A bidding misunderstanding.
Bridge Column for January 16, 2000, By HARVEY BERNSTEIN
Neither side vulnerable.  West deals.
                              NORTH
                              S: 9 6 8 3          
                              H: Void        
                              D: A Q J 7 5   
                              C: A J 8 6 
            WEST                             EAST
            S: A K 4                         S: J 10    
            H: A J 10 8                      H: K Q 6 4    
            D: 10 8 6                        D: 9 4 3 2           
            C: K 9 3                         C: Q 10 4      
                              SOUTH                         
                              S: Q 7 5 2
                              H: 9 7 5 3 2  
                              D: K         
                              C: 7 5 2    
          The Bidding://
                   WEST   NORTH     EAST   SOUTH                  
                    1NT    2D       Pass     3H 
                   Pass    4C       Pass     4S 
                   Pass    Pass    Double   Pass
                   Pass    Pass
     Today's hand was sent to me by Mort Klein of Beachwood.  It
once again proves that there is no such thing as a useless bridge
hand, it can always be used as a horrible example.  And yes, that
was the point that Klein was trying to make.
     When North bid two diamonds, South alerted and informed the
opponents that partner was showing a hand with five hearts and
five spades.  Edgar Kaplan, long time editor of Bridge World
magazine, who passed away earlier this year, was quoted in 1980
as saying "I don't think anyone in this tournament can bid
diamonds to show diamonds.  We lost the club suit in the 1950s.
Now diamonds are gone and hearts are sinking fast."
     South, truly believing that North had shown the major suits,
bid hearts and then spades, winding up in four spades doubled by
East.
     West led the ace of hearts, which was the right idea but the
wrong suit.  Declarer trumped in dummy, led a diamond to the king
and trumped a second heart. The ace of clubs was cashed and two
clubs were discarded on the ace and queen of diamonds.  Two clubs
were trumped in the closed hand and two more hearts were trumped
on the table.  The last three tricks were conceded to the
defense.
     So, the big question is, what lesson does this example teach
us?  While it is true that the North-South bidding (as well as
their understanding of the systems they have agreed to play)
leave much to be desired, East had every right to double this
contract.  After all, partner had shown at least fifteen high
card points, and East was looking at eight, leaving only
seventeen for North and South.     
     West, however, has to be aware that when the opponents reach
an unreasonable contract with very few high card points, they
must have some strange distribution.  The best defense then is to
start out by removing as many of their trumps as possible.  In
this case, leading the ace of spades instead of the ace of hearts
turns out to be the only winning action.  Once it obvious that
declarer will have to trump hearts in dummy, West can follow the
ace with the king of spades and a small spade.  Declarer can win
five diamond tricks by soon finds himself running short of trump
controls and goes down two.  That is a big difference, all
determined by the opening lead.  When you are in this type of
situation, lead a trump.  If it doesn't work out, blame me.
_____________________________________________________________________