[mikeh]

Hand 1.

You hold, red v white, imps: KJ952 K94 A432 Q.

RHO opens 3♣ and LHO, over your 3♠, bids 7♣.

Partner doubles and you decide that this does not invite a bid with your hand.

You lead......

Well, we would all lead the ♣Q, but our teammate chose to take a look at dummy via the ♦A.

Declarer held xxx Qxx void AK98xxx and dummy was Qxx void QJ10xxx J10xx.

-1630


Hand 2: actually the same hand at the other table.

My partner, who is a fine altho conservative player, chose not to open the 3=3=0=7 hand, out of fear that the hand fit the majors too well to preempt, plus I'd never play him for this much with 3♣ and 3N (our 4 level minor opening) might lead to a missed major game or slam.

So our auction was P [1♠] 3♦ [4♥] all pass: declarer got the trump wrong, inexplicably, and so we were -650.

-20 imps... the biggest number I have been minus in a few years. How do we apportion the blame (obviously the doubler of 7♣ on Ax AJ10xxxx Kxx x was relatively free of blame

[Apollo81]

Club lead sets 3 right, +500?

I'd say based loosely on that, 75% to the opening lead against 7♣ and 25% to the hand who failed to preempt. If you preempt you might get out in 5♣x or 6♣x.

[whereagles]

All actions seem normal to me, though I confess I would never, ever get myself to pass on that 3307

[cherdano]

I blame Mike. Wait, what hand did he have? Qxx - QJTxxx JTxx and he preempted 3♦? Hmm, a little hard to apportion blame to that, I admit

I give 30% blame to the preempting style (not saying that it is a bad style, but it definitely hurt on this hand, and to me it seems odds-against if you have to pass with this), 50% to the lead, and 20% to bad luck.

[FrancesHinden]

I give most of the blame to not pre-empting on the 3307, and a lot of credit to the 7C bidder.

We can all say now that it's "obvious" to lead a trump against 7Cx, but we'd all feel really sick when dummy came down with

x
AQxxxxx
x
J10xx

I think it's a horrible lead problem and I really have no idea what's right. It is true that I actually had to work fairly hard to construct a hand where it was definitely making if we didn't cash, and partner had a fair number of high cards, so maybe I can be convinced of a trump lead, but really we have no idea if we are trying to take the maximum penalty, or trying to stop it making.

[helene_t]

Your partner's non-preempt is extremely conservative. IMPs, white vs red, first seat: it's the most ideal prrempt position. And he even had two different ways to open a weak hand with clubs.

Although you don't necesarily have to play the same style as p as long as you respect p's style, it's a little bit worrying that you then made this kamikaze 3♦ bid. Are you two happy with each other's preempt style? This is not a retoric question - if you are happy that's great of course.

I think I would have lead ♦A as well allthough a trump lead is probably better.

[the hog]

xxx Qxx void AK98xxx

This is a hand I would never have passed. So blam goes to your pd. Btw I probably would have led AD as well!

[brianshark]

♦A was my immediate thought too, and I've probably done it at the table unless I tanked for a bit.

I'd give 75% of the blame to the non-pre-empter, be it the person or the style. And 25% to the Diamond Ace lead.

[Winstonm]

100% of the blame to the opponents for making us guess - again.

Failure to open 3C: $70
Finding the only lead to let them make: $30
The result: Priceless.

[FrancesHinden]

I gave the lead problem to my other half last night and after rather more reflection, we've decided that the choice is between a trump and a spade.

If we need to cash because of dummy's long hearts it's very close which pointed suit dummy is most likely to be void in, and partner with no heart honours will certainly have the SA. (We have more spades than diamonds, but if partner has the likely club void he might have bid 7S with a suitable hand and long spades).

So if it's about 50/50 between a spade and a diamond being right for cashout purposes, we should lead a spade because it's much less likely to cost in the way that the DA can, as dummy won't have a long spade suit.

A trump is likely to be right if we need the maximum penalty; but I'm less convinced if we are simply trying to beat it. I can construct hands where a trump is necessary to beat 7, but I think they are less frequent than when we need to cash out.

[Halo]

FrancesHinden, on Jan 24 2007, 06:24 AM, said:

So if it's about 50/50 between a spade and a diamond being right for cashout purposes, we should lead a spade because it's much less likely to cost in the way that the DA can, as dummy won't have a long spade suit.

I think the logic for a spade lead is convincing.

[Codo]

I had never lead a spade at the table. Ins´t it forbidden for the spades to be Axx in dummy and Qx in declarers hand?
If they bid to make, they are quite strong and prepared for a spade lead, so dummy has the ace of spades quite often.
And if they bid to defend, I must lead the card, which maximisze the profite.

I think a club lead is quite good for both goals, allthough it won´t work always.

I give 40 % to the preemting style and 30 % for the lead. 30 % are just bad luck and opps who found the right bids.

[brianshark]

Your LHO won't bid 7♣ without the ♠A or void realistically imo. I don't think the spades are casheable, and as I don't think've enough values to threaten to actually make 7♣ on force (because you have values, and your partner has doubled himself) then I think after reflection a trump lead stands out to provent it making in case of freak distribution.