[kenrexford]

♠Q54 ♥AQ82 ♦J72 ♣Q32

RHO opens, with the following bidding:

1♦-P(you)-1♠-P-
2♣-P-3♣-P-
3NT-P-P-P

Your lead?

I made a lead face down, and then realized that the card face-down on the table was the absolute wrong card, or at least absolutely not the card that I wanted to be on the table. I felt that I had to lead that (is that right?) and tabled the card. The option I wanted to switch to would have been the best lead in practice. I'm wondering if it is the obvious lead (careless on my part) or not so obvious (occasionally bright but often too late). LOL

Forgot to mention this, but the scoring is MP, which alway might make a difference.

[pclayton]

Low spade feels right, but the Q could work better.

[jdonn]

The so called "expert" lead is the spade queen. On the other hand, one time I played with Marshall and he made that lead, dummy had JTxxx and just one entry and declarer had AK tight!

[foo]

1= If the lead has not been Faced, you are legally allowed to change it.

2= Give Them 25+ HCP and a ♣ fit, and your 11 HCP implies that pd has 4- HCP.
pd is broke or nigh unto broke.
If this contract is going down, you are most likely going to have to provide all the power tricks and hope you can figure out what Our long suit is.

On this auction, ♠'s doesn't rate to be it.

It may not work out, but all pd needs for a ♥ lead to be good is Jxx or JTx, which is well within their HCP expectation.

I will boringly lead 4th down from my longest and strongest; which also happens to be the unbid suit.

[awm]

I like small spade. It avoids the risk mentioned by Josh.

The spade queen would be good if we need to run partner's spades and I can't get in again, or if declarer has singleton jack. But declarer could just as easily have singleton king or ace. And I have a clear heart entry, and would be happy to see partner win the lead and switch to hearts.

[jdonn]

foo, on Jun 26 2007, 12:35 AM, said:

1= If the lead has not been Faced, you are legally allowed to change it.

False (in the ACBL)

http://web2.acbl.org/laws/play.htm

"LAW 41 COMMENCEMENT OF PLAY

A. Face-down Opening Lead

After a bid, double or redouble has been followed by three passes in rotation, the defender on presumed declarer's left makes the opening lead face down. The face-down lead may be withdrawn only upon instruction of the Director after an irregularity (see Law 47E2); the withdrawn card must be returned to the defender's hand."

The face-down lead may be withdrawn ONLY upon instruction of the director after an irregularity (which is exactly what 47E2 goes on to say). So you're stuck with what you chose. Of course things are different if you accidentally dropped a card face down since then you never really led it, but this instance sounds like Ken had a brain fart (I had a few myself tonight). In short, he can't change it.

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Jun 26 2007, 09:04 AM, said:

foo, on Jun 26 2007, 12:35 AM, said:

1= If the lead has not been Faced, you are legally allowed to change it.

False (in the ACBL)

http://web2.acbl.org/laws/play.htm

"LAW 41 COMMENCEMENT OF PLAY

A. Face-down Opening Lead

After a bid, double or redouble has been followed by three passes in rotation, the defender on presumed declarer's left makes the opening lead face down. The face-down lead may be withdrawn only upon instruction of the Director after an irregularity (see Law 47E2); the withdrawn card must be returned to the defender's hand."

The face-down lead may be withdrawn ONLY upon instruction of the director after an irregularity (which is exactly what 47E2 goes on to say). So you're stuck with what you chose. Of course things are different if you accidentally dropped a card face down since then you never really led it, but this instance sounds like Ken had a brain fart (I had a few myself tonight). In short, he can't change it.

Right Josh. And that applies all over the world.

[skjaeran]

I think it's very a very remote chance to lead the ♠Q. I think it's better to play for partner to have five hearts, opps not to have nine fast tricks. I'll lead the ♥A. Then I still have possibility to switch to the ♠Q if that seems right.

[kenrexford]

One bite so far, but for a limited reason. Comments follows (hidden):

Spoiler

I also thought that a mundane fourth-best heart was probably right. After I tabled the deuce of hearts, I then thought that I should have selected the heart Ace, just in case RHO happened to have stiff King, not implausible, or jummy had stiff Jack, Jack doubleton, or something like that.

After the lead, me muttering to myself before dummy was exposed (some consolation), dummy tabled J10 tight in hearts. Partner's 9xxx would have fit well had the defense been heart Ace, heart Queen.

[cherdano]

(I don't see the point of discussing this in hidden text.)
♥A to cater for singleton K?? If you think RHO would bid 3N with a singleton ♥K on this auction you should have told us up-front that he is crazy (or that we are crazy, making crazy assumptions about declarer).

Anyway, at MPs I would definitely not lead a heart, just go for the normal (low) spade. ♠Q could be right though, not only in case declarer has stiff J, but also some layouts with stiff T or 9.

[kenrexford]

Singleton King is one possible reason, but the more likely is stiff Jack or Jx/J10 opposite Kxx, not to mention the switch possibility. If a heart lead is right, I cannot imagine that a small heart is right.

Picking the least likely layout (stiff King) and discounting that, without comment on the other possibilities, is a tad insufficient.

A spade lead catches the uninspiring AJ109 in dummy, BTW.

[Apollo81]

jdonn, on Jun 25 2007, 11:58 PM, said:

The so called "expert" lead is the spade queen. On the other hand, one time I played with Marshall and he made that lead, dummy had JTxxx and just one entry and declarer had AK tight!

I also like a small spade here cause of the heart situation.

[Codo]

cherdano, on Jun 26 2007, 10:27 PM, said:

Anyway, at MPs I would definitely not lead a heart, just go for the normal (low) spade.

Qxx in dummies suit is "the normal lead"?

Funny, in the books I read, they always write about "unbid suits, or "longest and strongest suit". But maybe these guys like Kelsey and Mollo are outdated and it is normal to lead a spade into opponents AJT9.

Of course there are cases to lead dummies suit. F.E. Qxx,xxxx,xxx,xxx would be a hand. But to construct hands, where a spade will win opposite a partner with about 4-6 HCPs (when we are lucky...) is no easy task.

That does not mean, that a Heart is clearcut (I am not sure that it is even best), but "normal" is a spade lead in no way.

[FrancesHinden]

I don't see the point of the SQ at all when we are looking at the AQ of hearts. OK, it pins a singleton J or 10 in decalrer's hand, but singleton A or K is more likely. And it's not as if we need to hold the lead because of our lack of outside cards.

I think it's close between a low spade and a low haert, with a low heart more obvious at IMPs as it is more likely to beat the contract - partner can't have that much stuff in spades. With Qxx xxxx Jxx Qxx the SQ is more tempting.

I think the HA lead is a little obscure. It gains when dummy has a short heart honour and we have our side's entry. It loses when, say, the hearts are 4333 round the table, declarer has the K, and partner has the entry. It can certainly only be right when we have all these high cards, making it much less likely partner can get in. But even so, partner could have the DA to get in with...

[pclayton]

RHO doesn't have a stiff heart, even the King. That leaves LHO with just too many minor suit cards or 3 spades, which seem impossible.

RHO is more likely 1=3=5=4, 1=2=6=4, or 2=2=5=4.
RHO might even be 0=4=5=4 or 0=3=6=4.

I don't agree that pard is limited to "4 or less points". RHO may have a fair 12-13 count with stoppers and a trick source or two, which can give pard at least another Ace.

The spade Queen looks great when the layout is K9xx opposite a stiff Jack, but with the quick heart entries, we are going to get back in at T2, which equalizes positions like K9xx opposite T or 8. The QS looks outright ridiculous (and puts partnership morale on ice) when dummy has very strong spades like KJT9x or AJT9x.

So I'm sticking with the low spade and will pass up my opportunity to make the NY Times bridge section.

[pclayton]

Codo, on Jun 26 2007, 07:06 AM, said:

cherdano, on Jun 26 2007, 10:27 PM, said:

Anyway, at MPs I would definitely not lead a heart, just go for the normal (low) spade.

Qxx in dummies suit is "the normal lead"?

Funny, in the books I read, they always write about "unbid suits, or "longest and strongest suit". But maybe these guys like Kelsey and Mollo are outdated and it is normal to lead a spade into opponents AJT9.

Of course there are cases to lead dummies suit. F.E. Qxx,xxxx,xxx,xxx would be a hand. But to construct hands, where a spade will win opposite a partner with about 4-6 HCPs (when we are lucky...) is no easy task.

That does not mean, that a Heart is clearcut (I am not sure that it is even best), but "normal" is a spade lead in no way.

Ah, but you will learn young Padawan

There are 'rules' in bridge you will learn, and unlearn, relearn, and then finally discard. This is one.

To be a great opening leader, you have to visualize all of the unseen hands and not be bound to "4th best from longest and strongest".

Another way to look at it is to pretend you are declaring this hand, and you need to make 5 tricks. Imagine the unseen hands and go about your task. You certainly don't play hands as declarer using rules like 4th best, why would you cling to such a concept as a defender?

[jtfanclub]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2007, 11:41 AM, said:

RHO is more likely 1=3=5=4, 1=2=6=4, or 2=2=5=4.
.
.
I don't agree that pard is limited to "4 or less points". RHO may have a fair 12-13 count with stoppers and a trick source or two, which can give pard at least another Ace.

Hmmm...actually, I would think the auction would point more towards 1-3-4-5 or 2-2-4-5 than the other way around. Opener's hand increased in value with the 3♣ bid. If opener had long diamonds, his value would actually decrease.

Example:
x
Kxx
AKxxx
Axxx

3 clubs implies to me that diamonds aren't a length source. I have 4 tricks (if I'm lucky) plus one length trick in clubs, and partner should have at most 3 tricks. Meanwhile, we have a natural crossruff set up in clubs. Pass three clubs.

x
Kxx
Axxx
AKxxx

3 clubs implies to me that clubs are a length source. I could easily be looking at 7 tricks in my hand even if partner has xxxx in clubs. Add in partner's 3 tricks and we have 10. Bid 3NT.

By the same logic, the hearts aren't entries. Either your partner has next to no points, or opener has a minor suit he can run. So opener's going to develop the minors, not lead hearts.

I'm the only person on the planet, I'm sure, tempted to lead a diamond. If partner has something finessable, my diamond jack will keep us from losing a trick. With three suits bid, hopefully partner will find the heart switch if he wins the trick. It is, IMHO, the safest lead, and every time I lead a heart in this situation it ends up being their 9th trick.

I don't know what the right lead is. But I think the auction is more revealing than you've indicated.

[pclayton]

jtfanclub, on Jun 26 2007, 09:08 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jun 26 2007, 11:41 AM, said:

RHO is more likely 1=3=5=4, 1=2=6=4, or 2=2=5=4.
.
.
I don't agree that pard is limited to "4 or less points". RHO may have a fair 12-13 count with stoppers and a trick source or two, which can give pard at least another Ace.

Hmmm...actually, I would think the auction would point more towards 1-3-4-5 or 2-2-4-5 than the other way around. Opener's hand increased in value with the 3♣ bid. If opener had long diamonds, his value would actually decrease.

Example:
x
Kxx
AKxxx
Axxx

3 clubs implies to me that diamonds aren't a length source. I have 4 tricks (if I'm lucky) plus one length trick in clubs, and partner should have at most 3 tricks. Meanwhile, we have a natural crossruff set up in clubs. Pass three clubs.

x
Kxx
Axxx
AKxxx

3 clubs implies to me that clubs are a length source. I could easily be looking at 7 tricks in my hand even if partner has xxxx in clubs. Add in partner's 3 tricks and we have 10. Bid 3NT.

By the same logic, the hearts aren't entries. Either your partner has next to no points, or opener has a minor suit he can run. So opener's going to develop the minors, not lead hearts.

I'm the only person on the planet, I'm sure, tempted to lead a diamond. If partner has something finessable, my diamond jack will keep us from losing a trick. With three suits bid, hopefully partner will find the heart switch if he wins the trick. It is, IMHO, the safest lead, and every time I lead a heart in this situation it ends up being their 9th trick.

I don't know what the right lead is. But I think the auction is more revealing than you've indicated.

Nah, the population that opens 1♦ on 4-5's is dwindling fast. The UN might step in, but its really just Darwinism in action.

3♣ could have improved RHO's hand, but more likely, he just has a 2♣ rebid he likes. Don't read too much into his hand type, honor placement or whatever, you'll drive yourself mad.

A ♦ lead gets you into the GHOF (Genius Hall of Fame). The ballot closes 7/1, and I'm honored to nominate you

[foo]

pclayton, on Jun 26 2007, 11:46 AM, said:

Ah, but you will learn young Padawan

There are 'rules' in bridge you will learn, and unlearn, relearn, and then finally discard. This is one.

To be a great opening leader, you have to visualize all of the unseen hands and not be bound to "4th best from longest and strongest".

Another way to look at it is to pretend you are declaring this hand, and you need to make 5 tricks. Imagine the unseen hands and go about your task. You certainly don't play hands as declarer using rules like 4th best, why would you cling to such a concept as a defender?

Hold it "Darth (in)Sidious".

Everything you said is true yet you use it to justify a twisted conclusion (advocatng the lead of a ♠ on this auction). Thus leading innocent padawan's astray.

Truly perfidious are the ways of the Dark Side.
It is always the lie disguised and surrounded by truth that is the most dangerous.

I will summon the good Jedi spirit of Mike Lawrence's _Opening Leads_ and allow it's connection to the bright and logical side of The Force to do battle with your chaos buried within its disguise of the trappings of order.

_Opening Leads_ speaks:
The most important thing about the opening lead is to try not to blow a trick or blow up a suit. we have much less assets, and therefore much less margin of error in our choices.

With that in mind, 1st we will pick a suit and then we shall pick the card to lead.

our hand: ♠Q54 ♥AQ82 ♦J72 ♣Q32

RHO opens, with the following bidding:

1♦-P(you)-1♠-P-;
2♣-P-3♣-P-;
3N-P-P-P;

Assuming SA and no other specialized agreements (like Walsh)
Opener is most likely a 54 or 55 in the minors with a ~14-15 HCP hand.
Responder is most likely 44, 54 or 55 in the Blacks with 10-11 HCP.
Thus EW have ~24-26 HCP between them. With 25 HCP being the most likely.
We are looking at 11 HCP. That leaves room for pd to have 5- HCP; with 4- HCP being the most likely.

reasonable Shapes for Opener:
2254, =1354, (21)55
reasonable shapes for Responder:
4(23)4, 5224, 5(31)4, 5(21)5

Possible ♠ lengths and expectation:
(6,7,7,7; 5,6,6,6; 6,7,7,7; 5,6,6,6)=> 6.25 ♠'s
Possible ♥ lengths and expectations:
(4,5,4,5,3,4,3; 5,6,5,6,4,5,4; 4,5,4,5,3,4,3; 3,4,3,4,2,3,2)=
=28+35+28+21=> 112/28= 4 ♥'s

Clearly a ♥ lead rates to be in Our longest suit more than any other lead.

*I'll come back and post =which= ♥ rates to be best later.*