1eyedjack Posted July 20, 2014 Report Share Posted July 20, 2014 In one of the ACBL Bulletins a couple years, there was an article addressing how often a short ♣ was actually short. As I recall, the article said that it occurred only about 18% of the time. So lacking a far better lead, not leading a ♣ for partner is an anti-percentage play. There is usually additional information available. Indeed, if you find yourself on lead this is certain, as opponents have been bidding, and opener has made at least one more descriptive call, even if it was Pass. I should be interested to know if the ACBL bulletin only addressed the a priori odds in a vacuum, ie at the point of opening, and if so how that would compare with an empirical analysis of hands where the 1C opener ends up defending but not on lead. Not that that statistic would be much more meaningful, as the dynamics change according to the precise auction and opening leader's hand pattern, and no one will have stats of that subset available. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve2005 Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Gib rarely leads a suit you've bid, even if you've shown a 6+ card suit, and those who control it claim it makes good safe leads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts