[mike777]

Scoring: IMP

1D=P=1S=(3H)
P=(4H)=4S=(5H)
5S=(6H)=P=P
X=P=P=P

---

Your lead and why?

[the hog]

mike777, on Dec 13 2006, 11:00 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1D=P=1S=(3H)
P=(4H)=4S=(5H)
5S=(6H)=P=P
X=P=P=P

---

Your lead and why?

Did this auction take place in real life? It sounds like something out of Alice in Wonderland.
7 of S lead just in case they can knock out the DA for a S pitch.

[mike777]

As a matter of fact this hand was a real life hand.

[flytoox]

Agree with Justion.

[Halo]

I lead a heart - why are there two heart options, what does it matter which heart I lead?

In the Hideous Hog books leading one of your aces is always a mistake.

[pclayton]

Jlall, on Dec 12 2006, 07:55 PM, said:

trump lead is stand out. RHO likely has 6-5 or 7-5 with a minor. We need to stop ruffs in dummy.

BTW barnet shenkin has told me many times about this hand, but I think his suggestion is nuts

♥: 10; ♠: 6. Clubs can wait, and ♦'s is likely my LHO's suit. ♠ is possible to set up a trick in case they are 3=2=6=2 around the table.

Hearts are probably 7-3, and I'm guessing LHO has a whole lotta ♦'s. Pard should have 7♠'s and a little outside, but could be 6=1=1=5 (see below LOL)

I'm guessing Barnet's lead is the A♦ to try to get a ruff in pard's hand? That requires pard to hold ♥x AND ♦x. Not too likely if you ask me. A more likely layout:

---

[whereagles]

Obvious trump lead, and I don't need to look at the whole hand to know that

We got spades, clubs and diamonds. Where are their tricks coming from? Ruffs, of course. Hence, stop those ruffs.

[mikeh]

whereagles, on Dec 13 2006, 12:20 PM, said:

Obvious trump lead, and I don't need to look at the whole hand to know that

We got spades, clubs and diamonds. Where are their tricks coming from? Ruffs, of course. Hence, stop those ruffs.

your view had a lot of support in the MSC panel (altho far from unanimous), and, in reality, 'knowing the whole hand' would get you pulling that trump back as fast as you could

Actually, in hindsight, the answer is still not obvious but it is logical... assume the red v white opps have not entirely lost their minds (and they are real experts in real life) and it is reasonable to worry about layouts where the issue is beating the contract, rather than maximizing the penalty. The trump lead caters to maximizing the penalty but it is truly difficult to come up with a construction where it is necessary in order to attain down 1.

You may argue that such 'making' layouts will be very rare... but think about the auction... it is hardly commonplace either.

[mike777]

Well I did put it in the "interesting hand" section not the teaching section

[Codo]

If the opps seem to defend against my freely bid game, I think it is a good advice to maximize the profit and not to think too much about the one in a million hands, where you fight for a one trick set.

[cherdano]

Codo, on Dec 13 2006, 10:47 PM, said:

If the opps seem to defend against my freely bid game, I think it is a good advice to maximize the profit and not to think too much about the one in a million hands, where you fight for a one trick set.

You did notice that opponents are red vs white, right?

[Codo]

cherdano, on Dec 14 2006, 06:47 AM, said:

Codo, on Dec 13 2006, 10:47 PM, said:

If the opps seem to defend against my freely bid  game, I think it is a good advice to maximize the profit and not to think too much about the one in a million hands, where you fight for a one trick set.

You did notice that opponents are red vs white, right?

You are welcomed to post any hand you or your opps bid to slam after the bidding started with
1 m - pass 1 ♠ 3 ♥
pass 4 ♥

And then count to zero how often they bid this way to make 6 ♥ and not as a sacrifice.

I agree that there are hands, where slam is making, but obviously the opps did not believe, that this is one.

[dake50]

Having not chosen the standout insurance 6S bid, back my decision that it is a max penalty hand.