[jerdonald]

BBO,
I am east and the bidding went:
S W N E
1C P 1S P
2S P P P

I hold:
S KJ6
H A932
D J75
C J43

Playing BOSTON(Bottom Of Something Top of Nothing) on the opening lead
and not wanting to lead an unsupported ace or under lead an ace. What
should I lead?

The diamond 3 or the club 5 look like BOSTON, leading either jack looks
like a JT sequence and I really don't want to lead the spade 6.

Best I could think of was to lead the club 6 intending to discard the jack
on the next club trick.

Was there a better apporach?

Jerry D

[smerriman]

I'm not entirely sure what the dilemma is. Axxx and Jxx are both poor leads in general, though you have to pick one - and if you decide to lead from Jxx, you'd lead the lowest card - the Jack is 'Something'.

[AL78]

Leading an unsupported ace is usually horrible, leading a spade might be into the AQ and blow a trick, and leading a suit the opponents have bid naturally doesn't look appealing, so I would lead a low diamond and hope it isn't a frozen suit.

[FelicityR]

AL78, on 2020-July-07, 02:31, said:

Leading an unsupported ace is usually horrible, leading a spade might be into the AQ and blow a trick, and leading a suit the opponents have bid naturally doesn't look appealing, so I would lead a low diamond and hope it isn't a frozen suit.

As sensible reply as you're going to get here. Just think about the bidding? What sort of hand usually opens 1♣ and raises partner's 1♠ reply to 2♠? Answer: weak. Now if your opponents are playing (I assume) a weak no-trump, what does that tell us about opener's hand. Probably 4(3/1)5 or 4225 or 4414 shape, although that's not a given. So thinking about the choice of the unbid suits to lead, it would incredibly stupid to lead away from an ace, or lead the ace, so low from ♦J75 is the best option.

[mikeh]

I’ve never heard of BOSTON leads, and don’t think much of them. Having to lead my lowest card from a suit in which I have values seems to me to be very bad. Against suit contracts, every expert of whom I’m aware provides some count information with the lead, whether it be the old 4th best or the more currently popular 3rd and low or 3rd and 5th. This count information helps declarer, of course, but it tends to help partner even more. I’m not a big fan of giving count much, but the Opening lead is a big exception. Partner is largely in the dark about declarer’s distribution at trick one, so that is often the most important time to provide him or her with a clue.

Also, top of nothing went out of fashion decades ago. Again, count is usually more helpful to partner than to declarer. Plus, say one holds 9763. Are we really wanting to lead the 9? That could on occasion blow a trick in the suit while at the same time being impossible for partner to distinguish between that holding and, say, 963.

As for what to lead, I’d lead the low diamond. I’m not a fan of leading from Jxx(x), but (as is often the case) when faced with no attractive option, chose the least unattractive one.

[nige1]

Jerdonald "Playing BOSTON (Bottom Of Something Top of Nothing) on the opening lead and not wanting to lead an unsupported ace or under lead an ace. What should I lead? The diamond 3 or the club 5 look like BOSTON, leading either jack looks like a JT sequence and I really don't want to lead the spade 6. Best I could think of was to lead the club 6 intending to discard the jack on the next club trick.Was there a better approach?"
++++++++++++++++++++++
Rarely should you risk a trick so that you can rigidly adhere to your carding methods.
A considerate partner will sometimes appreciate your likely predicament.
I go along with the ♦5 consensus.

---

[Tramticket]

jerdonald, on 2020-July-06, 16:03, said:

I hold:
S KJ6
H A932
D J75
C J43

The diamond 3 or the club 5 look like BOSTON,

Best I could think of was to lead the club 6

Is it me? You don't seem to hold the diamond 3, the club 5 or the club 6!

Are BOSTON leads a code for leading a card from someone else's hand?!

[AL78]

mikeh, on 2020-July-07, 04:54, said:

I’ve never heard of BOSTON leads, and don’t think much of them. Having to lead my lowest card from a suit in which I have values seems to me to be very bad. Against suit contracts, every expert of whom I’m aware provides some count information with the lead, whether it be the old 4th best or the more currently popular 3rd and low or 3rd and 5th. This count information helps declarer, of course, but it tends to help partner even more. I’m not a big fan of giving count much, but the Opening lead is a big exception. Partner is largely in the dark about declarer’s distribution at trick one, so that is often the most important time to provide him or her with a clue.

Also, top of nothing went out of fashion decades ago. Again, count is usually more helpful to partner than to declarer. Plus, say one holds 9763. Are we really wanting to lead the 9? That could on occasion blow a trick in the suit while at the same time being impossible for partner to distinguish between that holding and, say, 963.

As for what to lead, I’d lead the low diamond. I’m not a fan of leading from Jxx(x), but (as is often the case) when faced with no attractive option, chose the least unattractive one.

Isn't 4th best a subset of BOSTON? You lead fourth best from a suit containing an honor, partner interprets your lead as low for like, high for hate.

[mikeh]

AL78, on 2020-July-07, 07:48, said:

Isn't 4th best a subset of BOSTON? You lead fourth best from a suit containing an honor, partner interprets your lead as low for like, high for hate.

no, it is not. It is not even in the same family.

BOSTON apparently tells partner: I have nothing in the suit or I have something in the suit.

So from 9762, 962, 96, one leads the 9. Good luck partner working out whether to give you a ruff when you hold 96. Of course, many players playing this sort of style are prone to playing the 6 quickly (should partner win the first two tricks) with 96 and slowly with 962. Absent that sort of 'magic' the method is unplayable just on these grounds alone.

But of course there is more.

a 4th best lead sometimes tells partner, immediately, how the suit is distributed...sometimes even where the important spots and honours are. Even when it doesn't, leader's later play in the suit may clarify...lead the 3 and later play the 2: then if you had length, it is now known to be 5 cards.

Bad players almost always fail to understand how much information is available on most hands. I don't mean just the auction, but also (in some cases) literally every card that is played and the order in which other players attack suits. Length information, even if only in the form of inferences, is a big part of this. BTW, a lot of bridge information is available from asking: why did 'x not play this card or attack that suit? In other words, information can be positive but also negative.

The earlier a defender knows how one suit breaks, the earlier he can, usually, work out how the whole hand breaks. Defence is almost impossible without such information. Of course, one has to be sufficiently skilled to recognize the information, to draw sound inferences, and to plan one's play accordingly but, funnily enough, the more information one conveys and receives, the easier it is to learn how to use it. I am ignoring, for now, the need sometimes to withhold or distort information in order to prevent declarer from working out what's going on. This is safe to ignore for most advancing players since their opps often have little more skill at this part of the game than they do.

Boston gives no real length information and is thus a very poor, imo, approach to opening leads.