Opening Lead Transparency

[jerdonald]

BBO,

My partner and I have been using opening leads such as BOSTON (Bottom

Of Something Top Of Nothing), partners suit, touching honors, A from AK,

coded 9s & 10s against no trump, and most of the "standard leads".

 

We play against the same opponents most of the time and they know us

all too well.

 

We would like to adopt a different system that, even when the opponents

ask us to we explain it, doesn't make the lead so transparent to

declarer.

 

Any suggestions?

 

Thanks,

JerryD

[johnu]

My partner and I have been using opening leads such as BOSTON (Bottom Of Something Top Of Nothing)

AKA Low from interest leads, or attitude leads

 

We play against the same opponents most of the time and they know us all too well.

 

We would like to adopt a different system that, even when the opponents ask us to we explain it, doesn't make the lead so transparent to declarer.

 

Any suggestions?

What exactly are you asking? Do you want to deceive declarer about what your leads mean?

[smerriman]

What exactly are you asking? Do you want to deceive declarer about what your leads mean?

I think he means he thinks the opps are benefitting more from the lead than his partner.

 

But signals that only partner can only decipher are often illegal, and I think giving clear information to partner is more important than trying to hide it from the opps.

[jerdonald]

BBO,

Not looking to deceive declarer or anything illegal just a lead system that

don't give away too much.

 

Jerry

[johnu]

BBO,

Not looking to deceive declarer or anything illegal just a lead system that

don't give away too much.

 

Jerry

If you want partner to have an idea how to defend the hand, you have to make leads that are somewhat well defined. The one thing you could drop is coded 9's and 10's (honestly,they don't really come up often enough to worry about) which a lot of players hate because they think it gives away too much to declarer and aren't worried about partner knowing.

 

If you want to be really tricky, lead somewhat randomly like GIB. Sorry I can't describe how GIB leads because I can't claim to know. But partner will be in the dark too.

[apollo1201]

Sorry I can't describe how GIB leads because I can't claim to know. But partner will be in the dark too.

🤣🤣

It is not so random actually. Against NT:

- don’t lead partner’s suit

- look instead for the worthless doubleton or tripleton that corresponds to dummy’s, or, even better, declarer’s 5-cd suit (partner when in hand is more likely to return it than switch if it is not on the table)

- otherwise offside singleton honors that declarer was to finesse partner for

 

Against suit contracts, apply the same principles, keeping in mind the trump singleton too.

[pescetom]

Not looking to deceive declarer or anything illegal just a lead system that

don't give away too much.

 

But that's the Catch-22 of bridge - you must disclose your agreements to opponents, so you give away the same to opponents as you do to partner.

In particular, you're not allowed to encrypt signals and some RAs also limit the kind of signals you can make in specific circumstances.

[johnu]

Against suit contracts, apply the same principles, keeping in mind the trump singleton too.

For GIB, a singleton trump king when declarer has shown length in the suit and overall HCP strength is the classic lead.

[Vampyr]

You could try attitude leads, where partner’s holding may clarify what your attitude is. The same goes for declarer of course, but since you will not be playing declarer’s suit, partner rates to have more of them.

 

Against suit contracts, you could also lead 3rd and low, which again may be easier for partner to interpret, for the same reason as above.

 

I assume that the person who suggested random leads was joking for the purpose of taking a well-deserved poke at GIB. Do not do this. Patterns will emerge, and you may not be fully conscious of them yourselves, so you will not be able to adequately disclose your methods. Of course you could shuffle your cards and lead whichever card lands on top.

 

I guess there are other things you could do involving hand parity or the values of spot cards. The latter is unlikely to provide information to anyone.