Lead?

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

you play a base system similar to SAYC,

i.e. 15-17 NT, a 2/1 bid promising another bid

 

you hold in 3rd seat, at equal vul, MP scoring:

 

109x

Q9x

K10987x

10

 

1S ..... - (2C) - 2H (1) - (3C)

3H (2) - (4C) - Pass . - (Pass)

X ....... - all Pass

 

(1) contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)

(2) game try with heart values

 

Your lead, and more important, why?

If you have comments about the auction feel free

to make them.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

 

Edited: The vulnerability was all green.

[Apollo81]

Isn't the point of this constructive raise agreement to differentiate between a "good" raise to 2♠ and a bad one? Seems like you are just bidding 2♥ on all hands that would normally bid 2♠.

 

Anyway I'd have just raised to 2♠ on this hand, but you're clearly close to your bid, as you've described it. I'm not sure I'd have sat for the double of 4♣ either...but again I don't think it's clear cut and don't have a big problem with the pass.

 

As for the defense, I'd just go with the normal looking ♠10 lead.

[awm]

I'd lead a club.

 

How are opponents going to take tricks on this hand? It seems unlikely they will take very many spade tricks (the suit we have bid and raised) and partner has advertised heart values with me holding the queen. My diamond holding (length and good spots) is such that they aren't likely to be pitching losers on their diamonds. So it seems like they will take tricks by scoring as many trumps as possible separately. May as well lead trumps while we have the tempo.

[jdonn]

I think this is a clear game bid over 4♣. We have Q9x of the suit partner wants, and singleton in the suit the opponents are bidding.

 

I think I agree with the club lead in the given situation. Hard to see where else their tricks will come from.

[fifee]

This hand rates to be a constructive raise for me. The stiff ♣ definitely puts the hand into the "constructive range." For me 2♠ would show 3 card support and shape and very few points or 4-6 dummy points balanced and support.

 

Personally, I am not married to 4♠. The stiff ♣ is great but my trumps are not and the ♥Q9x is not quite enough to accept imho.

[whereagles]

I thought this was a lead problem, not a bidding problem...

 

Anyway, I'll lead the ♥Q to take a peek at dummy while (hopefully) retaining the lead.

[the hog]

Well I don't think this is a constructive raise, and I agree that over 4C I would have bid 4S as the bidding went. However, being in this situation now, I would lead the CT. Why? Cut down on ruffing value. As Josh and Adam state, from where are their tricks coming?

[jdonn]

I thought this was a lead problem, not a bidding problem...

If you have comments about the auction feel free

to make them.

[nige1]

you play a base system similar to SAYC, i.e. 15-17 NT, a 2/1 bid promising another bid. You hold in 3rd seat, all green, MP scoring:

♠ T9x ♥ Q9x ♦ KT987x ♣ T

1♠ (2♣) 2♥ (3♣)

3♥ (4♣) _P (_P)

_X AP

- 2♥ = contructive raise, (+7) - (-11)

- 3♥ = game try with heart values

Your lead, and more important, why? If you have comments about the auction feel free to make them.

 

Prefer 2♠ to 2♥. Prefer 4♦ or 4♠ to _P. Now, IMO ♣ = 10, ♥ = 7, ♠ = 6.

We seem to have the side suits tied up, so our best hope is to prevent our winners being ruffed.