Appalling Leads Against NT

[SixOfWands]

Most good players will lead a good five card suit against NT contracts given no other information. When this suit holds a sequence, broken sequence or internal sequence it's pretty much mandatory. So why then does GIB lead short or poor suits against NT contracts? With a semi-solid sequence as in this example below it's unfathomably poor play.

 

Please fix this.

 

This Hand is unbelievable.

[steve2005]

Gib likes to make "safe" leads. It does so based on a suggestion from a lead book whose title I can't remember.

There are many worse examples than this. For example if partner has opened a preempt leader still might not lead that suit even with 3+ card support. Or you side can overcall and raise a suit and leader still may not lead that suit. If you look at previous thread you will find this complaint many times.

 

Now on this hand double dummy any lead except A♠has same result and holds declarer to 9 tricks. But bridge isn't double dummy and unless you lead Q♠ partner won't know which suit to lead when they are in with A♣.

 

Also much of defensive decisions are made based on simulation of hands and it is difficult for BBO to change this part of Gib.

[johnu]

Gib likes to make "safe" leads. It does so based on a suggestion from a lead book whose title I can't remember.

 

Are you sure? I thought GIB always does a simulation in determining the opening lead. If GIB makes "safe" opening leads, it's because it has done the same type of simulations that the lead book would have done. The book I am thinking of was also published well after GIB was programmed.

 

I am usually personally insulted when GIB makes a "normal" lead from longest or strongest or partner's suit and beats a poor contract. Frequently the only reason I bid that high was because I was counting on GIB misdefending.