[rusty]

Can't seem to find this anywhere. Does anyone know if there is a lead table for 3/5 leads?

My questions:

1) Does it only apply to suit contracts, or NT contracts also?

2) Do the leads apply to spot cards only, or with one honour, or non-touching honours? So with KJ73, what would you lead?

If you have 9876, do you lead the 7?

If you have J98732, what card do you lead?

How about Q 10 8 6 4 3 2?

3) Is 3/5 leads best played with some other carding systems? For example, Journalist leads, Cincinnati etc.

Does anyone know of a reference, book or article, that explains this in some detail?

Thanks.

[jdonn]

1) By agreement. In my experience and playing circles, it is usually only against suit contracts. Also the better similar agreement is 3/low (3rd from even, low from odd), essentially meaning from 6 card suits you lead 3rd not 5th.

2) KJ73 = 7
9876 = 9 (sequence, but 8765 I do not consider a sequence. Others may disagree.)
J98732 = 8, some lead 5th best from 5+ but the better agreement is 3rd from any even number, so pard only has to distinguish between 4 and 6 if he knows you are leading from length, rather than 5 and 6.
QT86432 = 2, low from odd. If you lead 5th best from 5+ card holdings partner can't tell if you have 5 6 or 7, here he just has to decide 5 or 7.

3) To my knowledge it makes no difference.

[djehuti]

I play 1/3/5 with my partner against suit and NT(although i prefer 1-2-4 in NT), ill try to describe how we do:

1- We ALLWAYS lead 1-3-5 , and even with KJ73 (NT), at least for now. The reason , i think, is that it helps us better in defence, since we are not world class defending.... yet ( ). This may not be popular, but we try to "stick to it". If we start to lead 4th when our agreement is 5th , we better change to 1-2-4 leads.

2- With KJ10x , Q109x , K109x , ..... 10, 9 , 9 respectivly. Basically, 2 cards above the one we lead, or none. With 9876, we lead the 9.
The other 2 holdings you gave, it depends if one has shown the suit(5+cards) or not. If we haven't, everything is normal. If otherwise we have , then we lead the 3rd spot from a suit with more then 5 cards, playing a low spot next to show more than 5 cards. So, J98732 and Q1086432 we would lead the 8 if we had shown the suit.

3-We also play inv. smith from BOTH in NT. It works very nice for us and, for those who care, we are really very ethical about it.

[rusty]

Thanks all. It's very instructive.

What is meant by 1-3-5 and 1-2-4?

[Walddk]

rusty, on Mar 29 2007, 06:45 AM, said:

What is meant by 1-3-5 and 1-2-4?

Abbreviations used by lazy players (like myself).

1-3-5: First, third, fifth = highest from touching honours, third best from three or four, fifth best from five or more.

1-2-4: First, second, fourth = highest from touching honours, second best from three, four or five small, fourth best from four or more (with an honour).

If you lead 4th, the Rule of 11 applies. If you lead 3rd and 5th, the Rules of 12 and 10 apply. Links:

http://bridgehands.c.../Rule_of_11.htm

http://homepage.mac....ons/Rule12.html

http://homepage.mac....ons/Rule10.html

Roland

[pclayton]

I've never understood why players insist on 3rd / 5th, when 3rd / lo is superior.

If pard leads the 4 (with the 3 and 2 unknown), does he have 5, or 6, or 7?

David Weiss advocates something called "parity leads", which means "low from an odd number" and as "high as possible from an even number". While its tougher to figure pard's exact holding on a high lead, you have instant count. I've seen them in action, and I'd like to ask some of the regulars if they've encountered them.