[david_c]

Quick question for those who play attitude leads against NT:

Do you play this as essentially a two-way signal (leading either the bottom card to show a good suit or first/second to show a bad suit), or do you frequently lead middling cards to show varying degrees of attitude?

[hrothgar]

Binary

[iggygork]

I play them more as a range of attitudes about the suit itself and how much of a shift I can stand to other suits; it is primarily about the suit led but also encompasses some information about the rest of my hand. Hence, I may lead second lowest from T8xxx if I hold a yarborough outside of this suit but second or third highest if I have something like KQx on the side.

[Apollo81]

I would think non binary attitude leads would work very, very badly...

[jdonn]

binary as well

[ArtK78]

What most of the posters are saying is that they play attitude leads in much the same way that many players play 2nd and 4th best leads - 2nd best from a suit that they do not want returned, and 4th best from a suit that they do want returned.

I do not believe that is what was intended by the creators of attitude leads. I might even go one step further and state that those are not attitude leads - it is actually high from a bad holding and lowest from a good holding. Attitude leads, as originally devised, allowed for a range of attitudes from worst (highest) to best (lowest) and everything in between, depending, of course, on the length of the suit.

I tried to find a definition of "attitude leads" on the web, but the best I could find in a short period of time comes from a question and answer session with Bobby Wolff:

Dear Mr. Wolff: Why is it that we all lead fourth highest against no-trump contracts? Is there a reason other than inertia?

Iconoclast, Levittown, Pa.

Answer: These days there are two other popular lead styles: third and fifth (or third and low), where the lead is third highest from an even number of cards, but bottom from an odd number, or attitude leads against no-trump, where the smaller the card led, the better the suit. The concept of fourth-highest leads dates from whist and is simply a way to protect your honor cards, while adding some systematic element to the leads. Plus, it works!

Wolff's answer strongly implies that, at least as he understands them, attitude leads are not binary.

[miguelm]

Long time no see Art

I play attitude leads against NT with my regular partner.
These are not intended to be binary, at least not IMO and surely not in the way we try to use it.

Otherwise, I make Art's words mine, you better stick with the 1-2-4 leads.

[FrancesHinden]

I play them 'nearly binary' (which is possibly an oxymoron, but live with it).

Our general approach is that we lead bottom from length to an honour, and top without an honour (except the 9 promises the 10).

The logic for this is that one big plus from attitude leads is that partner has a good idea at trick one what sort of suit you have led from, and can make an intelligent decision about what honour to play. If you make some wishy-washy middle card lead, then partner may not be able to tell if the 6, say, is from KQ76 or from Q762 or from 6542 and you have lost the benefit.

However, we do make an exception to this - when leading from a long but dodgy suit (e.g. J7632), if we have a potentially switchable side suit, we might lead the 3 on the first round and decide whether to continue upwards or downwards next round depending on what develops.

[mycroft]

I still remember leading the 2 from a suit, having declarer ask what the leads mean, being old "the lower the card he leads, the more he wants it returned", and finessing and losing to Qx. I had Txxxx2, and enough stoppers; but if he got in I did *not* want him taking out an entry.

I tend to be ternary: "I don't particuarly want this back", "I really want this back", or "you decide".

Michael.

[JanM]

Add me to the "the lower the card led the more I want that suit returned" agreement. I'd also add that the fact that it isn't always clear to the opening leader which card to lead or to third hand what it means is the reason that I play attitude leads only with Chip and play 4th best, but top or second from bad suits, with other partners. Attitude works best when you've had lots of discussions with the partner with whom you're playing it.

[dburn]

In the days when I used to worry about what to lead, I played that you led your lowest card from a suit you wanted partner to return, and your highest affordable card otherwise.

But over the years, my success rate on opening lead is such that I am thinking of adopting suit preference leads. Thus, the two of hearts means "I probably ought to have led a club" while the eight of hearts means "I probably ought to have led a spade". Partner already knows that I ought not to have led a heart.

[hrothgar]

JanM, on Jan 11 2008, 09:31 PM, said:

Add me to the "the lower the card led the more I want that suit returned" agreement. I'd also add that the fact that it isn't always clear to the opening leader which card to lead or to third hand what it means is the reason that I play attitude leads only with Chip and play 4th best, but top or second from bad suits, with other partners. Attitude works best when you've had lots of discussions with the partner with whom you're playing it.

The obvious question is whether adopting the simplier binary style might allow one to play attitude leads without quite the same level of preparation.

I can certainly accept that a partnership that is willing to invest sufficient time/energy discussing attitude leads might be able to add associate some nuances with intermeidate cards. Conversely, partnership that aren't willing to do so will probably need to use a more blunt instrument.