How far do you trust Bird & Anthias?

[Jinksy]

[hv=pc=n&s=st83h65dt87cat763&d=e&v=e&b=6&a=1np3nppp]133|200[/hv]

 

Pick yer poison.

[foobar]

♠8 for me.

[hrothgar]

♠8 for me.

 

I like short suit leads versus NT with weak hands.

Leading 4th best club on this one

[billw55]

We had another thread very similar to this not long ago. I chose to lead from HHxxx in a minor. Rainer's sim indicated that this was close at IMPs, but that the ♠T83 (yes, exactly the same spots) was a clear winner at matchpoints. Maybe I will start trying the spade in this sort of situation.

[PrecisionL]

♠8 for me.

8♠ for me too, as per foobar and hrothgar ...

[Jinksy]

We had another thread very similar to this not long ago. I chose to lead from HHxxx in a minor. Rainer's sim indicated that this was close at IMPs, but that the ♠T83 (yes, exactly the same spots) was a clear winner at matchpoints. Maybe I will start trying the spade in this sort of situation.

 

This looks quite different to me. With a hard entry in the C suit but not much else by way of defensive tricks there, I'd expect this to come out more strongly in favour of a major lead at IMPs. At MPs I'd guess the single honour is less risky than the KJ holding.

[BillPatch]

If I remember the chapter on leading from hands with 0-4 HCP, Bird-Anthias recommended leading from the shorter major on this auction. So I bet that a heart is best at both IMPs and matchpoints.

[whereagles]

Are you sure? I seem to remember that tripleton was slightly better than doubleton.

In any case that was when you didn't have a 5-card suit headed by the ace. If we had another entry, say the ♦K, I think a club would be the winner. As it is my money's on the spade.

[BillPatch]

Are you sure? I seem to remember that tripleton was slightly better than doubleton.

In any case that was when you didn't have a 5-card suit headed by the ace. If we had another entry, say the ♦K, I think a club would be the winner. As it is my money's on the spade.

In the other chapters, where opening leader had a stronger hand, a tripleton slightly outperformed a doubleton. This chapter the shorter short suit major won, except once in the quiz when a JTX tripleton beat a doubleton.

[mike777]

Does not his book assume double dummy defense on these short suit leads?

 

In any case I will try a small c.

[Jinksy]

In the other chapters, where opening leader had a stronger hand, a tripleton slightly outperformed a doubleton. This chapter the shorter short suit major won, except once in the quiz when a JTX tripleton beat a doubleton.

 

Yeah, the gist seemed to be that the weaker leader's hand is, the shorter the major they should lead. It wasn't exactly conclusive, though.

[P_Marlowe]

Heart.

 

The discussion with the same spade holding, had a longer heart suit.

[billw55]

This looks quite different to me. With a hard entry in the C suit but not much else by way of defensive tricks there, I'd expect this to come out more strongly in favour of a major lead at IMPs. At MPs I'd guess the single honour is less risky than the KJ holding.

This makes logical sense. One point of disagreement, declarer may have an easier time isolating the minor suit by holdups when he has the ace. Here we have it. Low club to partner's queen is now a much bigger problem for declarer.

 

Still, I suspect you may be right. I would like to see if it stands up to a sim. Paging Rainer ...

[ArtK78]

One thing I have learned by playing against Robots on BBO is that they inevitably lead their shorter major on an auction like this (and on many not like this). My experience is that these short major leads are surprisingly effective. So, even though we could conceivably have 5 clubs on the go, I am leading my top heart.

[Jinksy]

This makes logical sense. One point of disagreement, declarer may have an easier time isolating the minor suit by holdups when he has the ace. Here we have it. Low club to partner's queen is now a much bigger problem for declarer.

 

Still, I suspect you may be right. I would like to see if it stands up to a sim. Paging Rainer ...

 

My guess is that both major and ♣ leads will have a higher chance of setting the contract on this hand than their equivalent on the other, but that the increase is greater for the majors, pushing one of them to the top. At MPs I would expect them both to increase again, with a smaller difference, but with major lead still coming out on top.

[Jinksy]

Incidentally, on the actual hand, partner had KQx of Cs and declarer had 10 tricks on top on any other lead.

 

That said, I was dummy with Axxx AQx xxx Jxx, and the sequence had actually been 1N 2♣ / 2♥ 3N. I wasn't sure about Stayman but decided with two bullets and two wide open suits it was worth a go. Since on that auction a ♣ lead stands out a mile, I wondered whether I'd blown the contract.

[whereagles]

On a Stayman auction the club lead seems way more attractive. It would probably be the Bird/Anthias winner, as they identified a minor-suit bias in that case.

[yunling]

My programme tells me to lead C6, and I trust her.

Certainly this is a good 5 count, not 0-4, so you cannot follow the recommendation for weak hands :)

[ArtK78]

Incidentally, on the actual hand, partner had KQx of Cs and declarer had 10 tricks on top on any other lead.

 

That said, I was dummy with Axxx AQx xxx Jxx, and the sequence had actually been 1N 2♣ / 2♥ 3N. I wasn't sure about Stayman but decided with two bullets and two wide open suits it was worth a go. Since on that auction a ♣ lead stands out a mile, I wondered whether I'd blown the contract.

A club lead on this auction is far more attractive than on the auction 1NT - 3NT. That doesn't mean that I will make the club lead, but it is far more attractive.

[gszes]

The club suit does not really have the spots needed to make it safe

and there is also a decent chance that p may find a club shift it my

 

heart 6

 

lead is no good. p has at least 4 hearts and could easily have more and

never had a chance to show them due to the bidding (note this probability

is significantly less in spades). If we are going to try and hit partner

(the owner of the vast majority of our defensive assets) it seems to make

sense to try and hit their longest suit which rates to be hearts in this case.

[rhm]

Does not his book assume double dummy defense on these short suit leads?

 

In any case I will try a small c.

Why do so many believe that passive leads require better defense?

I understand if passive leads at notrumps are shocking for you, changing habits require some time.

I for my part have given up fourth best leads, because I have my doubts whether they help the defense more than declarer.

I simply lead attitude.

So if I lead a high spot card, partner knows I am not interested. If I lead a middle one I don't know what is best, and if I lead lowest I am serious.

Simple and often effective and declarer can not tell whether I led lowest from four (because no switch looked attractive to me) or five or six and I may not lead lowest from 5 or more if a switch in another suit looks attractive.

When I lead high and do not hit partner's suit, which does happen surprisingly often (confirmed by the book mentioned here), declarer will usually win and start establishing his tricks.

So at most 2 candidate suits usually remain to switch to when partner wins a trick.

Is a halfway intelligent partner looking at his hand and dummy and what he knows about declarers hand so likely to misguess which suit he should try next?

Even if partner wins the first trick and needs to switch at trick two, which is obvious most of the time, he has a high chance to get this right.

What is important is that your lead agreements show your interest in the suit led and partner can distinguish an 8 spot from a 2 spot and this is not even taking into account there is a signalling convention called Smith-Peter.

Not so hard for those past the beginner stage.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[BillPatch]

Yeah, the gist seemed to be that the weaker leader's hand is, the shorter the major they should lead. It wasn't exactly conclusive, though.

On p 70 of chapter 4 ,"Leading from a weak hand," Bird & Anthias. Winning Notrump Leads. they stated their conclusion as "From a weak hand it is generally right to lead your shorter major, whether or not it includes an honor." I feel that this is a good precept.

[BillPatch]

Incidentally, on the actual hand, partner had KQx of Cs and declarer had 10 tricks on top on any other lead.

 

That said, I was dummy with Axxx AQx xxx Jxx, and the sequence had actually been 1N 2♣ / 2♥ 3N. I wasn't sure about Stayman but decided with two bullets and two wide open suits it was worth a go. Since on that auction a ♣ lead stands out a mile, I wondered whether I'd blown the contract.

If I recall with this distribution you have about a 34% shot of finding a spade fit, an improvement unless partner is 4=3=3=3. On the other 66% of hands you will be in 3 NT and declarer can conceive that the minors might be weak and worthy of a lead. According to the poll 65% lead a major if you bypass Stayman so there is a high probability you blew the contract.

[Jinksy]

It does look that way <_< (though I'd bet against BBO randoms, the C lead would be way more popular)

[Jinksy]

On p 70 of chapter 4 ,"Leading from a weak hand," Bird & Anthias. Winning Notrump Leads. they stated their conclusion as "From a weak hand it is generally right to lead your shorter major, whether or not it includes an honor." I feel that this is a good precept.

 

I've got the book upstairs, so I'll have a look now, but my memory is that this is an oversimplification of their results, which sometimes favour the 3, sometimes the 2 (occasionally the 1). I don't think they convincingly establish a clear rule, but I certainly came away with the impression that with a solid entry, a longer-short-suit lead looks better.