[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

I sometimes try to catch partners suit,
but the main problem is, I have to
guess, is his suit clubs or hearts, and
there is no help.

Because of this, I will lead a diamond.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[pclayton]

Fluffy, on Jul 10 2007, 10:26 AM, said:

pclayton, on Jul 10 2007, 05:55 PM, said:

bid_em_up, on Jul 10 2007, 07:45 AM, said:

I think a diamond is the worst possible lead you can make, for several reasons.

Wow - not a lot of ambivalence

Pard didn't overcall over 1♣ with a fair amount of strength, so pard appears to not have a 5 card major. A diamond is pretty obvious. Pard can still have length in diamonds, or we may catch an Ax.

[

You saw the bidding wrong.


I always lead my longest suit in here. There is a good point for leading the incorrect card from a 5 card suit when you have no entries (specially at MP)

Youre right - thought LHO opened 1♣. Doesn't matter though.

[Trumpace]

bid_em_up, on Jul 10 2007, 04:11 PM, said:

What part of this:

If a diamond was correct, we wouldn't be seeing this question here.

is everyone failing to understand?!?!

I will lead a club, only because a diamond is so clearly right, that the only reason the question is even posted here is that somebody led a diamond, it turned out to be wrong, and some other lead was "right".

At least that was my take on it, anyway.

Eh?

What a ridiculous argument for shunning a diamond lead. Just because a non-diamond turns out to be a win against _some_ hand, it does not mean a diamond lead is incorrect.

You are showing classic symptoms of a disease called ResultMerchantisis.

I have a feeling you are kidding though

[FrancesHinden]

Trumpace, on Jul 10 2007, 07:44 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jul 10 2007, 12:37 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jul 10 2007, 01:43 PM, said:

No offense to anyone but I consider not leading a diamond to be horrible.

I'm a strong believer in leading my best suit on this sort of auction, whether or not I've got all the high cards.

Obviously it's not always right, but I've gained a surprising number of game swings in when the layout is something resembling this:

<snip>

But, isn't this a matchpoint lead problem? How does previous experience in game swings justify it here?

(I am not saying diamond is incorrect, just being nitpicky )

You normally get a good board for beating game, even at matchpoints.

[awm]

There is something to be said for a heart lead. If RHO had five hearts, he might've tried to introduce them over 2NT, and if LHO had four hearts he would probably have bid them. Neither of these applies to clubs or diamonds. So partner is fairly likely to hold some heart length on this bidding. It's also true that our hand has no entries, making it harder to set up the diamond tricks.

Nonetheless, I would lead systemic small diamond here, but I think if I had one fewer diamond (and one more spade say) I would try a heart lead.

[Trumpace]

FrancesHinden, on Jul 10 2007, 04:59 PM, said:

Trumpace, on Jul 10 2007, 07:44 PM, said:

FrancesHinden, on Jul 10 2007, 12:37 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jul 10 2007, 01:43 PM, said:

No offense to anyone but I consider not leading a diamond to be horrible.

I'm a strong believer in leading my best suit on this sort of auction, whether or not I've got all the high cards.

Obviously it's not always right, but I've gained a surprising number of game swings in when the layout is something resembling this:

<snip>

But, isn't this a matchpoint lead problem? How does previous experience in game swings justify it here?

(I am not saying diamond is incorrect, just being nitpicky )

You normally get a good board for beating game, even at matchpoints.

Yes we do get a good score, but does that mean, as defenders in MPs you try to beat every contract?

All I was trying to say is that experience in IMPS might not apply as the play/defense/bidding strategy could be quite different. Just because declarer went down in an IMP game more than 50% of the time, it does not mean that they would do so in an MP game too a similar % of the time.

Anyway, as I said it is a nitpick. You probably have 10 times the experience I have and will take your word for it.

[Free]

Can we get the results now Gwnn? Then we don't have to make any other jokes about not leading ♦ because it was questioned on the forum...

[gwnn]

Declarer had 10 tricks outside of diamonds, with ♦ lead he gets the 11th and on the run of the tricks partner gets squeezed for +3. Declarer can guess diamonds if he so wishes and make +3 on any lead (x and KJx), but he wanted to make only 3NT+1. I am not saying that this proves anything, if I had thought that I wouldn't have posted the hand here. I found myself fearing giving up tricks from lead far too often at Pairs, and I wondered if this hand qualifies. Seems not. Thanks for everybody's help!

[Double !]

OK, the result is posted, and those geniuses who found a better lead than a diamond are to be congratulated. The diamond lead didn't work on this particular hand: one sample proves nothing.
I, too would have led a diamond (that proves absolutely nothing), and where is it written that I couldn't hit partner with Ax(x) or even KJx. Now the lead has become psychologically favorable because, should declarer have a 2-way decision to make in a side suit, then your hand would be the dangerous hand and declarer might finesse into partner (losing). Little things like this can lead to matchpoints, too. I doubt you got a bottom for your lead unless partner could have taken some action (even if risky) but chose not to. Again, I would need Luis' sunglasses to know better than to lead a diamond.

DHL