[mycroft]

Unfortunately, our complete agreement *is* "from AK we lead the K if we think count will help us decide what to do next more than attitude, A otherwise." Okay, there's a couple other ones: "we lead K from AK tight if we're going for a ruff", "We lead K from KQ, knowing we're going to get count, knowing that probably isn't best", and so on. But I've led different cards from the same holding into the same contract, because of the auction and the rest of my hand, based solely on whether I think I'm going to have a better time leading T2 with one piece of information or the other.

There are a lot of situations where the answer to "what does he hold" is "don't know, don't care. I just follow instructions." Yes, sometimes we have additional experience we can give, and we do. Sometimes we don't. That doesn't make it either an illegal agreement or incomplete disclosure.

[wank]

a/q for attitude, king for count has nothing to do with the OP. The OP is about leader showing length with his choice of card. A/Q att, K ct is about extracting your preferred signal from partner.

by the way, the reason A for count doesn't work is that you want a power lead for situations when you want partner to unblock against NT. For example you hold AKJTx against 3NT and dummy puts down xxx. Attitude is no good because you won't know if declarer's queen is dropping. Similarly count is no good because you don't know where the queen is. You need to have the agreement that a card is strong enough for partner to unblock honours and otherwise give count. Only the king works for this, as you can hold other strong holdings like KQt9x.

as it happens i prefer rusinow with king for power though.

[Zelandakh]

wank, on 2014-July-30, 19:16, said:

Only the king works for this, as you can hold other strong holdings like KQt9x.

This is simply not true wank, as displayed by Journalist NT Leads and for that matter every NT leading style from the golden age of bridge. JL work by using the ace as the power lead asking for unblock of any honour or count if no honour is held, with the king effectively being an attitude lead. The queen is interesting - she asks for unbock of the jack or attitude if that card is not held. This covers the KQT9 case.

The problem with using the ace as the power lead is not that the scheme does not work but rather that the lead of an unsupported ace has become much more common in the intervening years. Therefore the Rusinow approach is more flexible. However the traditional style is certainly good enough for anyone not reaching the top echelons of the game and seeking to eek out every (legal) advantage possible.

[Siegmund]

Returning to A=even, K=odd...

Do you also lead K from KQxx? Or is this done in conjunction with Rusinow from Q downward, or Q=even J=odd, or...?

I like the idea for aces and kings, but am not sure I see how it fits into the rest of a system.