[Stephen Tu]

A fair number of better players, vs. NT, play K = power lead, = AKJT KQT9, AKQT etc. asking for unblock honor or give count. Along with this, A is led from AKJx, AKTxx type holdings asking for attitude about the Q.

I am looking for some clarification on how to play the lead of the Q in this scheme.

1. Some suggest you lead Q from all KQTx(x), KQx, QJ9x(x), QJTx, and AKQx.
It's easy to encourage holding the A, K, or J. But what do you do holding
the T or T9 w/o the J? encourage or discourage? If partner holds QJ9x, if he gets
in you'd like for him to continue & not be worried about declarer's AKT(x).
But if you encourage & partner led from KQx, you help declarer Bath coup w/ AJx.

(This query instigated by lead from AKQx opposite T9xxx, player discouraged
catering to KQx lead, AKQx player switched, 1nt made an undeserved overtrick)

2. Others (Woolsey) suggest that from QJ holdings one should lead J, and lead T from JT8x. Is this better? I guess it clears up the T ambiguity but is incompatible if one likes to play various coded T/9 schemes.

How do you play it?

[mikeh]

Asking me how I play it is only going to confuse you

With some I play A asks for unblock or count, with the K asking attitude (absent other info, partner plays me for AKx) and the Q asks unblock of the J or count, and the J is from J109... or J108...., or QJ9.... thus if partner has the 10, he is supposed to unblock on the J.

With others I use the A as attitude and the K as the lead asking for unblock or count, and the Queen for the J, and we don't play the J asking for 10 lead at all.

I find that it doesn't seem to matter, in practice, so long as I remember who I am playing with Fortunately, I play fundamentally different methods with these two groups, so I rarely forget

With the problem hand, I'd ask for count on opening lead... nothing is assured of working, but (assuming the auction has been something like 1N all pass) asking for count will help quite often: if we see 3 in dummy, knowing that partner has an odd number is of some considerable help, while if partner shows an even number, we are guessing whether it is 2 or 4, but sometimes we have to guess well.

[Walddk]

There is obviously a flaw when you lead the queen. As Stephen points out, partner won't know if the 10 is enough to encourage. It won't help to reverse it so that ace asks for unblock and king for attitude. Then the problem arises when the king is led.

In my view, the best method is to lead high from any honour combination. Ace promises the king, the king shows the queen, and so on. Now, if partner has the honour I "promise", he unblocks. Otherwise he gives count as clearly as possible.

The added advantage is that it's easy to remember.

What about giving count then? Isn't that to dificult to read? Sometimes it is, but very often partner will be able to read the length if you play this method:

From 2 and 5: play smallest.
From 3: play highest.
From 4: play 3rd highest.

Nothing is 100%, but this is the best I have come across, and I have tried almost everything.

Finally, if you prefer to play Garozzo's method (A and Q for attitude and K for unblock), it seems sensible to do it the way Woolsey suggests: jack from QJ and 10 from J10.

Roland

[lowerline]

This is what I prefer vs NT:

- Ace asks unblock of queen or count (AKJT)
- King asks attitude (can be from AKxx or KQTx)
- Queen asks unblock of jack or attitude (AKQT; KQT9; QJ9x)
- Jack denies higher honor (JT8x)
- Ten shows 0/2 higher (T9xx; KJTx)
- Nine shows 0/2 higher (9xx; QT9x)
- 8..2: either 4th from a good suit, or 2nd from a weak suit

This is BWS except for the coded 9/10.

[Poky]

I like Duboin-Bocchi's scheme very much:
A= asks attitude
K= asks unblock of Q/J or count (AKJ10+ or KQ109+)
Q= KQ(J/10/9)+, AQJx+ or QJ(10/9)+
J= natural or QJx (can be HJ10x+)
10= natural (can be H109x+)
9= natural (can be H98x+)

From AKQx you probably lead the Q to hear an echo for J.

[Walddk]

lowerline, on Oct 6 2006, 10:16 AM, said:

- King asks attitude (can be from AKxx or KQTx)

What is your partner supposed to do if he has the jack? You want him to encourage if the lead is from KQ10x, but he must discourage if it's from AKxx.

Roland

[FrancesHinden]

To get back to the original question; I'm not trying to be fatuous but since when do you lead from KQx on a blind auction against NT?

To answer the general question, playing these methods (as I do) I give attitude on the jack if partner leads the queen; what I do holdijng the 10 depends on the auction and dummy's holding.

With one partner I play what my partner calls 'blue club' leads (although I've not seen that name anywhere else and they are the same as in Rubens' book on Journalist leads I think):

A for attitude, usually from AK to length
K for unblock or count
Q for attitude, from QJ10, QJ98 or possibly KQ9x(x)
J from J109, J108 or QJx (possibly QJxx into a 2NT opening)
10 strong from AJ10, KJ10, A109, K109
9 from shortage or 1098/1097 to length
8 and lower attitude style (low from length to an honour, high without an honour)

I find most of this works well 90% of the time. The part I'm least happy with is playing strong 10s, as I'm not certain if they help declarer or the defence more. So far they seem to be about 60/40 in favour of the defence, but I have one partner who refuses to play them.

[lowerline]

Walddk, on Oct 6 2006, 03:24 AM, said:

lowerline, on Oct 6 2006, 10:16 AM, said:

- King asks attitude (can be from AKxx or KQTx)

What is your partner supposed to do if he has the jack? You want him to encourage if the lead is from KQ10x, but he must discourage if it's from AKxx.

Roland

No set of agreements is without flaws... Partner is supposed to encourage with the J and I, being aware of this flaw, should be encouraged to underlead AK if I do not have the Q or J.

Steven

[Gerben42]

I prefer that a card asks for unblock of the card directly below it, for example from KQT9x you lead the Queen-

[bid_em_up]

Stephen Tu, on Oct 5 2006, 02:03 PM, said:

A fair number of better players, vs. NT, play K = power lead,  = AKJT KQT9, AKQT etc. asking for unblock honor or give count.  Along with this, A is led from AKJx, AKTxx type holdings asking for attitude about the Q.

I am looking for some clarification on how to play the lead of the Q in this scheme.

1. Some suggest you lead Q from all KQTx(x), KQx, QJ9x(x), QJTx, and AKQx. 
It's easy to encourage holding the A, K, or J.  But what do you do holding
the T or T9 w/o the J?  encourage or discourage?  If partner holds QJ9x, if he gets
in you'd like for him to continue & not be worried about declarer's AKT(x).
But if you encourage & partner led from KQx, you help declarer Bath coup w/ AJx.

(This query instigated by lead from AKQx opposite T9xxx, player discouraged
catering to KQx lead, AKQx player switched, 1nt made an undeserved overtrick)

2. Others (Woolsey) suggest that from QJ holdings one should lead J, and lead T from JT8x.  Is this better? I guess it clears up the T ambiguity but is incompatible if one likes to play various coded T/9 schemes.

How do you play it?

Stephen, am I reading correctly that you led the Q from AKQx?

And then partner, anticipating the lead was from KQx, discouraged?

(This appears to be what you have said, or I am reading it wrong).

Use the methods you already have. Lead the Ace. Partner should encourage with 109xxx.

Treat the Q lead as if from either KQ10x or QJ10x or QJ9x.

If KQ10x partner should unblock the Jack if he has it; the same goes if he has the 10 and you have lead from QJ9x (or he should strongly encourage if possible).

[Stephen Tu]

Thanks.

Justin - so your idea is always (almost always?) encourage with the T, then I suppose player with AKQx(x) never tries underlead to J when dummy is stiff or just guesses what to do? I know it's quite rare this is necessary but might as well try to cover all cases if one can or at least nail down exactly what the guessing situations are.

Frances - you said what you'd do with T depends on the dummy holding & bidding, can you clarify with a couple examples?

To those suggesting other methods:
other methods have their own problems

• schemes were you can lead K from both AK and KQ - ambiguity problem with J as noted
  
• leading honor above the one you want unblocked - this works for unblocking, but loses the ability to get a count signal to drop declarer's honor as 3rd hand will be giving attitude not seeing the missing honor, won't be able to give count.

Quote

Use the methods you already have. Lead the Ace. Partner should encourage with 109xxx.

Under these methods ace asks attitude for the Q. encouraging with T9xx(x) looks silly if partner led from AKJx and decides to underlead to your Q and declarer's doubleton scores.

Quote

If KQ10x partner should unblock the Jack if he has it;

That can potentially cost a late trick to a 9. You are supposed to hold KQT9 to lead the appropriate card in your scheme to ask for partner to drop the J. Otherwise should lead other cd & partner just gives attitude.

[paulg]

As they are not widely known, I'll describe the Slawinski honour leads that we play. They are designed to increase the chances of partner understanding the lead at the cost of declarer also working it out. We also give up specifically asking for attitude or count but partner should be better placed to work out what is best.

From HHx(x) we would lead the highest (if we decided to lead an honour)
From HHH lead the middle card against NT (top against suit)
From HHh lead the middle card
From Hhh lead the bottom card

So the lead of the Ace is from AKx(x)(x)
The lead of the King is from KQx(x), AKJx
The lead of the Queen is from QJx(x), KQ10x
The lead of the Jack is from J10x(x), QJ9x, AQJx
The lead of the Ten is from AJ10x, KJ10x, 109xx
The lead of the 9 is from A109x, K109x, Q109x, 9xx(x)

We feel this is an improvement on standard methods.

paul

[lowerline]

Poky, on Oct 6 2006, 03:21 AM, said:

I like Duboin-Bocchi's scheme very much:
A= asks attitude
K= asks unblock of Q/J or count (AKJ10+ or KQ109+)
Q= KQ(J/10/9)+, AQJx+ or QJ(10/9)+
J= natural or QJx (can be HJ10x+)
10= natural (can be H109x+)
9= natural (can be H98x+)

From AKQx you probably lead the Q to hear an echo for J.

I wonder why they lead the J from QJx? Lauria-Versace don't make that exception.

Steven

[lowerline]

Stephen Tu, on Oct 5 2006, 02:03 PM, said:

A fair number of better players, vs. NT, play K = power lead,  = AKJT KQT9, AKQT etc. asking for unblock honor or give count.  Along with this, A is led from AKJx, AKTxx type holdings asking for attitude about the Q.

I am looking for some clarification on how to play the lead of the Q in this scheme.

1. Some suggest you lead Q from all KQTx(x), KQx, QJ9x(x), QJTx, and AKQx. 
It's easy to encourage holding the A, K, or J.  But what do you do holding
the T or T9 w/o the J?  encourage or discourage?  If partner holds QJ9x, if he gets
in you'd like for him to continue & not be worried about declarer's AKT(x).
But if you encourage & partner led from KQx, you help declarer Bath coup w/ AJx.

(This query instigated by lead from AKQx opposite T9xxx, player discouraged
catering to KQx lead, AKQx player switched, 1nt made an undeserved overtrick)

2. Others (Woolsey) suggest that from QJ holdings one should lead J, and lead T from JT8x.  Is this better? I guess it clears up the T ambiguity but is incompatible if one likes to play various coded T/9 schemes.

How do you play it?

Lead the Q from KQJx, KQTx, KQx(x) or QJTx and encourage with A, K or J only.
Lead the J from QJx(x), AQJx or JT9x and encourage with the T.

There is an issue if you have KQJx or QJTx and you want to know about the T or 9 respectively.

From AKQx lead the Q. If partner discourages, play the A on which partner will give count.

You could have done this as well in your case. If you had continued with the A partner could have given count. Only if declarer had something like JTxx might this have cost a trick.

Steven

[joshs]

I play this style of leads in one of my most regular partnerships (with Marc Umeno). Its a lead style thats very popular in europe but less popular in the US.

The Q lead is usually from the QJ. It is also led from KQx when you decide to lead that suit (you lead the K if this is partner's bid suit, of course). It is also led from KQTx[x] without the 9, and rarely from KQ9x[x]. You can't really cater to this last one (its a rare lead made as an attempt to not blow a fast trick if Jx or Tx is in one of the opponents hand. Its a much more frequent lead at mps than in IMPS, since it risks blocking the suit), so 3'rd hand should be encouraging with Txx unless you are sure partner has made a lead from the K.

I honestly am not sure its correct to lead the Q from AKQx playing this style, since partner will encourage with the J or the T, so you still have a guess. Although perhaps its less of a guess than after the A lead. Of course if you have a side entry, you can usually lead the A then the Q then low.....