Please Settle An Argument

[Trump Echo]

The ops bid uncontested to 6 Spades. All four suits had been bid.

 

I hold:

 

S 8

H K10632

D K432

C K72

 

I am sitting as South.

 

Edit:

 

West opened from first seat and the bidding went:

 

1D - 2S

3H - 4C

4S - 4NT

5H - 5NT

6D - 6S

 

I could have asked about the 2S but I didn't. Turns out East had only 12 hcps but long Spades to the AJ10xxx.

 

What's my opening Lead?

 

Thank-you

[masse24]

♠8

[whereagles]

spade eight

[rmnka447]

Is there anything you can glean from the auction? Which hand is the big hand or are they both equal? Is there a likely running side suit where losers can be pitched? Are they possibly planning on a crossruff? Who has what controls?

 

If the auction indicates RHO has the big hand, the hand will be played on a crossruff, or the auction yields no info at all, 8 ♠. With the big hand to your right, let declarer do the work to make the contract by making a passive lead. A trump lead versus a crossruff often leaves declarer a ruff short.

 

If LHO has a big hand or shows a strong side suit (likely via 1 ♠- 2 ♣ or apparent 2 suited fits), then maybe you should consider an attacking lead of a low ♦ or a low ♥. With LHO holding the big hand, it's more likely that any required finesses will work.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

The Spade

[wanoff]

Anything could be right.

♥6

[helene_t]

At first I thought a club lead would be the worst lead but it may not be so silly - even if I am leading towards declarer's AQx or similar, which seems quite likely, it probably doesn't cost as declarer can pitch clubs on dummy's red suits anyway. OTOH a red suit lead could be costly if declarer has the queen and partner the jack. Finally, a trump lead could be costly if partner has Qxx or Jxxx.

 

So anything could be wrong. With so many points it is probably not worthwhile trying to find partner's queen since he probably doesn't have any. Better to try to find the safest lead. But it is not clear what that is.

[Cyberyeti]

At first I thought a club lead would be the worst lead but it may not be so silly - even if I am leading towards declarer's AQx or similar, which seems quite likely, it probably doesn't cost as declarer can pitch clubs on dummy's red suits anyway. OTOH a red suit lead could be costly if declarer has the queen and partner the jack. Finally, a trump lead could be costly if partner has Qxx or Jxxx.

 

So anything could be wrong. With so many points it is probably not worthwhile trying to find partner's queen since he probably doesn't have any. Better to try to find the safest lead. But it is not clear what that is.

 

If I'm leading a club, I'm leading the K, stiff Q might appear on the deck opposite declarer's Ax.., or declarer might have AJ10, but I only expect dummy to have one club.

 

Spade could easily pick up partner's Jxxx although could be right anyway.

 

Question to ask, does 3♥ over 2♠ show extras ?

 

2♦ comes into the mix also, it's possible this may look like a singleton to declarer, so when dummy decks with AQJxx(x) he may go elsewhere for tricks. I'd reject it because it's very likely anywhere else he goes will work (heart finesse, ruffing club finesse), although you might make K♦ and a trump.

[billw55]

The passive ♠8 is tempting, but this feels like a hand where I need a cashing trick when I get in. LHO seems short in clubs, so no tricks there. I will try a ♥ through dummy, declarer may hop up the ace, not wanting to risk a finesse at trick 1.

[Winstonm]

I lead my singleton heart 2.

[mikeh]

I lead my singleton heart 2.

while faking a shortness lead away from a king is a common and often successful gambit, one shouldn't generally lead the 2 if one can help it, since it is consistent with a length lead, so one usually leads a high spot...either the 6 or the 10. However, this ploy rarely works when declarer rates to be short and opener hasn't shown real length. If I were faking a singleton lead, it would be in diamonds, since opener's diamonds will be as long as or longer than his hearts.

 

At the table, I'd know if the auction promised they held the spade Q. The OP info about declarer's suit makes it clear that they don't play keycard, but at the same time, opener shouldn't hold Kxx in trump, which is the only holding on which our spade lead picks off partner's trumps. I mean, who doesn't raise spades immediately with that?

 

Hint to the OP: don't tell us anything about the opposing hands if you want an unbiased answer. I already 'know' with some certainty that I can lead a trump safely. Absent that knowledge, I'd be afraid of picking off Jxxx in partner's hand on a layout such as xx opposite AKQ10xx, a holding consistent with the auction.

 

As best as I can rationalize, pretending I don't know declarer's hand, I proceed more or less by elimination. I rule out a club. It could work, as could just about anything, but the auction suggests no club values in dummy and so too much risk of AQ in declarer. Meanwhile, my reds are long and strong enough that declarer may not be able to get enough pitches and may need the losing club hook. Of course, partner may hold the Q:)

 

I won't lead a trump. Leading stiff trumps when partner could have a useful holding is generally very poor in my experience

 

So it comes down to a red card.

 

I am leading a heart: the 6. Not to fake shortness but to fake passivity. Either red suit may blow a trick but a diamond is more likely to blow a trick and a tempo.

 

But this is a crapshoot, absent the hint, which makes a trump far more attractive than it would be in real life. (I am not suggesting the spade leaders were influenced by the hint, btw....they may not have drawn the same inferences as I did)

[Fluffy]

I lead a low club, my hopes are that declarer misses ♣Q or ♣J and has a key red ace where my king scores. Impossible since you said declarer had 12 HCP and ♠AJ, but that's what I would lead.

[Trump Echo]

I tried to reason with my partner. I explained that no lead was a good lead, and the best I could do was make a lead that was the least bad as possible. But she was adamant that my lead was a blatant error and threatened to break off the partnership (for the 99th time) if I didn't agree.

 

I still didn't agree. But I agreed to make a different lead in similar circumstances the next time, to appease her. This wasn't good enough. She insisted I agree with her. She insisted my lead cost us a trick.

 

I'll post my lead and all the gory details tomorrow. :D

[kenberg]

I tried to reason with my partner. I explained that no lead was a good lead, and the best I could do was make a lead that was the least bad as possible. But she was adamant that my lead was a blatant error and threatened to break off the partnership (for the 99th time) if I didn't agree.

 

I still didn't agree. But I agreed to make a different lead in similar circumstances the next time, to appease her. This wasn't good enough. She insisted I agree with her. She insisted my lead cost us a trick.

 

I'll post my lead and all the gory details tomorrow. :D

 

I would definitely encourage, in fact I would insist on it, her to follow through on breaking up the partnership. Even if I thought that the correct lead was obvious (I don't) I would accept that you don't.

[eagles123]

lol found the hand on bbo hand records

 

She insisted my lead cost us a trick.

 

 

 

lol i think its time to find a new partner :)

 

 

[whereagles]

she was adamant that my lead was a blatant error

 

Anyone that claims that it is "obvious" to lead (or not to lead) a particular card with this hand is a results merchant.

 

Ok, leading one of the kings seems bad, but other than that you get the point.

 

Incidently, if you're leading from a king, better lead from the shortest one. You might still take a trick with that king later. The longer the suit, the less likely it is you can make it later.

[Trump Echo]

I could not discern the location of any aces or queens or tenaces, so I figured each of my Kings had about an even chance of winning a trick. So as it stands holding 3 Kings, I have about an even chance of winning two tricks - unless I lead away from a King. I don't know what my partner holds in trumps, but I do know what I hold. So I led a trump.

 

[hv=bbo=y&lin=pn|x,x,x,x|st||md|1S8H236TKD234KC27K%2CS9KH459AD678JAC8J%2CS346QH78JQD5TC49Q%2C|rh||ah|Board%2011|sv|o|mb|p|mb|1D|mb|p|mb|2S|mb|p|mb|3H|mb|p|mb|4C|mb|p|mb|4S|mb|p|mb|4N|mb|p|mb|5H|mb|p|mb|5N|mb|p|mb|6D|mb|p|mb|6S|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|S8|pc|S9|pc|SQ|pc|SA|pc|S2|pc|C7|pc|SK|pc|S3|pc|C8|pc|C4|pc|CA|pc|C2|pc|SJ|pc|H2|pc|H4|pc|S4|pc|ST|pc|H3|pc|H5|pc|S6|pc|DQ|pc|D2|pc|D6|pc|D5|pc|D9|pc|D3|pc|DJ|pc|DT|pc|DA|pc|H7|pc|C3|pc|D4|pc|D8|pc|C9|pc|C5|pc|DK|pc|CK|pc|CJ|pc|CQ|pc|C6|pc|H6|mc|11|]400|300[/hv]

 

 

Thanks for your help! :D

Edited July 24, 2014 by diana_eva
Included Antrax's diagram here, deleted Antrax's post

[Zelandakh]

It looks to me like a partnership discussion on when not to play third hand high might be more beneficial than one about opening leads.

[Antrax]

You'll note the mistake is your partner's. He should've played low to trick 1, thus eventually scoring the trump Q.

[helene_t]

snp, Zel and Antrax were before me.

 

Btw I had a very similar discussion with a beginner once at a club in Amsterdam. She was very upset that her partner finissed her trump queen on the opening lead as she thought p should have known that dummy was void so declarer wouldn't be able to take the finesse by herself. I tried to explain to her that holding Qxxx of trump and dummy being void and declarer having shown great length in the suit, she should have played low. She insisted that "3rd hand plays high". It took me a long an frustrating discussion before I finally realized that she had interpretted the "3rd hand high" lesson from her teacher as a bridge law, i.e. that playing low in third seat would have been a revoke.

[billw55]

She insisted my lead cost us a trick.

LOL

 

Maybe this should go in the "clueless comments" thread.

 

Also, you are supposed to remove player names before posting the hand record. An admin may scold you http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

[Trump Echo]

LOL

 

Maybe this should go in the "clueless comments" thread.

 

Also, you are supposed to remove player names before posting the hand record. An admin may scold you http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/public/style_emoticons/default/wink.gif

 

Oh ok. Thanks

[kenberg]

A general point:

 

There are two kinds of discussions. The far more useful kind involves partnership understandings."Back at trick 6, I took your discard of the heart deuce as suit preference rather than attitude or count, is that how you intended it?" The second, usually far less useful, type is where one player instructs the other in how to play. I often go over a hand later to see if a bad result was due to bad luck, good play by an opponent, or a dumb move by me. I am usually open to a thoughtful comment from my partner, or even from an opponent, but players should tread carefully here.

 

This case at hand is common. I think that more often than not the player who makes the most noise and the player who has made the error are one and the same. For many people it would be very useful if they restrained from bringing up an error by partner until they have discovered and acknowledged at least five errors of their own. I make a lot of errors. Someone who says that s/he does not is either a world champion or oblivious. And really, my guess is that most world champions would acknowledge making more than a few errors. Probably their idea of "error" is a good deal more sophisticated than yours or mine.

[helene_t]

I think that more often than not the player who makes the most noise and the player who has made the error are one and the same.

This is my observation also. In Dutch it is known as the Howler Monkey convention but I am not sure what the underlying theory is. Maybe it is so that if someone subconsciously "knows" to be the culprit, he reacts by attacking partner in order to preempt himself from getting the blame. Or maybe it's just that players who search for their partners' mistakes instead of their own don't progress to the level where they will make fewer mistakes. (The Fluffy quote, which a few people have in their signature, comes to mind).

[whereagles]

she had interpretted the "3rd hand high" lesson from her teacher as a bridge law, i.e. that playing low in third seat would have been a revoke.

 

well, that's first time I heard of such a thing.. lol