[Flame]

What do you lead in the middle of the game from 3/4 small cards ?
I have two different mathods with two different partner with the first i play count ,i will lead low with the 3 cards and high with the 4 cards. With my second partner i would lead a high card since i dont have an honor.
I find the second way easier , but i think the first way is better for good players who can count declarer's hand, and imagine the honors that needed for the diffence. Yet maybe givving too many counts help the declarer more the giving atittude.
What do you play/prefer ?

[whereagles]

Jeff Rubens has discussed the issue a bit on his book "Journalist Leads".

Essentially, he advocates attitude shifts (low = enc, high = disc), except in cash-out situations, where it is obvious all leads are enc. In that case:

high = enc + even nr. of cards
low = enc + odd nr. of cards

(you can play the other way around if you prefer)

[Fluffy]

I think it dependson therest of the deal. Normally I will lead a high one, but in the middle of the game sometimes partner already knows our honnor alocation, but not the count.

[Double !]

Nice thread. I would like to add the following topic to this discussion: what card to play when leading a suit up to dummy, particularly from various combinations that include an honor ( or two, or three) midway through the play of the hand. This is an area where I have experienced and observed many partnership defensive "accidents" for a long time.

My approach:
Play the higher of touching honors, coded 9s & 10s, and attitude (some say "bad attitude", except for opening lead) when leading from behind declarer. However, when leading through declarer and up to dummy, I have always felt that it might be more advisable to lead lower of touching honors and attitude (maybe a remnant from my old journalist up-bringing). It's seemed to me that playing lower of touching honors might help distinguish between leads from honor sequences and leads from Hx. I believe that it is important to be able to make this distinction. Not everyone (understatement) has agreed with my approach regarding leading the lower of touching honors when leading through declarer. n.b.: It is a "given" ahead of time with some partners that I am wrong.

So. Assume that dummy has xxx of the suit you plan to shift to and that it is logical to shift to the suit. If you were to publish a list of the correct cards to play from various holdings when leading up to dummy, which card would you recommend, and why? (It is understood that there are many other factors in the play of the hand to consider.) Yes, I know that this is Basic Card Play 101. However, I have an important exam on this coming up soon, these are the pratice test study items, I don't know some of the answers, and might fail the exam. (please note: The Professor is highly respected as a leader in the field, and is quite firm or specific in his/her grading of exams.)

Versus suit contract Versus NT

1. JTx
2. JT9
3. Jx
4. KQx
5. Kxx
6. Kx
7. Qxx
8. QTx
9. QJx
10. Qx
11. xxx



DHL

[Kalvan14]

There is not a firm rule. It depends on the cards in dummy, what has declarer shown, being a cash-out or not.
In general, I prefer not to give count in such a situation; there are exceptions, though.

[cherdano]

I think this is worth a lot of discussion with partner. If you normally play 3/5, then I think it is best to play attitude as default. High spot card ostensibly denies an honor, but could also have an honor when you want a different suit returned. When the honor location of the suit is clear, default should be count (i.e. strict 3/5).
And of course, in some situation (e.g. complete suit layout known, or giving partner a ruff) it can be suit preference.

Arend

[pclayton]

Ah - the middle game - a much undiscussed subject. The ACBL cc is silent on this - maybe thats why pairs only focus on opening leads.

I am so used to figuring out the hand leading back the original 4th best that I ask my partners to do the same, no matter what we play on opening lead.

Most players split with 2nd highest, but I like the idea of splitting highest. Unless you lead Rusinow, the 2nd honor just looks funny to me. Thats if you choose to split at all.

Something I've been trying with my regular pard is to split highest with an even # of cards and to split 2nd highest with an odd #. There's a certain logic to it that I haven't been able to grasp, but it seems to work out.

The idea of coded 10's and 9's is sound, even if you choose not make opening leads using this method. Its especially effective when there is an honor in dummy -I think thats when Meckwell use them.

Leading 2nd and 4th in middle game is something a lot of pairs do, but I don;t like it myself. Lead attitude when possible and add in count when you can afford to.