Aversion against trump leads?

[helene_t]

In the post-mortems after the club nights, a recurrent theme is "it only goes down on a trump lead".

 

In my perception, club players don't lead trumps enough.

 

Some are quite explicit about it. I have on a few occasions seen profiles on BBO or StepBridge saying "don't lead trump please". Sometimes both partner and declarer have shown surprise when I lead a trump.

 

Is it true that club players don't lead trump as often as they should, or is it just my biased perception?

 

If it is true, what could explain it? Maybe that club-level declarers also tend to draw trumps prematurely, so that even when a trump lead is technically necessary it may not be necessary in practice?

[bluenikki]

In the post-mortems after the club nights, a recurrent theme is "it only goes down on a trump lead".

 

In my perception, club players don't lead trumps enough.

 

Some are quite explicit about it. I have on a few occasions seen profiles on BBO or StepBridge saying "don't lead trump please". Sometimes both partner and declarer have shown surprise when I lead a trump.

 

Is it true that club layers don't lead trump as often as they should, or is it just my biased perception?

 

If it is true, what could explain it? Maybe that club-level declarers also tend to draw trumps prematurely, so that even when a trump lead is technically necessary it may not be necessary in practice?

 

I don't know the answer to your questions.

 

But I do notice that the old guideline has been forgotten: When the opponents have used a distributional gadget, strain to lead trumps. I have always darkly suspected this is because authorities like to use distributional gadgets themselves, so they want to keep the defense secret.

 

Carl

[pilowsky]

Bird and Anthias have some specific advice including:

1. When your side suits contain honours.
2. When they struggle to find a fit.
3. When they reach 4M after a Stayman sequence and your side suits all have honours.
4. But not when they use a gadget to reach a sound game contract.

I have the impression that GIB really likes to lead a singleton trump if the distribution looks like 4441.

Which fits with 3. above.

Most of the time the simulations oppose a trump lead.

 

Is the reason to try to get the play to come back to your hand if declarer is likely to be much stronger than dummy?

 

I have encountered players - ranging from strong GM level to weaker than me (yes I know - HTB) - that seem to do it very commonly.

 

[DavidKok]

For what it is worth, I think people around me lead trumps too often, as opposed to not often enough. There are auctions or hands on which a trump lead is indicated though. Just yesterday I failed to make a trump lead against 3♥X from my KJx, which held it to 1 off (when a trump lead would have been 2 off). But on balance I think my opponents lead trumps more often than is wise.

[paulg]

My sense is the same as DavidKok, namely that the club players lead trumps too often, mainly because this is the default when they do not have a lead that looks ultra-safe.

 

I think stronger players all go through a phase when they think they are the worst leader on the planet: this is the time when it is worth reading a book on leads just to build your confidence up.

 

But leading is difficult: you have the minimum of information and it is often a critical moment in the game. It's so much easier with the hand records afterwards!

[AL78]

Hard to say without analysing boards where they could have done better in defence and counting the number of times a trump lead would have worked better. I probably don't lead trumps enough, one time I will lead one is if opps have settled in opener's second suit and I hold honors in opener's first suit. The only way they are going to get their losers in that suit away is by ruffing them in dummy. Also if they have bid two suits and settled in a third, that could indicate a cross-ruff situation, leading trumps at every opportunity will cut down the ruffing tricks.

[bluenikki]

Bird and Anthias have some specific advice including:

1. When your side suits contain honours.
2. When they struggle to find a fit.
3. When they reach 4M after a Stayman sequence and your side suits all have honours.
4. But not when they use a gadget to reach a sound game contract.

 

A distributional gadget urges a trump lead when the auction ends in a partscore.

 

1♣ - (2♣) - P - (2♥/♠) - all pass.

 

Declarer will often be 3-2 in the majors and will need the ruff to set up dummy's side suit.

[pilowsky]

A distributional gadget urges a trump lead when the auction ends in a partscore.

 

1♣ - (2♣) - P - (2♥/♠) - all pass.

 

Declarer will often be 3-2 in the majors and will need the ruff to set up dummy's side suit.

 

This example is what I summarised as "struggle to find a fit" - Bird and Anthias write: "when responder opts to stop in the openers second suit".

I imagine this is quite common playing forcing 1NT in 2/1 e.g. 1♣ - 1NT - 2♦ - Px3

[LBengtsson]

Interesting forum question. Although in defense you sometimes do not know what trump fit declarer and partner have reached, it must make a difference if they are playing in a part score, game or slam contract, and the likely variations of fits for each.

 

I guess - and this is a total guess - most part scores are played in a 4-3, 5-2, fit, whereas most games and slams are played in a 4-4, 5-3 or 6-2 fit. There's a bridge saying: "If in doubt lead a trump" That's crazy! As other forum commentators have said you have to look at your own hand and the bidding before making a lead.

 

And obviously, it also depends on what trumps are in your hand. As DavidKok indicates, leading a trump from KJx is not an easy lead to find but it might be the only lead that sets the contract or gains an extra defensive trick.

 

I have a few notes/books on opening leads, but everyone quotes Bird/Anthias so that will be the next bridge book that I need to buy.

[pilowsky]

And obviously, it also depends on what trumps are in your hand. As DavidKok indicates, leading a trump from KJx is not an easy lead to find but it might be the only lead that sets the contract or gains an extra defensive trick.

 

[hv=lin=st||pn|pilowsky,~Mwest,~Mnorth,~Meast|md|4SKJ9632H986DATCKJ,SAT7HAJ3DKQ92C643,SQH72D87643CQT982,S854HKQT54DJ5CA75|sv|e|rh||ah|Board%206|mb|P|mb|1S|an|Major%20suit%20opening%20--%205+%20!S;%2011-21%20HCP;%2012-22%20total%20points|mb|P|mb|P|mb|P|pc|DK|pc|D3|pc|D5|pc|DA|pc|CK|pc|C3|pc|C2|pc|C5|pc|CJ|pc|C6|pc|CQ|pc|CA|pc|DJ|pc|DT|pc|D2|pc|D4|pc|HK|pc|H6|pc|H3|pc|H2|pc|HQ|pc|H8|pc|HJ|pc|H7|pc|S4|pc|S2|pc|SA|pc|SQ|pc|HA|pc|C8|pc|H4|pc|H9|pc|DQ|pc|D6|pc|S8|pc|S9|pc|SK|pc|ST|pc|D7|pc|S5|pc|SJ|pc|S7|pc|D8|pc|C7|mc|7|]300|300| How about from ATx?[/hv]

[pescetom]

How about from ATx?

 

I think EW have bigger problems to discuss :)

[mikeh]

Interesting forum question. Although in defense you sometimes do not know what trump fit declarer and partner have reached, it must make a difference if they are playing in a part score, game or slam contract, and the likely variations of fits for each.

 

I guess - and this is a total guess - most part scores are played in a 4-3, 5-2, fit, whereas most games and slams are played in a 4-4, 5-3 or 6-2 fit. There's a bridge saying: "If in doubt lead a trump" That's crazy! As other forum commentators have said you have to look at your own hand and the bidding before making a lead.

 

And obviously, it also depends on what trumps are in your hand. As DavidKok indicates, leading a trump from KJx is not an easy lead to find but it might be the only lead that sets the contract or gains an extra defensive trick.

 

I have a few notes/books on opening leads, but everyone quotes Bird/Anthias so that will be the next bridge book that I need to buy.

Just be sure to consider whether they have underestimated the influence of double dummy analysis. While I think the books, on notrump and suit leads, are very good, I think the authors grossly underestimate or fail to acknowledge how distorted the analysis is due to being double dummy.

 

Here’s probably the worst issue: they like leads of Aces. Why? Because once they see dummy, having held the lead, they unerringly made the best switch….and their partner never goes wrong.

 

What do you expect partner to do in your partnership on the lead of a side Ace, say after 1S 2S 4S?

 

Is he giving count, since you lead Ace from AK, or is he giving attitude? If you switch, will he later play your for the K? Maybe you have AKJ and fear declarer has Qxx.

 

And so on.

 

None of that matters to B and A. Signals are meaningless: they literally don’t happen or, if they do, the computer ignores them. In the real world, defenders communicate by signals, and their honour leads have fixed meanings and, depending on the auction and dummy, call for specific information which is then utilized by the opening leader. None of that matters in the books.

 

They only give a few examples of hands, but my opinion is that if I led unsupported Aces as frequently as they suggest, my partner would go nuts…never knowing what I held and thus never helping me with his carding….which would be ok if only I defended double dummy😀

[Stephen Tu]

Just be sure to consider whether they have underestimated the influence of double dummy analysis. While I think the books, on notrump and suit leads, are very good, I think the authors grossly underestimate or fail to acknowledge how distorted the analysis is due to being double dummy.

 

Here's probably the worst issue: they like leads of Aces. Why? Because once they see dummy, having held the lead, they unerringly made the best switch….and their partner never goes wrong.

 

What do you expect partner to do in your partnership on the lead of a side Ace, say after 1S 2S 4S?

 

I think this objection is overstated. Surely if your partnership is going to experiment with emulating DD sim leads and lead bare aces substantially more often, I would assume you'd switch to Rusinow or the old fashioned K from AKx so you'd get an accurate signal more often when leading ace denying the K, and partner won't play you for the K in subsequent defense.

 

Also, to me the main human objection against leading aces is that this captures air, and generates say two tricks when declarer has Kxx vs Qxx or the like, not the "always finding right switch" thing. But the DD sims favoring the ace lead must mean that the ace blowing a trick outright effect isn't that enormous, at least in comparison to frequency of other leads also blowing a trick outright. So in practice you won't find the right switch later as well as double dummy. But surely you do better after looking at dummy and partner's signal, than you do on opening lead! So if DD says leading the bare ace is best on average on a holding and auction, I'd tend to believe it. You won't do as well as the computer at trick 2, but I think you are likely to do better with ace then dealing with trick 2 with extra info than choosing some second choice lead in another suit with less info.

 

To me there is more objection to other combos where declarer will always make the right guess, like they tend to like honor from KQxx vs NT, whereas declarer with J9x vs Axx will guess wrong in real life while always guess right DD, and the effect of this kind of thing is hard to quantify and measure.

[bluenikki]

Just be sure to consider whether they have underestimated the influence of double dummy analysis. While I think the books, on notrump and suit leads, are very good, I think the authors grossly underestimate or fail to acknowledge how distorted the analysis is due to being double dummy.

 

Here’s probably the worst issue: they like leads of Aces. Why? Because once they see dummy, having held the lead, they unerringly made the best switch….and their partner never goes wrong.

 

What do you expect partner to do in your partnership on the lead of a side Ace, say after 1S 2S 4S?

 

Is he giving count, since you lead Ace from AK, or is he giving attitude? If you switch, will he later play your for the K? Maybe you have AKJ and fear declarer has Qxx.

 

And so on.

 

None of that matters to B and A. Signals are meaningless: they literally don’t happen or, if they do, the computer ignores them. In the real world, defenders communicate by signals, and their honour leads have fixed meanings and, depending on the auction and dummy, call for specific information which is then utilized by the opening leader. None of that matters in the books.

 

They only give a few examples of hands, but my opinion is that if I led unsupported Aces as frequently as they suggest, my partner would go nuts…never knowing what I held and thus never helping me with his carding….which would be ok if only I defended double dummy

 

When your partner has not bid a suit, the opponents have bid three suits, and you hold the empty ace of the fourth, what are you to do? If the strong hand seems to be on your left, underleading is attractive; but I lack the courage usually.

 

Likewise, a doubleton lead is awful. But if that's the suit you need to lead ... Online play helps here: you can actually hold your nose.

 

Carl

[pilowsky]

Bird and Anthias do not recommend leading Aces in 1S-...-4S auctions.

It comes last on their list of possibilities where it is described as "not such a bad lead as people think".

Hardly a ringing endorsement.

In order:

Singletons

Top of doubletons

Passive leads from xxx or xxxx

Then comes trump leads if desperate and only then do we see the unsupported Ace from Axx or Axxx.

 

Where it seems to succeed is if the A is a singleton or (the often derided) Ax.

The same is true for leading into a part score.

[nige1]

In the post-mortems after the club nights, a recurrent theme is "it only goes down on a trump lead".In my perceptdfion, club players don't lead trumps enough. Some are quite explicit about it. I have on a few occasions seen profiles on BBO or StepBridge saying "don't lead trump please". Sometimes both partner and declarer have shown surprise when I lead a trump.Is it true that club players don't lead trump as often as they should, or is it just my biased perception?If it is true, what could explain it? Maybe that club-level declarers also tend to draw trumps prematurely, so that even when a trump lead is technically necessary it may not be necessary in practice?

For what it is worth, I think people around me lead trumps too often, as opposed to not often enough. There are auctions or hands on which a trump lead is indicated though. Just yesterday I failed to make a trump lead against 3♥X from my KJx, which held it to 1 off (when a trump lead would have been 2 off). But on balance I think my opponents lead trumps more often than is wise.

• John Mclaren stigmatised a trump as "the idiot's lead". IMO ...
• A trump lead can be an attempt to avoid thought -- and blame
• Obvioulsy, you should base a defensive plan on an assessment of likely combined assets.
• Often, an attacking lead imparts information, useful for partnership co-operation.
• Antheas and Bird seem to be right, however, that players tend to be over-aggressive.
• Another problem is that when partner is Gib, it switches, even when returning your aggressive lead would work.

[DavidKok]

When I read the Bird & Anthias books I did not get the impression that they recommend passive leads, but rather that they prefer a passive side suit to a passive trump lead.

[pilowsky]

From the conclusions about leading against (a one suit auction) to 4S

• Against one-suit auctions ... it is often better to lead passively from xxx or xxxx rather than from a suit headed by one or two honours.
• Consider leading a trump only when the side-suit leads are unattractive. (see above).

[bluenikki]

In the post-mortems after the club nights, a recurrent theme is "it only goes down on a trump lead".

 

In my perception, club players don't lead trumps enough.

 

Some are quite explicit about it. I have on a few occasions seen profiles on BBO or StepBridge saying "don't lead trump please". Sometimes both partner and declarer have shown surprise when I lead a trump.

 

Is it true that club players don't lead trump as often as they should, or is it just my biased perception?

 

If it is true, what could explain it? Maybe that club-level declarers also tend to draw trumps prematurely, so that even when a trump lead is technically necessary it may not be necessary in practice?

This is the beginning of the chapter "Failure to Lead Trumps" of Kelsey's "Improve Your Bridge."

 

"Of all the expensive errors that are made in defence the reluctance to lead trumps at any time is one of the most widespread. However, this is a bad habit that is easily overcome once the basic logic of the trump lead has been grasped.

 

"The subject of opening leads is a thorny one, and many players will hold that the failure to find a critical trump lead should be classed as a ’wrong view’ rather than error. I disagree. The bidding will almost invariable give sufficient indication, and I believe that the failure to find a trump lead on the proper occasion is normally a clear-cut and demonstrable mistake."

[mikestar13]

When playing with a beginner or a novice who is still tone deaf to inferences from the enemy auction, never lead trumps is a good rule for them. A trump lead will lose more often than it wins averaged over all auctions. It a poor rule for decent intermediates or better.