[Cascade]

Scoring: IMP

NS Uncontested
1♦ 1♥
1♠ 2♣*
2♦ 2♥
2♠ 3♥
4♥ All Pass

---

Trick 1: ♣ 4 2 K 3
Trick 2: ♣ 6 8 A 7
Trick 3: ♣ Q 10 ♠2 ♣ J
Trick 4: ♣ 5 ♦ 2 ♥ 10 ♥ Q

Down one.

[paulg]

It's looks an excellent lead to me.

Not sure that I'd have the imagination to find it myself but there are plenty of reasons supporting it. I'd want to write it up if I did this and it worked!

p

[se12sam]

I think this is either brilliant or lucky.
a. Brilliant -- if East heard the bidding carefully, the low club is a sound candidate for a lead. Having said that, it could still make East look foolish in some cases. So there is some risk attached. If East consciously chose it, well done! He deserves the result.
b. Lucky -- every one of us has encountered people who underlead aces without any sound reason. This could be one of them.

I think the play to trick 4 is well thought out and some of the people who (randomly) underlead aces will not find it. The play to trick 4 tips the scales in the direction of brilliant.

[helene_t]

The auction suggests that South has some club length but not the King. North might have suggested 3NT if he had the King. Also it is IMPs and East's honours are well placed for declarer and there seem to be no bad splits. So to set the contract you need to assume you have some luck, and you need to lead aggressively.

Also West's high ruff suggests that these guy are competent defenders.

They could be cheating but most likely they are good, and lucky as well.

[wclass___]

Brilliant

[655321]

None of the above.

Seems like good defense to me - neither cheating nor spectacularly brilliant .

The 4th round of clubs was obvious, and leading a club also seems clear.

So the choice of a low club rather than the Ace was the only interesting decision for the defense. East did well to lead low, probably reasoning that if neither opponent wanted to bid NT, his partner very likely had the King. And if he has the King, leading low works best whenever the King is doubleton, as on the actual hand.

[jdonn]

I think north's (a little) and south's (a lot) bidding are stranger than the defense.

[helene_t]

Huh? The auction looks ok to me. They may not be playing my pet methods, but playing vanilla I might very well have bid the same way. Maybe I have a weird notion of vanilla?

[gwnn]

Isn't it jdonn law to lead trump from East? If so, then the ♣ lead isn't really clear.

[Codo]

I guess that east understood norths bidding as 5 hearts with no stopper in clubs.
Soth denied a stopper too.
So the low club was a nice lead, but not too hard to find.

Maybe the 2 of spade denied a high diamond, so the only possile 4. trick was an uppercut.

Well done and a little lucky.

[zasanya]

Brilliant lead.Was it Fourquet?

[bid_em_up]

Abstain.

The answer to the question is dependent on the caliber of the player(s) in question.

For a World Class player, this should be an easy defense to find and wtp (doesn't mean they always will do so, but it would not be unexpected either). As others have stated, there is sound bridge logic on which to base this defense, and certainly any World Class player should be able to visualize the hands in this manner and find this defense.

For an Expert player, it's somewhere between a wtp, and "the guy is brilliant".

For Advanced, it's some of "the guy is brilliant" and some of "the guy is lucky".

For Beginner to Intermediate, it's normally just plain lucky (being rewarded for bad play).

Of course, any of the above could be wired as well. However, I would be inclined to believe that only if the player in question was known to be a poor player who consistently found this type of defense.

[Phil]

Agree with 655321. I think the defense has advertised no club stop, so the underlead is well thought out, but I wouldn't call it routine for anyone.

[Jlall]

normal

[bill1157]

You couldn't say whether the defenders had a wire on the hand based on 1 deal, you would have to see a pattern of brilliant leads that don't turn out wrong once in a while to suspect something funny.

Bill

[Cascade]

bill1157, on Jul 7 2009, 08:11 AM, said:

You couldn't say whether the defenders had a wire on the hand based on 1 deal, you would have to see a pattern of brilliant leads that don't turn out wrong once in a while to suspect something funny.

Bill

Many people seem to claim "wire" based on one hand.

It has long been my contention that the hands that work out are not the proof of a "wire" but the ones that don't work out that are the proof of not cheating.

[benlessard]

At imps its a normal lead. At matchpoint is a pretty good lead if you trust your opponents.



3H, both pointed Q. its pretty hard to find another layout where 4H will go down.

[the hog]

655321, on Jul 5 2009, 09:40 PM, said:

None of the above.

Seems like good defense to me - neither cheating nor spectacularly brilliant .

The 4th round of clubs was obvious, and leading a club also seems clear.

So the choice of a low club rather than the Ace was the only interesting decision for the defense. East did well to lead low, probably reasoning that if neither opponent wanted to bid NT, his partner very likely had the King. And if he has the King, leading low works best whenever the King is doubleton, as on the actual hand.

Totally agree. A C lead is 100% marked on the auction and the defence, while good, is nothing extraordinary. I also agree with Josh's comment regarding the bidding.

[se12sam]

Cascade, on Jul 6 2009, 09:43 PM, said:

Many people seem to claim "wire" based on one hand.

But not this knowledgeable forum. Option 4 has received 0(!) out of 23 votes after two days.

[Fluffy]

Well done opps, I hate you but lets see if I can get you next deal.