarily gives away a trick to declarer. -450 instead of a normal -420, or, -420 instead of a normal +50 are terrible results at MPs -- likely near zeroes. Since you can't know what partner's ♠ holding is, you just have to play low and hope for the best.

[PhilKing]

I might be being a bit thick, but when the opponents stop in part score and we push them into game, I don't set a premium upon stopping overtricks.

[Fluffy]

why didn't we double?, opponents don't thin they can make their contract why should we?

My partners will not lead from AQ no matter what so I find unblocking pretty lame.

[manudude03]

On this occasion, it shouldn't matter in theory if you unblocked or not. I had the vulnerability wrong, the opponents weren't vulnerable.

---

I unblocked convinced partner wouldn't bid 3S without AQ. Unfortunately partner didn't find the third spade continuation. We got 60% for 4H= (comparing against 1NTx+5!! 4H+1 x2, 2S+2 and 2S+3)

[PhilKing]

 manudude03, on 2015-August-09, 04:40, said:

On this occasion, it shouldn't matter in theory if you unblocked or not. I had the vulnerability wrong, the opponents weren't vulnerable.

---

I unblocked convinced partner wouldn't bid 3S without AQ. Unfortunately partner didn't find the third spade continuation. We got 60% for 4H= (comparing against 1NTx+5!! 4H+1 x2, 2S+2 and 2S+3)

I misread this one badly by crediting partner with the spade jack in my initial answer.