What's your lead?

[Hanoi5]

[hv=pc=n&w=st82hqt8djt9873c7&d=n&v=n&b=5&a=1cp1sp3cp3hp3sp4sp4np5hp6sppp]133|200[/hv]

 

Imps

[dboxley]

North gave his partner a choice between play 3S and 6S. This must be in the novice game. North must have solid clubs so we have to set up a trick on opening lead and hope partner has a trump entry. Partner needs less in hearts than in diamonds so I lead a small heart. Yeah, I know, that's the only lead that lets him make it.

[VM1973]

Partner doesn't have a diamond void or he would have doubled. Leading a trump is out, so the choice is between leading a club or a heart. I'll try the club as it's not impossible for partner to have the ♣A or ♠A. The heart lead is too likely to go into declarer's tenace (as he has bid the suit).

[mikeh]

I agree with the comment about the level of the game we're in: opener limited his hand, in a non-forcing way, with 3♣ and then, after partner signed off in 4♠, drove to slam.

 

As for the lead: the diamond seems obvious, so I assume it didn't work.

 

A trump lead gives up a tempo. We may well need to either take our tricks now or establish a winner for when we win a slower black trick.

 

A club lead (usually) wins if partner has either black A, but otherwise rates to be the same as a trump lead.....gives up a tempo.

 

A heart lead has the advantage of paying off if our slow trick is in hearts....partner has the K....but is into declarer's second suit. It seems to me to be the 2nd choice.

 

The diamond lead is less likely, than the heart, to develop our second trick, but it might develop our first and maybe our first 2.....catch Kx in dummy for example...and is safest.

 

I was going to show a sample of hands, but it is almost as easy to show one on which a heart is needed as it is a diamond....tho I do think that we should lean towards seeing opener as having something like KQx Axx x AKQxxx rather than say AQx xx Kx AKQxxx.

[mikeh]

Partner doesn't have a diamond void or he would have doubled. Leading a trump is out, so the choice is between leading a club or a heart. I'll try the club as it's not impossible for partner to have the ♣A or ♠A. The heart lead is too likely to go into declarer's tenace (as he has bid the suit).

In my view, partner doesn't have a diamond void because the opponents are extremely unlikely, bad as at least one of them is, to have a combined holding in the suit of AKQxxxx and never to have even suggested the suit.

 

Even if he did hold such a void, partner probably wouldn't have doubled to suggest a diamond lead because many players use the Lightner double to suggest the lead of dummy's first bid suit. While I would accept that this sort of auction suggests that partner can't have the right hand for such a lead, it is still a long step to infer that it suggests a diamond lead. He can't (realistically) hold a void, and he can't expect his AK to both cash. And of course on this auction he will expect a diamond lead unless you have a compelling reason to lead something else, so double is redundant.

 

Finally, altho this shouldn't be a factor on this hand, a void showing double sometimes steers opps into a making 6N....while, as I say, this shouldn't be a factor here (for several reasons), it is sometimes a reason NOT to make a lead-directing double and, instead, rely upon partner to make the right lead.

 

Please note that I am responding to your post on a bridge level :D

[dwar0123]

Leading a club, no way am I leading a heart on the hope that partner has the king. Leading a diamond seems safe but pointless.

[mikeh]

Leading a diamond seems safe but pointless.

Care to provide a reason for the conclusion? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am saying that it would be easier to assess the merits of your position if you provided an explanation :)

[dwar0123]

Care to provide a reason for the conclusion? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am saying that it would be easier to assess the merits of your position if you provided an explanation :)

Well it is certainty safe.

 

If partner has a black ace(or any ♠ entry), club is right.

 

If partner has a red ace, then you want to setup a trick in a 2nd suit before they can set up pitches for it.

Hearts are out cause you are to likely to give up a trick with the lead.

Diamonds are awful likely to find one of the opponents short enough so setting up a trick isn't even an issue.

It is possible diamond is the only setting move, but it requires the most specific situation.

[MrAce]

Mike

 

I don't mind if someone doesnt lead his stiff vs a slam.

 

I dont even mind if someone wants to make the "safest" lead after opponents screamed that they have long good side ♣ suit.

 

But i think the comment that says "♦ lead is obvious" was a bit too heavy.

[mikeh]

Mike

 

I don't mind if someone doesnt lead his stiff vs a slam.

 

I dont even mind if someone wants to make the "safest" lead after opponents screamed that they have long good side ♣ suit.

 

But i think the comment that says "♦ lead is obvious" was a bit too heavy.

Then you really wouldn't have liked my original answer, which was that the diamond lead was 'blindingly obvious' :P

 

And you misunderstand me if you think that I chose the diamond because it was the 'safest' lead...that may be some other poster's view, but it isn't mine...I make the lead because, for the detailed reasons I gave, it seems to me to be the best choice, while recognizing that it is by no means going to be the winning lead most of the time.....if only one suit works, I'd rate them as diamond about 40-45, heart maybe 30-35, club maybe 20-30, with spade being essentially zero. IOW, on an auction like this, I don't think it is possible to conclude that any one lead will more likely than not lead to a plus.

 

And I don't see any other explanation that seems at all persuasive

[MrAce]

I'd probably lead ♣, but i can not say ♦ lead is wrong, especially not at all against this LHO.

 

But against a strong pair, i would have less hope finding dummy with Kx(x) ♦ or worse since he did not make any attempt to offer a slam to be played from his side.

 

Call me old fashioned, but here is what i think when i lead ♣;

 

1-in order to defeat this pd needs to have an important card or what we lead will probably not matter. By leading ♦ i am hoping pd to hold more than 1 critical card, he needs to have ♦AK or AQ or K with ♣ stopper or trump stopper. Even then we are dependent to declarer's or dummy's holding in that suit and the length of ♦ in my hand doesnt look in favour of us.

 

2-If i lead ♣ and pd has ♣A we dont seem to need anything else (as u already said) unless an extereme ♣ situation exists. If pd has trump A or K we are still in good shape without needing another important card or without depending on opponent's shape as much as i expect on ♦ suit.

 

3-Imo ♣ was obvious and if it doesnt work, i expected this board to be a push, but now that i see a player at your caliber thinks ♦ is obvious , i may be totally off about pushing the board and bail sh!t loads of imps if you were the guy sitting on my seat at other table :)

 

4-Even if everyone disagrees with me, i am sure Benito Garozzo would be on my side for this lead FWIW

 

I have to tell you though, i agree with you that probably the winning lead is not the obvious one. But this depends on what the OP thinks is obvious, rather than what u and me think :)

[mikeh]

I'd probably lead ♣, but i can not say ♦ lead is wrong, especially not at all against this LHO.

 

But against a strong pair, i would have less hope finding dummy with Kx(x) ♦ or worse since he did not make any attempt to offer a slam to be played from his side.

 

Call me old fashioned, but here is what i think when i lead ♣;

 

1-in order to defeat this pd needs to have an important card or what we lead will probably not matter. By leading ♦ i am hoping pd to hold more than 1 critical card, he needs to have ♦AK or AQ or K with ♣ stopper or trump stopper. Even then we are dependent to declarer's or dummy's holding in that suit and the length of ♦ in my hand doesnt look in favour of us.

 

2-If i lead ♣ and pd has ♣A we dont seem to need anything else (as u already said) unless an extereme ♣ situation exists. If pd has trump A or K we are still in good shape without needing another important card or without depending on opponent's shape as much as i expect on ♦ suit.

 

3-Imo ♣ was obvious and if it doesnt work, i expected this board to be a push, but now that i see a player at your caliber thinks ♦ is obvious , i may be totally off about pushing the board and bail sh!t loads of imps if you were the guy sitting on my seat at other table :)

 

4-Even if everyone disagrees with me, i am sure Benito Garozzo would be on my side for this lead FWIW

 

I have to tell you though, i agree with you that probably the winning lead is not the obvious one. But this depends on what the OP thinks is obvious, rather than what u and me think :)

Thx for the explanations.

 

Bear in mind that the question was what to lead on this auction...not what to lead against a well-bid slam. I might well find a different lead against a pair I respected on a sensible auction. As it is, I very much doubt that partner has a black Ace. i am inclined to think LHO has something like AQx Kxx x AKQxxx, and am catering to something like Kxxxx AJxxx Qx x in addition to the possible tho improbable Kx in diamonds in dummy: AQx xx Kx AKQxxx opposite KJxxx Axxx xx xx.

 

Of course, LHO 'can't' hold these hand types...but he 'can't' bid as he did with a normal 3♣ rebid either

BTW, Garozo probably didn't have these opps in mind when he developed his lead habits :D