[gwnn]

kfay, on Nov 16 2007, 12:15 AM, said:

I've underled an ace a few times in my life. Once into KJx in dummy while declarer had xx or something like that. My partner won his queen and then.... returned something else and declarer pitched his small card later. Granted, this partner was an idiot, but it's true that your partner probably by far and away won't realize you've underled an ace until it's too late.

what is the exact reason why declarer would duck it with Ax or Axx?

[Codo]

Since one or two years I am in a more passive mode, so I try not to underlead any honour versus a suit contract and the strong hand on my right.

If I have to, because my hand or the bidding suggests to do so, I would more often underlead queens, then tens, then Kings, then Jacks, then .. Did I miss something? No, I "never" underlead aces.

Obviously NT is a different piece of cake. Here I would prefer to underlead aces to kings into the strong hand.

[MFA]

I prefer to underlead
Q > K >> J > A.

I tend to be very active.

Underleading aces is for specific situations only. Axxx with (balanced?) strength in dummy and a fair chance of partner having a doubleton, for instance.

In general I hate laying down aces. Maybe I hate that just too much ...

I much prefer to lead from a king than from a jack. Leading from a jack tends to require 2 honours with partner to be right. But curiously, I will almost always resolve a QT guess against a mediocre opponent by playing for him to have lead from the J rather than from the K, so perhaps it's just me.

[joker_gib]

Fluffy, on Nov 16 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

So I underlead Kings every day I play, Aces once in a while.

Same !

[skjaeran]

I make active leads regularly, but far from always.

Leading from queens and kings is very common for me.

Underleading aces against trump contracts occurs seldom, almost exclusively when I know dummy is strong banlanced and declarer is supposedly not too distributional. In those circumstances underleading an ace can be very effective.

Leading from a jack is almost a taboo - unless parnter has bid the suit. I only do that if there's absolutely no attractive alternative (in fact almost only if all alternatives are really unattractive). There's almost no other lead that's more prone to cost a trick than leading from Jxx or Jxxx.

[kenrexford]

skaeran, on Nov 16 2007, 05:09 PM, said:

I make active leads regularly, but far from always.

Leading from queens and kings is very common for me.

Underleading aces against trump contracts occurs seldom, almost exclusively when I know dummy is strong banlanced and declarer is supposedly not too distributional. In those circumstances underleading an ace can be very effective.

Leading from a jack is almost a taboo - unless parnter has bid the suit. I only do that if there's absolutely no attractive alternative (in fact almost only if all alternatives are really unattractive). There's almost no other lead that's more prone to cost a trick than leading from Jxx or Jxxx.

7NT, IMPs, vul.

Partner's lead was 9 from J972. Dummy: K865. Me: Q3. Declarer: A104.

Declarer needed four tricks from that suit to make the grand. No other options for him. I was so pleased.

[Foxx]

kenrexford, on Nov 16 2007, 11:42 PM, said:

Declarer needed four tricks from that suit to make the grand. No other options for him. I was so pleased.

Did declarer try to drop the 7 on the third round?

[gwnn]

kenrexford, on Nov 17 2007, 03:42 AM, said:

7NT, IMPs, vul.

Partner's lead was 9 from J972. Dummy: K865. Me: Q3. Declarer: A104.

Declarer needed four tricks from that suit to make the grand. No other options for him. I was so pleased.

one of my favorite Ken Rexford stories

[foo]

kenrexford, on Nov 16 2007, 08:42 PM, said:

skaeran, on Nov 16 2007, 05:09 PM, said:

I make active leads regularly, but far from always.

Leading from queens and kings is very common for me.

Underleading aces against trump contracts occurs seldom, almost exclusively when I know dummy is strong banlanced and declarer is supposedly not too distributional. In those circumstances underleading an ace can be very effective.

Leading from a jack is almost a taboo - unless parnter has bid the suit. I only do that if there's absolutely no attractive alternative (in fact almost only if all alternatives are really unattractive). There's almost no other lead that's more prone to cost a trick than leading from Jxx or Jxxx.

7NT, IMPs, vul.

Partner's lead was 9 from J972. Dummy: K865. Me: Q3. Declarer: A104.

Declarer needed four tricks from that suit to make the grand. No other options for him. I was so pleased.

...and results like this are why I advocate leading the 2nd highest from xxxx or Txxx vs NT contracts to all my partners and students.

I also lead 2nd highest from xxx, Hxx, or HHx (assuming broken honors) vs NT if I decide to lead that suit.
I lead the lowest from xxx or Hxx vs a suit.

Defending vs NT is different than defending vs suit contracts. Establishing long suits vs a suit contract is usually not nearly as useful as it is vs NT contracts.

Just about every expert I know has only underled a A vs a suit contract a handful or less number of times over decades of play.
Underleading A's vs suit contracts is VERY dangerous for the defense. If you adopt the philosophy to simply never do it unless They have shown you their hands, you'll probably be better off.

In stark contrast, underleading any other honor vs a suit contract, K's included, is no where near as likely to blow up a defensive trick as underleading an A.

CASCADE:
The best lead vs your 2S example from the E hand is a ♠.
If W was on lead, the natural (and in this case best) lead from W's hand is a ♥ honor.

In general, the first and best advice about leads is "do your best not to blow up a trick." Most people tend to be too active on opening lead.

[jdonn]

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 03:45 AM, said:

In general, the first and best advice about leads is "do your best not to blow up a trick." Most people tend to be too active on opening lead.

IMO* the best advice on opening lead in general is to be aggressive and try to set up your tricks, for if you wait are too passive declarer will have the advantage in tempo and setting up his suits, and your tricks will vanish before they are ever set up and taken.

*You note when I make a statement of opinion, I note this is my opinion, I don't state it as a fact no matter how certain of its truth I am. You state opinions as though they are facts several times per post. I mean, you are telling a FAR more accomplished player than you what the best lead is on a hand as though it was a fact, despite the facts that
- It's not really provable, and even if it were you certainly didn't prove it.
- His lead worked excellently
- His opinion, which obviously differs from yours, has many more bridge credentials to back it up.
If you didn't state your opinions with such certainty, then you wouldn't be constantly involved in these little battles with people all the time. That I can promise you.

[foo]

jdonn, on Nov 19 2007, 03:54 AM, said:

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 03:45 AM, said:

In general, the first and best advice about leads is "do your best not to blow up a trick."  Most people tend to be too active on opening lead.

IMO* the best advice on opening lead in general is to be aggressive and try to set up your tricks, for if you wait are too passive declarer will have the advantage in tempo and setting up his suits, and your tricks will vanish before they are ever set up and taken.

*You note when I make a statement of opinion, I note this is my opinion, I don't state it as a fact no matter how certain of its truth I am. You state opinions as though they are facts several times per post. I mean, you are telling a FAR more accomplished player than you what the best lead is on a hand as though it was a fact, despite the facts that
- It's not really provable, and even if it were you certainly didn't prove it.
- His lead worked excellently
- His opinion, which obviously differs from yours, has many more bridge credentials to back it up.
If you didn't state your opinions with such certainty, then you wouldn't be constantly involved in these little battles with people all the time. That I can promise you.

...and IME most players tend to be too aggressive and give up tricks or blow up suits on opening lead far more than they give up tempo by being too passive.

I've done statistical analysis using tools like Bridge Browser on this as well as compared notes with experts and Bridge teachers. What's the basis for your PoV or for claiming I'm only presenting my uninformed opinion?

YMMV, and that's fine, but I'm not going to stop giving people the best advice I can just because you and a few others disagree or have decided you like giving me sh*t.

Some people are here to learn. Myself included. Others, like evidently yourself and hrothgar and a few others, are here to argue with and "bad mouth" anyone who disagrees with your PoV.

If you want to argue Bridge merits based on logic and evidence, I'm more than happy to. If you want to flame me just because you don't like what I post, Please don't bother. Life is too short and I have far too little time as it is.

[jdonn]

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 04:13 AM, said:

I've done statistical analysis using tools like Bridge Browser on this as well as compared notes with experts and Bridge teachers.  What's the basis for your PoV or for claiming I'm only presenting my uninformed opinion?

My basis is my experience (after all, I did state from the beginning it was nothing more than my opinion.) And I never said whether I thought your opinion was uninformed or not. I said it was an opinion so you shouldn't state it as a fact. Are you claiming what you said is a fact?

Quote

YMMV, and that's fine, but I'm not going to stop giving people the best advice I can just because you and a few others disagree or have decided you like giving me sh*t.

Nor did I request you stop giving advice. You should only take offense at things that are said, not things that aren't!

[Codo]

foo, on Nov 19 2007, 06:13 PM, said:

YMMV, and that's fine, but I'm not going to stop giving people the best advice I can just because you and a few others disagree or have decided you like giving me sh*t.

Thanks for sharing your advice with us.

Funnily, people like jdonn and jlall had won more then one club tournement in their life. Maybe even more then five.... But they still share their OPINIONS with us mortals, no advices.

Just from your several postings I know that your personal wins are much less then theirs. Just because 9 times out of 10 (to put it mildly) you prefer the wrong way and you cannot be convinced by maths, experience or the 65:1 majority.
There are not just Josh "and some others". There are more or less all of us.

So maybe there is really nobody who needs your advice.

But funnily enough, for the subject of this threat, I share your opinion. I like to go passive if there is no clue to go active.
I read that respected players do disagree here and this is fine. They did not convinced me this time (and I know they won´t lose a tear about that).
But that I share you pov makes me shiver and maybe I should try more active leads instead in the future.

[han]

And against .. - 6NT.

[shintaro]

question

are you actually playing 'Bridge' if you knowingly will never ever underlead an ace!!

[sceptic]

opps are in slam, pard has bid a suit (probably an overcall) , you are void in a different suit from the contract, you are on lead with Axx of pards suit. ( you also have a trump for the ruff to work)

Is leading low to pards suit not worth a shot when if he switches to your void, you get a ruff and can set the contract before they get in and take the next 12 tricks

also a question here, as you wont be on lead, can you x the contract to indicate a different lead back if the K holds

also do you think my example is so far from the realms of reality that I need a brain transplant?

[shintaro]

sceptic, on Nov 20 2007, 03:44 AM, said:

opps are in slam, pard has bid a suit (probably an overcall) , you are void in a different suit from the contract, you are on lead with Axx of pards suit. ( you also have a trump for the ruff to work)

Is leading low to pards suit not worth a shot when if he switches to your void, you get a ruff and can set the contract before they get in and take the next 12 tricks

also a question here, as you wont be on lead, can you x the contract to indicate a different lead back if the K holds

also do you think my example is so far from the realms of reality that I need a brain transplant?

now septic buddy why the leading question

'brain' transplant

sooner rather than later

[ASkolnick]

I don't tend to like either, but I prefer Aces to kings. Here is why

Leading Away from Ace
1) Occasionally loses to stiff King.
2) Gives up a tempo and half trick (The ace is not capturing an honor so the RHO honor wins and LHO has a stopper/trick. This is only relevant though if a pitch is actually needed. So although you may give up a winner, you did not eliminate a loser.

Leading Away from King
1) Qx opposite A Length
2) Ax opposite Q Length

In each of these cases, there is no loser by leading it. My experience indicates that the 2nd is more likely than the 1st. But if I were to lead away from a King (usually 3 cards), it should be in my shorter suit since if declarer has 3 opposite 3+ in suit, you rate to get it back

Obviously, if the auction calls for an aggressive lead, one does not preclude me from taking a necessary action.

[ArtK78]

ASkolnick, on Nov 21 2007, 03:14 PM, said:

I don't tend to like either, but I prefer Aces to kings. Here is why

Leading Away from Ace
1) Occasionally loses to stiff King.
2) Gives up a tempo and half trick (The ace is not capturing an honor so the RHO honor wins and LHO has a stopper/trick. This is only relevant though if a pitch is actually needed. So although you may give up a winner, you did not eliminate a loser.

Leading Away from King
1) Qx opposite A Length
2) Ax opposite Q Length

In each of these cases, there is no loser by leading it. My experience indicates that the 2nd is more likely than the 1st. But if I were to lead away from a King (usually 3 cards), it should be in my shorter suit since if declarer has 3 opposite 3+ in suit, you rate to get it back

Obviously, if the auction calls for an aggressive lead, one does not preclude me from taking a necessary action.

I will add a point in favor of the underlead of the King.

Many times when it appears that the underlead of a King has given up a trick, it turns out not to be true. For one thing, declarer may have other cards behind the Ace and the Queen, so that there was never any real chance that the King was going to score a trick. For another, declarer may have enough tricks in the other suits to avoid having to lose a trick to the King.

On the other hand, when one underleads an Ace the tempo lost may be fatal. The trick may disappear on other winners.