[jvage]

Teams, at unfavourable you hold:
Q932
98643
4
543

Your opponents undisturbed bidding, starting with RHO:
1♦ - 1♥
1♠ - 2♦
3♣ - 3♥
3NT - 4♦
4♥ - 4NT
5♥ - 6NT

Partner doubles the final contract (in tempo, this is not a UI-problem).

2♦ was XYZ (artificial GF), 3♣, 3♥, 3NT and 4♦ natural. 4♥ was cue agreeing diamonds, followed by RKCB and 2 of 5 aces without the ♦Q. When you ask about 3♣ LHO says it probably shows 4054 (RHO would normally open 1♣ with 44 minors and would rebid 2NT or 3♦ with 4153).

What would you lead, and what would you lead if partner had not doubled?

John

[Codo]

Doubled: Dummies first suit, which happens to be our longest suit = Heart
Undoubled: The same.

[kfay]

This is interesting because to me the double asks for a ♥ lead. It's funny that these opps have a diamond fit yet LHO has settled on 6NT supposedly knowing his partner is void in hearts. Either he's playing mind games with us, forgot who's declaring 6NT, or has hearts legitimately doubly stopped (at least).

I feel like I shouldn't be overly stressed about this lead since what are declarer's losers going away on? If anything it seems like it'd be on dummy's long hearts.

I'm going to lead a club and hope I hit on partner's KQ. Without the double I'd probably lead a major but I'm not going to think about it too much.

[ArtK78]

I lead a heart, doubled or undoubled.

[kfay]

To me a heart lead just seems wrong. Is LHO a total idiot? If so maybe it should be noted in the OP. To me it's more likely he has KQJ109 and now declarer's 3 small clubs and a spade pitch.

It seems more than likely that partner has the ace of hearts and a trick he wants to establish somewhere else before that gets knocked out.

[Apollo81]

I'd lead a club. Partner is probably doubling on an AK somewhere, two aces, or a KQ and an Ace. I dont need to lead hearts in any of these cases, and I probably dont need to lead diamonds either. Without the double I'd probably have to decide whether the auction + my heart holding merited trying to find partner with the sK and a stick, but now I think I have a clear club lead since that is where pard could have a KQ

[Apollo81]

Doubling to ask for the lead of dummy's first bid suit doesn't apply when it makes no sense looking at your hand. Do you really think pard has ♥AQ and out? (I don't) Even if he does, the contract might not make even without the lead.

[ArtK78]

The auction is consistent with LHO holding KJTxxx of hearts. Partner doubled. He doesn't know what your heart holding is. But he knows that you would tend to lead dummy's first bid suit if he doubles. Why shouldn't you believe him?

[Codo]

Apollo81, on Jan 11 2008, 04:20 AM, said:

Doubling to ask for the lead of dummy's first bid suit doesn't apply when it makes no sense looking at your hand. Do you really think pard has ♥AQ and out? (I don't) Even if he does, the contract might not make even without the lead.

And how exactly can you figure out that you don´t double with AQ in HEarts because the message will be canceled cause pd has five small hearts?

And if you posess A of Diamond and KQ or KJ of Heart. which suit should your partner lead?

If pd has AQ of H and out they may have 6 diamonds 4 clubs and two spade without a finesse?

[Apollo81]

If partner has something like ♥Kx and an ace or ♥AQ I coutn only 11 tricks for declarer if he doesnt pick up the ♠Q, thus I can afford to try another lead

[awm]

How about a diamond lead?

I know this seems weird, but we have to ask why, at teams, the opponents chose 6NT over 6♦. Certainly declarer is very short in hearts, so it would seem like there's potential to establish additional tricks by ruffing the heart suit. It's not a matchpoint 6NT at this form of scoring.

It seems like one or both of the following is likely:

(1) Dummy's hearts are essentially solid, so he doesn't feel like ruffing them will help.
(2) The opponents are off two of the top three diamonds.

It seems quite possible that partner has a strong diamond holding and is doubling for that lead. This requires less in the way of high cards from partner than most other possibilities -- people seem to be suggesting partner has an ace plus a king-queen combination somewhere, which gives the opponents only 29 hcp and no problem in the diamond suit (leaving the question of why they ended in 6NT).

Without the double I probably lead a spade, hoping for partner with the ♠K plus an entry before opponents can reel off 12 tricks.

[kfay]

ArtK78, on Jan 10 2008, 02:38 PM, said:

The auction is consistent with LHO holding KJTxxx of hearts.  Partner doubled.  He doesn't know what your heart holding is.  But he knows that you would tend to lead dummy's first bid suit if he doubles.  Why shouldn't you believe him?

This is just foolish IMO.

Larry Cohen wrote an article in the BB 2-3 months ago about a situation quite similar to this where partner doubles a slam and it turns out he DOESN'T want dummy's 1st bid suit led. Partner made a thinking double and we're entitled to think as well. (Granted, reportedly Cohen led dummy's first bid suit, much to the disappointment of Berkowitz).

Isn't a lead into the ♣ suit also a little unusual?

Regardless, I have a hard time believing that declarer can come across 12 tricks with partner holding something like AQ in hearts when he and dummy seem to have a lot of diamonds between them as well. Frankly it seems impossible.

[pclayton]

Why is pard doubling? He's saying wake up and think and figure it out.

A heart looks normal, but think about it. If you held KJTxxx and you knew pard was short, why would you be jeopardizing a slam for the extra 70 points for 6N instead of 6♦?

Something else is up. I think dummy's hearts are pretty strong, if not solid. .

A spade lead is out (pard has no knowledge about our Q) which leaves a diamond and a club. I think there's a good chance if pard has the ♦AK it won't go away, so I'll try a club.

[Codo]

What had you lead without looking in your cards?
Or in other words, for which lead there is no need to double from pds point of view?
A heart lead is surely NOT high on the list. He does not know that we have five.

Declarer showed first Diamonds, then Spades then Club, everything natural.
Dummy showed Hearts and Diamonds.

I see no bid where they confirmed that they have a control in Club.
So I guess, the normal lead is a club? Pd won´t double with clubs, will he?
Why should partner double and give us the chance to look for a very silly lead while he could be quite confident that club is one of our highest priorities to lead?

If he has AK of Diamond or two cashing aces, the defence had a horrible misunderstanding. Theyx were looking for KCs in Diamonds, so they won´t be so silly to play in 6 NT missing two from 5.
And why shouldPD double for just -100 instead of -50? And are the opps so bad that they are in slam with two aces missing? I doubt this.

What else did posters believe?
Solid hearts in dummy. Possible, but in this case, why don´t they play 6 Heart?

Phil thinks, that the double was a wake up call. Great idea, I am always so sleepy when the opps play slams. I just concentrate to make the tirid overtrick in 2 Diamond undoubled. So I need a slam to be doubled to be alerted.

Pd did the double to help us, or he is SURE that they will fail. We can all agree on
this, can't we?
His help is very commanding, like: Lead dummies first suit. Or it just say: Do something unusual. Unusual would be diamonds or Hearts.

Up to you to decide, I stick to my Heart.

[jvage]

kfay, on Jan 10 2008, 03:21 PM, said:

Larry Cohen wrote an article in the BB 2-3 months ago about a situation quite similar to this where partner doubles a slam and it turns out he DOESN'T want dummy's 1st bid suit led.  Partner made a thinking double and we're entitled to think as well.  (Granted, reportedly Cohen led dummy's first bid suit, much to the disappointment of Berkowitz).

I had not heard about this article, and while I can't claim to be in the same league there are some similarities.

I will wait a bit before I give partners hand (some will probably not agree with his double), but part of the reason I posted was that partner (who is known for almost never saying anything critical to his partners during play) was critical to my "automatic" heart-lead. On the other hand, the only other player who got a similar problem (he is generally regarded as Norways strongest junior player) also lead a heart, but the bidding had been less revealing at his table (and the double less advisable). When I discussed the hand with him after play (of course in the bar ) he argued for a heart-lead, even with the bidding at my table.

Would LHO really bid 3♥, suggesting hearts as trumps facing a probable void, with ♥KJTxxx(x)? And if he did, where did he expect his partner who has not shown any extra values to find 12 tricks in NT? Opponents are not worldclass, but playing together they got a top 10 finnish in the National Pairs final (which is quite strong in Norway), posting in this forum I should have mentioned if I considered them very unreliable.

John

[Apollo81]

This thread died

[jvage]

Sorry for waiting so long before waking the dead

Of the posters I count 2 heart-, 2 club- and 1 diamondleader (some say they would lead the same without the double, some don't comment on that). This is an interesting spread, even more so when a spade-lead was the only lead to beat 6NT

Partners actual hand was AKx, x, QTxxx, Jxxx (dummy had Jx, AKQJTxx, Ax, Kx). Personally I think he should have passed, but at least he managed to bid in tempo.

In an earlier post I commented that LHO's 3♥ later followed by 6NT indicated a solid or near-solid suit. Noone has commented on the 4♦ and 4♥ bids. It makes sense to use 4♦ as a cue with solid hearts and 4♥ as signoff, but at the table it was explanained as a natural 4♦ followed by a cuebid. Since LHO was not interested in 6♦ it is not so farfetched to imagine that he holds solid hearts and the ♦A and is interested in a grand if partner got the ♦K and the 2 missing aces (laydown if he also got the ♦Q), as was the case. He preferred 6NT to 6♥ to protect partners hoped for ♠K (or AQ).

His partner cuebid a known void in his primary suit, would he not have cuebid 4♠ instead if he had a spade-cue? If you think along these lines a spadelead is marked. If partner had not doubled there is another argument for a spadelead. Your red-suits holdings indicate that one or both suits may not be breaking. You may need to establish your spadetrick (if partner got just the K) before declarer sets up his suit.

John