[VixTD]

At the same club pairs as the insufficient jump:

---

North thought for a long time before passing over 2♣. South now found the imaginative lead of ♠J.

EW didn't call the director as they didn't think it made any difference to the score, but discussed it with me later in the pub. I didn't get a chance to ask South why he chose that lead.

Do you think it looks suspicious?

[sanst]

A few questions. Do NS have a call that shows both majors after 1NT? And would that be 2♣? What would a double by N have meant? What was the score?
.

[billw55]

Nothing unusual about choosing a spade, although the jack is weird. Before making any judgments, I would want to know their lead agreements, and what north's potential calls over 2♣ would have meant. A general idea of south's ability couldn't hurt either.

So perhaps it is "suspicious" in the sense that a few questions may be warranted, but nothing more.

[barmar]

If a double would be lead directing, then from South's perspective the hesitation would likely mean that North was thinking about whether to double for the lead. In that case, only a suspicious club lead would seem to be demonstrably suggested by the UI.

I don't see how the hesitation suggests an unusual spade lead.

[wank]

nothing wrong with this. jack of spades is quite a sensible lead on this bidding. if he led a club and north had those everyone would be crying.#

to understand why the jack of spades is a good lead is beyond most club players and highlights the problem of spotting cheats: lesser players may misidentify good play as cheating.

[barmar]

Although a club lead would also be considered normal, since it's South's longest suit, and also least likely to blow up a suit. So would a club lead be disallowed even if we decided it was suggested by the UI?

[blackshoe]

If a club lead could demonstrably have been suggested over a major suit lead by the UI, then a club lead should be disallowed. That would leave a major suit lead as the only remaining LAs. Could either major suit demonstrably have been suggested over the other by the UI? I don't see how. So I don't see a problem with a spade lead.

[nige1]

VixTD writes "At the same club pairs as the insufficient jump: North thought for a long time before passing over 2♣. South now found the imaginative lead of ♠J. EW didn't call the director as they didn't think it made any difference to the score, but discussed it with me later in the pub. I didn't get a chance to ask South why he chose that lead. Do you think it looks suspicious?"

Without UI, on this auction, South might well lead a major knave. North was thinking of bidding -- probably a major in the light of South's shape and strength. That reinforces the choice of a major lead over a minor.

Most players follow the advice in the "ACBL club directors' handbook": Make the lead you would have made without UI..

That seems wrong to me but the onus is on law-makers to simplify and clarify the rules enough for ordinary players like me to understand the gist of them.

---

[steve2005]

South doesn't have a lead which is obviously better. If I was on lead would lead 9♥ might help on some holdings and not blow the suit on some others. Why lead ♠ and not ♥? But is not totally outrageous lead.

[VixTD]

I know South quite well, and whatever the merits of ♠J as an opening lead I don't believe he'd have found it under normal circumstances. This is not a case of an expert being accused by lesser players of cheating, South is a considerably weaker player than East or West. I'm not accusing South of cheating either; he could have perfectly innocent motives for leading a spade. He could have been trying to avoid leading a club, thinking that's what the hesitation suggests.

I don't think the hesitation does demonstrably suggest a club lead, nor any other suit, it's just the combination of the pause from partner and the choice of an unusual lead that makes me uneasy. If NS have got themselves into a situation where (consciously or unconsciously) they make an unusual lead every time partner hesitates and gain thereby, they are gaining an unfair advantage.

[barmar]

So you think it was a Lightner tank? "I have a hand that would like to make a lead-directing call, but no such call available, so try to find my stuff".

[blackshoe]

VixTD, on 2015-October-01, 07:45, said:

I know South quite well, and whatever the merits of ♠J as an opening lead I don't believe he'd have found it under normal circumstances. This is not a case of an expert being accused by lesser players of cheating, South is a considerably weaker player than East or West. I'm not accusing South of cheating either; he could have perfectly innocent motives for leading a spade. He could have been trying to avoid leading a club, thinking that's what the hesitation suggests.

I don't think the hesitation does demonstrably suggest a club lead, nor any other suit, it's just the combination of the pause from partner and the choice of an unusual lead that makes me uneasy. If NS have got themselves into a situation where (consciously or unconsciously) they make an unusual lead every time partner hesitates and gain thereby, they are gaining an unfair advantage.

I don't think you have sufficient evidence on this one hand. Perhaps the best you can do is to record it, and see if it comes up again, and if so how often.

[lamford]

VixTD, on 2015-October-01, 07:45, said:

South is a considerably weaker player than East or West.

I presume, therefore, that declarer covered in dummy and ducked when North played the king and emerged with an unexpected overtrick when North continued spades and South did not have the ten?

Given that all leads are nine tricks, it is not clear what point, if any, East-West are trying to make.

And, nothing is demonstrably suggested by the BIT. North could feasibly have been considering double, 2D, 2H or 2S, depending on whether he had clubs, diamonds, hearts or spades ... So South can lead anything he likes.

I would not record it. There is nothing to record.

[weejonnie]

So South is being 'punished' for being a weak player who finds a good lead. Since East has at least 7 cards in the minor suits, a major suit lead seems reasonable. And there is nothing I can see on the bidding/ pausing to chose one over the other since neither major has been mentioned. (I would probably have led the 9 of hearts as I need marginally less from partner to set up tricks in the suit, but that is neither here nor there.) I can see nothing wrong. You CAN make a successful decision when UI is present.

[VixTD]

This was never going to go further than a record of the hand, and probably not even that. I can't see that the hesitation suggests one lead over another, but I would have liked to have asked South why he chose that lead.