Help
Axx
Qxxx
x
Qxxxx
3D-p-6D
lead lead lead.
fixed now
lead lead lead
#1
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2010-June-19, 12:15
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 835
- Joined: 2009-May-03
Posted 2010-June-19, 13:39
What a coincidence... A bridge column in the newspaper quoted this week:
" Many years ago, we asked a great world champion about leading against a slam.
...( He said) ' Don't even think -- if you have a ( sidesuit ) singleton or an Ace, lead it ' " .
Of course for the hand in that column, it happened to be the losing lead..... as Declarer had Q x x opposite K x x x.
" Many years ago, we asked a great world champion about leading against a slam.
...( He said) ' Don't even think -- if you have a ( sidesuit ) singleton or an Ace, lead it ' " .
Of course for the hand in that column, it happened to be the losing lead..... as Declarer had Q x x opposite K x x x.
Don Stenmark ( TWOferBRIDGE )
#3
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2010-June-19, 13:56
so what do you lead???
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 835
- Joined: 2009-May-03
Posted 2010-June-19, 14:14
I hate to lead from Q-nothing....
And, eventho, i prefer the "non-thinking" route, I'll go with a Diam lead.
And, eventho, i prefer the "non-thinking" route, I'll go with a Diam lead.
Don Stenmark ( TWOferBRIDGE )
#5
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,866
- Joined: 2008-July-13
Posted 2010-June-19, 14:14
i'll go for a heart - attacking lead auction.
declarer's more likely to have 2+ hearts than clubs, though probably only marginally - he might have 4 clubs, but he's unlikely to have 4 hearts.
declarer's more likely to have 2+ hearts than clubs, though probably only marginally - he might have 4 clubs, but he's unlikely to have 4 hearts.
#6
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 595
- Joined: 2008-April-30
- Location:Pleasanton, CA, US
Posted 2010-June-19, 14:26
Spade ace.
#7
- Tubthumper
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,835
- Joined: 2007-July-11
- Gender:Male
- Location:Portland, OR, USA
- Interests:Bridge, pool, financial crime. New experiences, new people.
Posted 2010-June-19, 14:41
heart, unless I'm playing against gamblers who will bid 6 diamonds off two top spades.
Chris Gibson
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,214
- Joined: 2007-December-16
- Location:Pasadena, CA
Posted 2010-June-19, 14:49
Low spade, I don't even consider this to be trying to be a genius, this is just our best shot at two fast tricks.
#9
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,814
- Joined: 2009-July-23
- Gender:Male
- Location:New Orleans
Posted 2010-June-19, 16:00
gwnn, on Jun 19 2010, 01:15 PM, said:
Axx
Qxxx
x
Qxxxx
3D-p-6D
lead lead lead.
fixed now
Qxxx
x
Qxxxx
3D-p-6D
lead lead lead.
fixed now
Well I am not leading a singleton trump and pretty much set against leading the Ace so I lead from the longest suit which holds a Q.
"Tell me of your home world, Usul"
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
the Freman, Chani from the move "Dune"
"I learned long ago, never to wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and besides, the pig likes it."
George Bernard Shaw
#10
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 358
- Joined: 2009-December-17
Posted 2010-June-19, 16:06
Ace of Spades - this time and next whether or not it works.
#11
- Andy Bowles
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,993
- Joined: 2007-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, UK
Posted 2010-June-19, 16:32
A low heart seems to be hoping for quite a lot: partner to have the king, declarer to have at least two, dummy's clubs not to provide the necessary discards. A low spade needs less, but still quite a lot: partner to have the queen, declarer to have at least two, declarer or dummy to have the jack.
♠A requires only that partner have a trump trick. Looking at a singleton trump, that doesn't seem that unlikely. I'd lead ♠A.
♠A requires only that partner have a trump trick. Looking at a singleton trump, that doesn't seem that unlikely. I'd lead ♠A.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#12
- Modern Day Trebuchet Enthusiast
-
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 738
- Joined: 2007-October-17
- Gender:Male
- Location:Western Mass.
Posted 2010-June-19, 20:47
low ♠ in tempo unless righty suspects I underlead aces against slams, then ♠A.
I once yelled at my partner for discarding the 'wrong' card when he was subjected to a squeeze that I allowed by giving the wrong count with too high a card. Now he's allowed to pitch aces when the opponents have the king in the dummy. At trick 2. When he could have followed suit. And blame me.
East4Evil ♥ sohcahtoa 4ever!!!!!1
East4Evil ♥ sohcahtoa 4ever!!!!!1
#13
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 2,208
- Joined: 2007-July-01
- Gender:Male
- Location:Michigan
- Interests:Science, Sports
Posted 2010-June-19, 21:28
rogerclee, on Jun 19 2010, 03:49 PM, said:
Low spade, I don't even consider this to be trying to be a genius, this is just our best shot at two fast tricks.
Totally agree
Kevin Fay
#14
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,962
- Joined: 2007-September-14
- Location:Australia
- Interests:The Universe, Traveling, Squash, and Scandinavia.
Posted 2010-June-20, 05:48
Ace of spades.
- Andy -
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#15
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 323
- Joined: 2008-May-26
- Location:London
- Interests:Genetic Engineering, Squash, Languages, Travelling, Table Tennis, Movies, Judo, Swimming, Scuba Diving, Climbing...
Posted 2010-June-20, 06:44
What is the vulnerability?
♣ Veni, vidi, proficisci ♣
#16
- Csaba the Hutt
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,027
- Joined: 2006-June-16
- Gender:Male
- Interests:bye
Posted 2010-June-20, 07:31
They are vulnerable, we are not.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#17
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 323
- Joined: 2008-May-26
- Location:London
- Interests:Genetic Engineering, Squash, Languages, Travelling, Table Tennis, Movies, Judo, Swimming, Scuba Diving, Climbing...
Posted 2010-June-20, 08:40
Since LHO didn't go via rkc without the ♠A it seems reasonable to assume the ♦s are solid along with first round control in ♣ and ♥. It also seems probable LHO will have at least 2nd round control in ♠s, which is probably the ♠K. If you trust your opponents to have at least second round control in ♠ then I think the ♠A is out as you are probably just setting up a trick (K♠ or more) and handing them tempo to explore all their options.
A ♦ lead might make them misguess a suit they would have gotten right if you lead it, but leading a trump against this kind of contract also has a lot of inferences attached to it for declarer!
A small ♠ could work if you find your partner with the Q and opps with K and J. I wouldn't be prepared to take that risk because you might hand them an impossible contract if they have something like KQxx-x/Kxxx-Q/Kxx-Qx. It loses tempo and may allow them to set up a discard for their 2nd loser before you knock out the ace in that suit (eg. K♥ or K♣ with partner). ♠ is your shortest outside suit so if there is a suit they need to set up, it is most likely to be this one. If they have a guess to set up ♠s, they may still have it later! Most people will automatically put up the ♠J with KJT later in the play so they might still get it wrong.
Any of the other leads could work too but would be more likely to lead a ♣ than a ♥. Simply because I have more of them and the opponents are more likely to be forced to start on that suit because they have more expected combined length.
So I suppose in the end I would lead a small ♣.
A ♦ lead might make them misguess a suit they would have gotten right if you lead it, but leading a trump against this kind of contract also has a lot of inferences attached to it for declarer!
A small ♠ could work if you find your partner with the Q and opps with K and J. I wouldn't be prepared to take that risk because you might hand them an impossible contract if they have something like KQxx-x/Kxxx-Q/Kxx-Qx. It loses tempo and may allow them to set up a discard for their 2nd loser before you knock out the ace in that suit (eg. K♥ or K♣ with partner). ♠ is your shortest outside suit so if there is a suit they need to set up, it is most likely to be this one. If they have a guess to set up ♠s, they may still have it later! Most people will automatically put up the ♠J with KJT later in the play so they might still get it wrong.
Any of the other leads could work too but would be more likely to lead a ♣ than a ♥. Simply because I have more of them and the opponents are more likely to be forced to start on that suit because they have more expected combined length.
So I suppose in the end I would lead a small ♣.
♣ Veni, vidi, proficisci ♣
#18
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 244
- Joined: 2008-June-03
Posted 2010-June-20, 09:03
Knowing nothing about the bidder, I am stumped at what dummy's holding is to go straight to 6♦ without any interest of controls? The only type of hand that makes sense to me is something where you need to cash out the ♠A and a slim hope for a trump trick, because your two Q's don't look to be lying favourably.
I just do not see how leading a low ♠ will get you anything that you would have not of had a good chance of getting anyway? The only issue would be the ♠ trick disappearing. The only other viable option is partner having a K in ♥ or ♣, in which case leading the ♠A could cost. It would not surprise me that the lead of a small ♣ could work.
I just do not see how leading a low ♠ will get you anything that you would have not of had a good chance of getting anyway? The only issue would be the ♠ trick disappearing. The only other viable option is partner having a K in ♥ or ♣, in which case leading the ♠A could cost. It would not surprise me that the lead of a small ♣ could work.
bridge is never always a game of exact, for those times it's all about percentages, partner and the opponents.
#19
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,962
- Joined: 2007-September-14
- Location:Australia
- Interests:The Universe, Traveling, Squash, and Scandinavia.
Posted 2010-June-20, 09:28
gnasher, on Jun 20 2010, 09:32 AM, said:
♠A requires only that partner have a trump trick. Looking at a singleton trump, that doesn't seem that unlikely. I'd lead ♠A.
Additional (albeit probably unlikely) chance would be giving partner a spade ruff as dummy might track with long solid spades.
- Andy -
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
We are all connected to each other biologically, to the Earth chemically, and to the rest of the universe atomically.
We're in the universe, and the universe is in us.
#20
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,162
- Joined: 2006-July-10
- Gender:Male
- Location:Maryland
Posted 2010-June-21, 13:42
gnasher, on Jun 19 2010, 06:32 PM, said:
A low heart seems to be hoping for quite a lot: partner to have the king, declarer to have at least two, dummy's clubs not to provide the necessary discards. A low spade needs less, but still quite a lot: partner to have the queen, declarer to have at least two, declarer or dummy to have the jack.
♠A requires only that partner have a trump trick. Looking at a singleton trump, that doesn't seem that unlikely. I'd lead ♠A.
♠A requires only that partner have a trump trick. Looking at a singleton trump, that doesn't seem that unlikely. I'd lead ♠A.
agree