[Chamaco]

Hi all,
I'd like to have comments on which card to lead from QJxx and JTxx at a suit contract.

Beginner's books teach us to lead the top honor at suit contract and lead low in a NT contract (unless we hold at least 8 or 9 as the 3rd card).

Lawrence in "Opening leads" gives a small preference to the Q vs suit contract rather than leading small (based on some computer simulated deals).

Blackwood in "The complete book of opening leads", also gives a slight preference to leading Q vs suit.

Yet I have met quite a few experts who prefer to lead low from QJxx, and when I asked them why they said: "I have to find anywaythe 10 in pard's hand, oytherwise even leading Q wastes a trick. Furthermore leading low is harder to read from opponents, and it sometimes happens that, even when it should waste a trick, declarer does not make the right play at trick 1. OIt is true that it is harder to read also from pard , but in any case it is an attitude lead so pard will return the suit anyways, and defenders benefit more than declarer of the concealed location of honors. ".

I have started experimenting leading low from QJxx vs sit, with good and bad results, and it seems to me that one should lead a honor or a low card *according to the circumstances*.


*according to the circumstances* is a very clever expression, but says nothing , so I'd like hints from the experts as to which hints from the bidding I shd use in order to make my choice...
For example: what inference I shd draw according to the fact that LHO or RHO has length or shortness in the suit ? etc etc..

Thanks !!!

[1eyedjack]

The more cards partner is expected to have in the suit, the greater is the incentive to lead the Q. The more cards that the opps have (especially if one of them is likely to have 4 of them) then (always assuming you must lead the suit at all) the greater is the incentive to lead low.

Just one general pointer.

[Flame]

The worse problem in leading the Q from QJx(x) is finding dummy with A10x(x) and declerer with the K, other problems are if dummy has AK10 (the 10s can also be in declerers hand if he got the 9) if you think this is likely then you better not lead the suit or lead small. this might mean if dummy is strong and not short in this suit (like when he bid NT) you might not like the Q lead.
The problem with leading small is either selling to opponents 10 , which can happend in many ways (the simplest is when declerer has AK10) beside that
leading by the book helps the partnership confident which is very importent.
leading low can sometimes fool declerer.
I'd say lead the Q unless you have a good resson not to, tend to lead low , as dummy become stronger and have more cards in the suit.

[Trpltrbl]

I base my decision on the bidding.
I lead different on different occasions, mostly depending on bidding and my mood (aka tablefeel)

Mike

[Chamaco]

Trpltrbl, on Jun 4 2004, 09:53 PM, said:

I base my decision on the bidding.
I lead different on different occasions, mostly depending on bidding and my mood (aka tablefeel)

Mike

This is also my position, but I would like to understand specifically which info from the bidding I should analyze to decide whether leading low or a honor.

[1eyedjack]

Chamaco, on Jun 4 2004, 08:40 PM, said:

Trpltrbl, on Jun 4 2004, 09:53 PM, said:

I base my decision on the bidding.
I lead different on different occasions, mostly depending on bidding and my mood (aka tablefeel)

Mike 

This is also my position, but I would like to understand specifically which info from the bidding I should analyze to decide whether leading low or a honor.

If you judge it important to limit the number of early tricks in that suit taken by the opposing side, then it is an incentive to lead the top. If you judge it important to maximise the number of tricks that you take in the suit but are happy for them to be by later establishment, then it is an incentive to lead low.

Against a suit contract the prospect of establishing long tricks in the suit is slim, as established tricks may be ruffed by the opposing side. If you judge that the opponents lack trump control then it could be an incentive to lead low. In isolation this tends to suggest that leading high is indicated more often than leading low. But you are seldom taking the decision in isolation.

If you suspect that declarer may seek to establish long tricks in the suit then you are probably better off not leading the suit at all. However the alternatives may be even less attractive. In that case, if you are committed to leading the suit then it is an incentive to lead low.

If you reckon that such values as the opponents hold in the suit are more likely to be concetrated on your left it is an incentive to lead high. If you reckon that they are more likely to be on your right it is an incentive to lead low.

Just a few more general pointers. None of them are conclusive or even more than a marginal feel.

[Fluffy]

Many circunstances happen, the first that comes to my mind is that leading low from QJxx may block the suit, unable to cash all the tricks we deserve quick, so don´t lead low unless you have an outside quick entry.