Jump to content

Lead Agreement from Three Small vs Suits


awm

  

68 members have voted

  1. 1. Playing your preferred lead agreements, what do you lead systemically from xxx (unbid suit) against suits?

    • Small
      34
    • Middle
      22
    • Top
      12
    • Depends on something else (please explain)
      4
    • A random card
      0
    • I never lead from xxx against suits
      1


Recommended Posts

Suppose you decide to lead from xxx vs. a suit contract. This suit has never been bid, and suppose your spots are small enough that you don't really need to worry about costing a trick (i.e. the top card is not the ten or anything like that). What I'm interested in here is your systemic lead (obviously you might false-card on some hands especially if you hold almost all your side's expected values, but that is really not the issue here).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think small is the best, it gives the most important information first (count). No surprise it's so popular at elite level.

I play 2/4 all my life: low from xx, middle from xxx (and then small). This is decent, you don't waste the highest card and got delayed count information (and sometimes instant, expecially in xx case).

I don't like MUD. If you have T8x/98x you sometimes don't want to play the highest 2nd round and I predict a lot of confusion as to 2 or 3 dilemma.

 

in my new partnership we play 4th and lead middle or top from 3 small

 

Beware those 98x vs 9x problems :)

I always thought it's very bad agreement. You con't distinguish xx from xxx even by 2nd trick. Looks like source of disasters to me. I think I remember a spectacular disaster of Hamman-Zia on vugraph caused by this. What am I missing here ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never played anything but 3/5th vs suits, so I don't know. Hope it works out :P I assume there will be some compensating gains knowing partner has an honor on the 2 lead or something but I am used to strict count leads vs suits.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to threadjack, but I'm considering 2nd from NT with holdings like Hxx. It is a sound method to lead as follows:

 

Hxxx

xxxx

xxx

Hxx?

 

It seems 2nd is getting a lot of attention here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer low but play 3rd/5th almost always.

 

If you have already shown 3 card support during the auction, leading low should promise a queen or higher. Lead high with 3 small. Partner already knows the count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you have already shown 3 card support during the auction, leading low should promise a queen or higher. Lead high with 3 small. Partner already knows the count.

 

nigel_k was responding to the OP which explicitly said that the suit hadn't been bid.

 

I'm the same as JLOGIC, I always play 3rd/low (except with gnasher!) and find this normal.

It helps to have good agreements about when you are going to come out with a lead of xxx in the first place, it's not exactly my first choice of lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a sound method to lead as follows:

 

This is standard Polish style. Almost everybody in Poland play it.

My understanding is that this is different from "British 2/4" in a way that we lead small from xx (up to 92).

You also need an agreement about what card you play from xxxx in 2nd round of the suit if you can't afford the highest one (so appearance of lowest/highest not seen tells partner exact count at this point).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is standard Polish style. Almost everybody in Poland play it.

My understanding is that this is different from "British 2/4" in a way that we lead small from xx (up to 92).

You also need an agreement about what card you play from xxxx in 2nd round of the suit if you can't afford the highest one (so appearance of lowest/highest not seen tells partner exact count at this point).

British 2/4 includes a few 3s and 1s for those who don't understand it. A better description would be "we never lead 5th" than 2/4 :)

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is standard Polish style. Almost everybody in Poland play it.

My understanding is that this is different from "British 2/4" in a way that we lead small from xx (up to 92).

You also need an agreement about what card you play from xxxx in 2nd round of the suit if you can't afford the highest one (so appearance of lowest/highest not seen tells partner exact count at this point).

 

Yes, when people said 2/4th I used to get confused then I realized I should just listen to their accent to figure out what they meant.

 

It helps to have good agreements about when you are going to come out with a lead of xxx in the first place, it's not exactly my first choice of lead.

 

Interesting I am generally a very passive leader and often will lead from 3 small. Obv depends if its MP or imps I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Play frequently with 2 partners.

 

One prefers small from 3 small, one prefers middle.

 

However, I think small is best. At least pard is not likely to confuse it for a doubleton.

 

Most of the time leading from 3 small is not a preferred choice. But if the opponents have had a tortured auction and a passive lead seems right, it may be necessary with tenaces in the other suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, when people said 2/4th I used to get confused then I realized I should just listen to their accent to figure out what they meant.

 

 

 

Interesting I am generally a very passive leader and often will lead from 3 small. Obv depends if its MP or imps I guess.

 

My passive leading has gone up a bit recently but I have always thought that strict 3rd/low i.e. including low from xxx didn't fit well with a passive leading strategy. Putting a strong emphasis on count works best when partner has a good idea what your honour holding is up front.

 

Maybe it also works fine if you are a very passive leader; it only goes wrong when partner has no idea if you like to lead from Hxx or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Suppose you decide to lead from xxx vs. a suit contract. This suit has never been bid, ....

 

I would lead LOW ( from odd ) .

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Now you didn't ask about the following, but let's say partner HAS bid, and you have NOT supported:

- - then Lead LOW from odd in his suit ...

 

However, if you HAVE supported:

- - then Lead HIGH w/NO honor ( x x x )

- - or LOW w/an Honor( H x x ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I think small is best. At least pard is not likely to confuse it for a doubleton.

A good demonstration of why the question posed in this thread is in fact slightly silly. A better question may have been "given that it is axiomatic to lead high from a doubleton, what do you lead from three small?"

 

I like to lead the middle card from three small because it fits well with the rest of my preferred leads, which include low from a small doubleton.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...