[Aberlour10]

Hi all

There are surely some topics about this theme based on defined hands, but I would like to ask our BBF experts for (more) general thoughts, an intermediate player would be able to follow.

Robert

[Trumpace]

I am not an expert (sorry), but I liked Jlall's post in some thread (I don't remember which, maybe someone else can point to it) in which he said (note, my own words and could be completely incorrect)

"
Look at your own hand, and based on the bidding, try and come up with the lead which offers the best chance of the defense getting atleast 2 tricks.
"

I believe this was said for IMP scoring. For MPs it might be different.

There was also this BOLS tip from Benito Garozzo:

"Games can be defended quietly, but slams must be ATTACKED". This assumes that opps know what they are doing when they bid to slam.

[paulg]

Listening to the auction is very important, garnering any small clues available.

In general experts will lead more aggressively against small slams than intermediates. It is often a race to establish your second trick before declarer gets to twelve and so you will see experts lead away from kings and queens in order to do this.

It is tough to give hard rules about whether to lead an ace or not. I guess intermediates lead aces considerably more than experts, although Reese said that more slams are let through by not leading an ace.

Against grand slams you just look for the safest possible lead. If possible, make sure partner is on lead.

Paul

[han]

Trumpace, on Oct 13 2007, 12:38 PM, said:

I am not an expert (sorry), but I liked Jlall's post in some thread...

clearly no expert!

[helene_t]

The thread with the advice from Justin

[ralph23]

Be alert to lead directing doubles (both at NT and suit i.e. Lightner doubles against suit slams), both to making them and inferences if any when p doesn't make one.... get rules on all those ironed out with your regular partners.

[jdonn]

If you have two aces against a slam and the opponents have told you they had a blackwood misunderstanding, lead one of them. I saw a very well known expert mess this up once. I am not being sarcastic.

[mikeh]

I don't know that it is possible to give a 'sound-bite' answer that deals with all situations.

However, unless you are looking at a trump surprise or can tell that the suits declarer intends to run are very badly situate for him (so the slam is almost assured to fail unless you give away the contract on opening lead) you should make aggressive leads against small slams and passive against grands.

Underleading a King is a typical lead.. you are hoping to catch partner with the Q or dummy with Q10x (or equivalent) and have declarer misguess, so partner's jack forces the Ace.

It is common to lead a misleading spot card away from the King... especially if you think you hold your side's other defensive trick... and really especially if that trick is maybe a (for declarer) disappointing trump break. The idea is to hope to find dummy with the Ace, and declarer to be worried about a ruff if he ducks it.. and having other (not-working) lies that allow him to make the contract if he flies with the Ace. Obviously, this only works if the auction has not told declarer what's going on

There are also a few times when the opening lead should be an underlead of an Ace.

When you can deduce that the K is on your left, and that the opps had a power auction, and the suits appear to be breaking normally, you should consider the underlead.

One lead I would rarely, if ever, make is away from Jxx or Jxxx. There is simply way too much risk of blowing the contract and the upside is too low: you need too much from partner. I'd prefer xxx or xxxx or xxxxx to any lead from an unsupported Jack.

One occasion to go passive against a small slam is when the auction tells you that partner is truly broke. You hold 9 hcp and the opps bid 2N 4N 6N.... your partner doesn't hold as much as a Queen, and probably not even a Jack. Now go passive (unless you have an obvious lead... KQ in one suit and a side Ace, for example).

[skjaeran]

I'm in the agressive lead vs slam camp.

Exceptions being when your hand and the auction cries for a passive lead - see Mike's post.

Btw on Monday I held ♠AJx ♥Axx ♦QT8xxx ♣X and opps bid to 6♥. After 1♥-1♠, 2♣-2♦, 2♥-3♥ and some quebids opener jumped to 6♥. I led ♥A and a ♥. Later I won ♠A when declarer run the king from dummy (he was void). He really should have made the contract I believe, but any other lead would have given him the contract right away.

[jdonn]

mikeh, on Oct 13 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

Underleading a King is a typical lead.. you are hoping to catch partner with the Q or dummy with Q10x (or equivalent) and have declarer misguess, so partner's jack forces the Ace.

.....

One lead I would rarely, if ever, make is away from Jxx or Jxxx.

Well I won't get that particular guess wrong against you

[mikeh]

edited

[TheoKole]

I'll add my 2 cents worth.

Believe me that if I or anyone else made the best leads against slam or even game contracts all the time WE would be the player playing for our countries in the Bermuda Bowl.

I've heard quoted that of all contracts that aren't laydown, that 50% of them suceed or fail on the opening lead.

That said, there are some guidelines that I follow:

The first thing I do is pay close attention to the bidding, I see if I can picture the shape and strength of the declarer and the dummy.

Has either of them shown long suits during the bidding?
Have they done any cue-bidding indicating controls?
How many trumps do you think they have between the hands?
Do you have or can you picture your partner to have a trump stack that declarer doesn't know about yet?
Can you see that some suits are breaking badly for declarer?
Do you hold strength in declarers suits that dummy has indicated a shortness in, (meaning that declarer is going to try and ruff his losers with dummy's trumps.)
Has partner bid or Doubled a cue-bid to indicated an opening lead that he would like you to make.

A little more sophisticated thinking would be if there was something that seems wierd in the bidding that doesn't make logical sense to you. Try to make it make sense from declarers point of view.

The more information that the opening leader has from the bidding, the better.

Basically if you can figure out the shape and strength of the hand of declarer and dummy, you can also figure out how the declarer plans or at least hopes to make his contract. As the opening leader, you try to destroy those plans with your lead.

Does the bidding make it sound that declarer is planning a cross-ruff or at least several ruff's in dummy - then lead a trump. Sometimes even from a Q, the declarer won't believe you would do such a thing so he may finesse into you playing your partner from the Q.

Has dummy or declarer indicated a long side suit - after pulling trumps declarer will run the side suit for tricks - this is time for an attacking lead away from a King or Queen. (If you or your partner have a trump entry - declarer may not have the time needed to run the suit.

Do you have an extraordinary amount of high cards for the bidding of the opponents. - I would make a passive lead (whatever seems less likely to give a trick away - because most likely partner has nothing and the declarer is going to be looking for the honor cards that you hold)

Very rarely, and I mean very rarely you might want to make a despiration lead. (for example - you have a long suit that partner which showed a fit and a void in another suit - you might want to underlead an Ace to try to get partner in and give you a ruff). (I remember doing this 1 time in the last 4 years, although I see it all the time on BBO).

As you have lesser information from the bidding, you should fall back on certain guidelines.

1) Against a 6NT or 7NT contract, make the safest lead possible from your hand
- do not underlead a King or Queen.
2) Against a suit contract you can either decide to lead a trump as a safe lead or to make an attacking lead. As a general guideline, I lead safe except when long suits have been indicated, and trumps seem to be breaking well for declarer.

A very good book to read, is called "Opening Leads" written I beleive by Mike Lawrence, my apologies if I got the author wrong.

Cheers,

Theo

[Mbodell]

mikeh, on Oct 13 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

One lead I would rarely, if ever, make is away from Jxx or Jxxx. There is simply way too much risk of blowing the contract and the upside is too low: you need too much from partner. I'd prefer xxx or xxxx or xxxxx to any lead from an unsupported Jack.

This advise on opening leads was in my mind tonight. I held:

J86 8765 T975 73

The auction went (E dealt - E/W vul, IMP pairs):
W     E
-      2C
2D* 2S
3D  3S
4H  4S
6NT

(2D was artificial positive response)

Pick a lead.

[TheoKole]

8 ♥


Theo

[kenrexford]

mikeh, on Oct 13 2007, 03:49 PM, said:

One lead I would rarely, if ever, make is away from Jxx or Jxxx. There is simply way too much risk of blowing the contract and the upside is too low: you need too much from partner. I'd prefer xxx or xxxx or xxxxx to any lead from an unsupported Jack.

Why didn't you tell my partner that?!?

I had the pleasure of seeing the lead of the 9 from J972. I held Q3. Declarer held K104. Dummy held A865. Declarer needed this to make the grand. IMPs, vulnerable.

[Mbodell]

TheoKole, on Oct 14 2007, 07:26 AM, said:

8 ♥


Theo

That's what I lead. Turned out a lead from Jxx was the only thing that made the contract fairly easy and a club lead from xx was the only thing that made the contract impossible double dummy. The heart or diamond lead led to a line that should be defeated with reasonable defense on probable declarer lines. Unfortunately, we let them make it.