Another lead against slam

[Trumpace]

I believe Omar Sharif's book has a hand with this kind of a problem.

 

Since I don't remember the hand, but only the idea, I made this hand up. Please pardon any goofs. If someone remembers that hand, please post that.

 

You hold 2, T976, J432, K432

 

 

RHO opens bidding:

 

(1S) - P - (4H)* - P

(4N)* - P - (5H)* - P

(6S) - P - P - X

All pass.

 

4H - singleton

4NT - some form of Ace ask.

5H - 2 keycards (likely side A and trump King) and no spade Q.

 

Partner doubles (lightner) the final 6S contract.

 

What would you lead?

[TylerE]

♥6

[goobers]

ahhhhhhhh

[neilkaz]

Lightner Double, I lead a ♥ to PD's ace and wait for him to later collect his natural trump trick.

[TylerE]

Important question: Is the 4H bid *exactly* a singleton or could it be a void?

[cherdano]

Lightner Double for heart lead?? Why didn't he double 5♥??

I lead a diamond to partner's void. If his void is in clubs, I might still get my ♣K later.

[kenrexford]

What? We have an agreement where partner MUST double 5♥, so the opponents can stop in a making 5♠, instead of waiting until they bid 6♠, so we can set them? Seems like a bad agreement.

 

I lead a heart.

[Trumpace]

Important question: Is the 4H bid *exactly* a singleton or could it be a void?

Yes. Exact singleton.

[Trumpace]

What? We have an agreement where partner MUST double 5♥, so the opponents can stop in a making 5♠, instead of waiting until they bid 6♠, so we can set them? Seems like a bad agreement.

 

I lead a heart.

What about a double of the 4♥ bid? Pard does not know they are going to be in slam. He might as well get his ♥A before the singleton goes away on some suit of declarer's. Is that reasonable?

[ralph23]

Important question: Is the 4H bid *exactly* a singleton or could it be a void?

Yes. Exact singleton.

So what do you bid as responder with a void? You can't make the double jump shift as that claims a singleton.

 

We play splinters show either 1 or zero.

[Trumpace]

Important question: Is the 4H bid *exactly* a singleton or could it be a void?

Yes. Exact singleton.

So what do you bid as responder with a void? You can't make the double jump shift as that claims a singleton.

 

We play splinters show either 1 or zero.

I don't know... ask the opps :D

 

Look, I tried to make this problem up to get across a nice lead problem.

So, please go ahead and assume that is the case.

 

Sorry if the bidding is totally confusing/not completely logical.

 

If someone gets the point I am trying to get across and remembers the actual hand from Omar Sharif's book, please post it here.

[ralph23]

Important question: Is the 4H bid *exactly* a singleton or could it be a void?

Yes. Exact singleton.

So what do you bid as responder with a void? You can't make the double jump shift as that claims a singleton.

 

We play splinters show either 1 or zero.

I don't know... ask the opps :D

 

Look, I tried to make this problem up to get across a nice lead problem.

So, please go ahead and assume that is the case.

 

Sorry if the bidding is totally confusing/not completely logical.

 

If someone gets the point I am trying to get across and remembers the actual hand from Omar Sharif's book, please post it here.

I know how hard it is to make up problems. I have the same difficulty myself, every time. And am in complete sympathy with all bridge-problem-creators, believe me. :)

 

The point is, we (as defenders) don't know if the splinter shows 1 or zero ♥. It could be either. So, that's the answer to Tyler's question: "We're not sure. Shows either 0 or 1."

 

Don't just tell him responder's hand ! We're not as defenders entitled to know what responder actually has; only what their agreements are.

Edited August 9, 2007 by ralph23

[skjaeran]

Heartlead???

 

Partner is obviously void in one of the minors and has got an ace in addition, and hopes I can diagnose his void due to disparity in my minor suit lenghts. Unfortunately I can't, but I'm not dead yet.

 

I'll lead the ♣K. If partner is void in ♦'s and has got the ♣A I'll still be on lead to give him his ♦ ruff. If I hit the void he'll ruff my king and cash his ace.

[Trumpace]

I know how hard it is to make up problems. I have the same difficulty myself, every time. And am in complete sympathy with all bridge-problem-creators, believe me. :P

 

The point is, we (as defenders) don't know if the splinter shows 1 or zero ♥. It could be either. So, that's the answer to Tyler's question: "We're not sure. Shows either 0 or 1."

 

Don't just tell him responder's hand ! We're not as defenders entitled to know what responder actually has; only what their agreements are.

No, I am not telling you the responders hand. All I am saying is the 4♥ promises an exact singleton (that is _the_ agreement). Perhaps they have other methods of showing a void. Who knows?

 

Anyway...

[Trumpace]

Heartlead???

 

Partner is obviously void in one of the minors and has got an ace in addition, and hopes I can diagnose his void due to disparity in my minor suit lenghts. Unfortunately I can't, but I'm not dead yet.

 

I'll lead the ♣K. If partner is void in ♦'s and has got the ♣A I'll still be on lead to give him his ♦ ruff. If I hit the void he'll ruff my king and cash his ace.

Excellent!

 

That was the intent of this problem. I hope people are convinced :P

[goobers]

Heartlead???

 

Partner is obviously void in one of the minors and has got an ace in addition, and hopes I can diagnose his void due to disparity in my minor suit lenghts. Unfortunately I can't, but I'm not dead yet.

 

I'll lead the ♣K. If partner is void in ♦'s and has got the ♣A I'll still be on lead to give him his ♦ ruff. If I hit the void he'll ruff my king and cash his ace.

Excellent!

 

That was the intent of this problem. I hope people are convinced :P

Oh, awesome.

[Guest Jlall]

The king of clubs is a lead that every beginner should find.

[cherdano]

The king of clubs is a lead that every beginner should find.

Thanks.♥

[ralph23]

I know how hard it is to make up problems. I have the same difficulty myself, every time. And am in complete sympathy with all bridge-problem-creators, believe me.  :P

 

The point is, we (as defenders) don't know if the splinter shows 1 or zero ♥. It could be either. So, that's the answer to Tyler's question: "We're not sure. Shows either 0 or 1."

 

Don't just tell him responder's hand ! We're not as defenders entitled to know what responder actually has; only what their agreements are.

No, I am not telling you the responders hand. All I am saying is the 4♥ promises an exact singleton (that is _the_ agreement). Perhaps they have other methods of showing a void. Who knows?

 

Anyway...

OH, ok they've got a method for showing a specific singleton, and no method for showing a void. These hypothetical good-card holders !! :D :P

[Trumpace]

<snip>

OH, ok they've got a method for showing a specific singleton, and no method for showing a void. These hypothetical good-card holders !! :D :P

I never said they have no method to show a void. It is just that I don't know about it, and didn't bother to ask them (lol :P inspite of them being figments of my imagination).

[kenrexford]

If a double asks for an unusual lead, and if the default is to lead the first suit bid by dummy, then a 4♥ double or 5♥ double would ask for a heart lead, right?

 

So, if you do not double 4♥ and do not double 5♥, then partner will presumably understand to lead something other than a heart, if you don't double the slam, right?

 

So, if partner will lead something other than a heart when you do not double 4♥ or 5♥, then why double at the end to reaffirm that which you already told him by not doubling 4♥ or 5♥? Shouldn't doubling cancel out the inference from the prior failures to double?

 

BTW -- double asking specifically for a lead of dummy's suit is really stupid anyway when the bid is a splinter. The agreement here is dumb, if that's what the agreement really is.

[cherdano]

Ken, without a double opening leader will lead the minor suit where he hopes to build up a trick, e.g. a Qxx or Kxx suit. With the double, opening leader will lead his longer minor to find partner's void. Is that really so difficult to understand?

Btw, a heart lead is so unlikely to be useful on this auction that it seems pretty silly that you apparently want to have 3 ways of asking for a heart lead (double 4H, or double 5H, or double 6S).

[ralph23]

<snip>

OH, ok they've got a method for showing a specific singleton, and no method for showing a void. These hypothetical good-card holders !! :)  :P

I never said they have no method to show a void. It is just that I don't know about it, and didn't bother to ask them (lol B) inspite of them being figments of my imagination).

What ?? You mean ....they aren't real ???? omg.....

[kenrexford]

Ken, without a double opening leader will lead the minor suit where he hopes to build up a trick, e.g. a Qxx or Kxx suit. With the double, opening leader will lead his longer minor to find partner's void. Is that really so difficult to understand?

Btw, a heart lead is so unlikely to be useful on this auction that it seems pretty silly that you apparently want to have 3 ways of asking for a heart lead (double 4H, or double 5H, or double 6S).

I suppose that I have been reading this question wrong, thinking that the majority definition of a "Lightner Double" is the one that I find silly -- an absolute demand for dummy's first bid suit, here hearts.

 

If you then assume the minority view on Lightner, the lead of an "unusual" suit, and assume the arguments made that "of course" you'd double hearts early on if you wanted a heart lead, then the late double must ask for that "unusual lead" of a suit that you previously had passively inferred against.

 

The perhaps poorly-argued Devil's Advocate position I was trying to make here was that which you seem to be using against me -- that we would have three ways to signal a heart lead directly and nothing else. I don't want that -- I think that this is silliness.

 

The agreement that I usually have is that a late double in a splinter situation asks for the lower of the other two options and that an even later double asks for the higher, if I know that I'm going to get two chances to double (as here). So, I'd double 5♥ to infer a request for a club lead, or 6♠ for a diamond lead. That seems a lot better than requiring partner to pick which 4-card minor to lead.

[ralph23]

Heartlead???

 

Partner is obviously void in one of the minors and has got an ace in addition, and hopes I can diagnose his void due to disparity in my minor suit lenghts. Unfortunately I can't, but I'm not dead yet.

 

I'll lead the ♣K. If partner is void in ♦'s and has got the ♣A I'll still be on lead to give him his ♦ ruff. If I hit the void he'll ruff my king and cash his ace.

Excellent!

 

That was the intent of this problem. I hope people are convinced :P

The club King is on a probability basis the best, but let's not forget that it is not foolproof...

 

Partner can have four combinations of Ace and void:

 

1. Club void and diamond Ace.

2. Club void and heart Ace.

3. Diamond void and club Ace.

4. Diamond void and heart Ace.

 

THe King of Clubs gets the money on 1,2 and 3.

 

It could be the only lead to give away the contract on 4, of course, as declarer may have started with AQJ in clubs, for instance, and had a club and heart loser all day... until the opening lead !!

 

Still, 3 chances out of 4 is not bad odds (it's not precisely 75% but close enough for government work...).

 

I admit that I do find the lead-directing double confusing, but if you do correctly diagnose partner's thinking, it was a brilliiant double.

 

I find it confusing b/c I (apparently holding the minority view) thought it meant "find an unusual lead, partner, and not a trump". And what in the world could be MORE unusual than a heart, when partner already had TWO chances to double an artificial bid for a heart lead? I mean, THAT's really really unusual !!

 

But .... naw, that's just TOO crazy. Even MY partner is not that crazy... :D :lol:

 

Without the double I'd lead a low minor card. Partner's talking me into leading a minor King, if I'm lucky enough to have one.... That gives us an EXTRA chance, when partner has case 3 above (club Ace and diamond void). Had I led a LOW club and case 3 was true, then declarer would prevail, as he obviously has a stiff club.