Coded 9 and 10s vs standard leads

[jh51]

I recently proposed to one of my partners that we play coded 9's and 10's as suggested in a number of Kanter's books. He objected, stating that Wolff feels that it gives too much information to declarer.

 

What is the general feeling about this lead convention?

[aguahombre]

We use them and are content with them. Yes, extra info to declarer is sometimes a byproduct, which we just live with. Sometimes the situation is still unclear to declarer, but clear to our side --because of the holding in partner's hand --and sometimes it doesn't matter what declarer knows because he can't do anything about it.

 

Interesting that they are called "coded". Like encrypted carding (illegal), sometimes the information is available to partner but not declarer. Only this time it is legal.

[Jlall]

I'm not a fan but a lot of people play it

[jjbrr]

I don't like them much myself. I can't find much wrong with standard leads.

[kfay]

I don't like them much myself. I can't find much wrong with standard leads.

Yes, dude. Yes.

[matmat]

I don't like them much myself. I can't find much wrong with standard leads.

Yes, dude. Yes.

playing coded 9s and 10s shows a level of commitment to the partnership that standard leads simply cannot express.

[Jlall]

Meh that's not really fair. Obviously the problem with standard leads is that if you lead a J or T it is unknown if you have an interior sequence or not, which can lead to guesswork by the defenders.

[eyhung]

My feeling is that there are some hands where playing coded leads will help the defense, but there are more hands where they will help the declarer. If you play against poor declarers who don't bother to look at your carding conventions or are incapable of using the information against you, go ahead and use them. Otherwise I recommend playing standard leads -- most of the top pairs I see do not use coded leads or odd/even discards.

[ArtK78]

I used to play coded 10s and 9s but gave them up in favor of standard signals. I have not missed them.

 

Some play Rusinow leads against NT as well as against suits. I find Rusinow leads to be an improvement over standard leads, but Rusinow leads are aimed at solving a different problem than coded 10s and 9s.

 

I thought that the use of odd/even first discards was nearly universal among experts. At least, that is my experience.

[gnasher]

I think you should play them when you've already shown length in the suit. That rarely tells declarer anything that he didn't already know. At a suit contract it may save partner a guess when the layout is something like:

               Qxx

KJ10xxx or        Axx

J10xxxx

               x or K

[aguahombre]

[hv=n=sxxhxdakqjtxxxcqx&w=shdc&e=shdc&s=sajxxxhakxxxxdckx]399|300|[/hv]

 

stumpled into 3NT --so did our opps at the other table.

 

club ten was led. Gulp. (oops, I had kj tight of clubs)

[Jlall]

I think you should play them when you've already shown length in the suit. That rarely tells declarer anything that he didn't already know. At a suit contract it may save partner a guess when the layout is something like:

               Qxx

KJ10xxx or        Axx

J10xxxx

               x or K

hmm I would still hate to lead the jack when I don't have an interior sequence and let declarer know my partner has the short king

[ArtK78]

[hv=n=sxxhxdakqjtxxxcqx&w=shdc&e=shdc&s=sajxxxhakxxxxdckx]399|300|[/hv]

 

stumpled into 3NT --so did our opps at the other table.

 

club ten was led. Gulp. (oops, I had kj tight of clubs)

3NT? That violates a couple of good rules:

 

1) Never put down an 8 card suit in the dummy (this can be a problem when both partners have an 8 card suit - I guess they have to defend).

 

2) What do you call an 8 card suit to the AKQJT? TRUMP!

 

Seriously, while I can understand how it is difficult to bid this sort of hand, I cannot understand how anyone holding the North hand would be willing to allow his partner to declare 3NT at IMPs.

[jdonn]

Art your focus is outstanding lol.

[Jlall]

Art your focus is outstanding lol.

haha

[ArtK78]

Art your focus is outstanding lol.

My comment was about the hand that was posted. The hand also had no direct relationship to the original question posed in this thread. Obviously, 3NT is making or going down depending on the location of the ♣A (assuming declarer plays the ♣Q at trick one, which seems clear). And, just as obviously, 3NT is a hideous contract. I was just having some fun with it.

[bid_em_up]

Focus, Art, Focus.

 

He says "oops, I had KJ♣ tight". Now how would you play if your opponents had said that they are playing coded 10/9 leads? Ok, he didn't state that, but otherwise, as you said, the hand would not be on topic. As it stands, I believe that it is.

 

Obviously, playing the Q has to be wrong. The only hope is to play small (which seems clear) and hope that RHO plays the Ace.

[ArtK78]

Focus, Art, Focus.

 

He says "oops, I had KJ♣ tight". Now how would you play if your opponents had said that they are playing coded 10/9 leads? Ok, he didn't state that, but otherwise, as you said, the hand would not be on topic. As it stands, I believe that it is.

 

Obviously, playing the Q has to be wrong. The only hope is to play small (which seems clear) and hope that RHO plays the Ace.

OK. So I was looking at the hand, not the added comment.

 

Still, the contract is pretty funny.

[Jlall]

Saying that you cannot understand how one would allow partner to play 3N when they have 8 solid of a minor is pretty funny also...

[jdonn]

Saying that you cannot understand how one would allow partner to play 3N when they have 8 solid of a minor is pretty funny also...

Yeah it would make more sense to criticize the guy who is 5-6 in the majors than the guy with 8 solid diamonds lol.

[jh51]

1) Never put down an 8 card suit in the dummy (this can be a problem when both partners have an 8 card suit - I guess they have to defend).

My partner recently violated this rule, and I was glad she did. Her suit was a minor headed by the Jack, and we had 9 or 10 tricks in the other suits playing NT.

 

Never say never. Most statements containing always or never are false.

[jjbrr]

I find this thread both interesting and educational.

[junyi_zhu]

Saying that you cannot understand how one would allow partner to play 3N when they have 8 solid of a minor is pretty funny also...

Yeah it would make more sense to criticize the guy who is 5-6 in the majors than the guy with 8 solid diamonds lol.

Well, the situation for 8 solid minor suit to play in 3NT as the best contract is indeed very rare, you need one card in that suit from partner, all suits stopped. Very often, when these requirements all meet, 5m can also have a reasonable play. However, when the situation for 3nt is a very bad contract happens, it can be very wrong when partner holds no diamonds. it only needs partner to hold Axxxx AKxx - Kxxx to make 6D, and when CA is off, 3NT would go down 5 when 6D is cold. Still in the bidding, few systems can really explore all the distributions and honors, so general speaking, to play in 3NT is a decision that can succeed in a few times when partner holds slow stoppers in side suits and at least one card in D, but fails when partner can't guard one suit or holds no D. And there is often no enough space to explore the 3NT possibility when bidding is under 3NT.

[aguahombre]

Art your focus is outstanding lol.

My comment was about the hand that was posted. The hand also had no direct relationship to the original question posed in this thread. Obviously, 3NT is making or going down depending on the location of the ♣A (assuming declarer plays the ♣Q at trick one, which seems clear). And, just as obviously, 3NT is a hideous contract. I was just having some fun with it.

actually it had everything to do with the thread, and I already admitted "stumbled into"...as did our wc opps at the other table. Of course the bidding at both tables sucked....and of course you are wrong about popping the queen at trick one.

 

the "coded" problem was that of the defenders, and ML thought long and hard, then popped with the ace, realizing what had happened when I dropped the king.

[Codo]

Back to the issue:

 

Coded leads give normally more informations then standard leads. This helps declarer and partner.

 

Same is true if you lead random or 4. best. The later gives more information to declarer too, but nobody would like random leads.

 

If you are capable to handle different leads depending on the length of a suit you have already shown, Andys (Gnasher) idea is great. But I would mess this up, so I have to stick to standard or coded but not both.