[kgr]

Teams IMP's

---

What do you rate lead of..(3rd/5th):
- ♠3
- ♣J
- ♣2
- ♦4

[Fluffy]

♣J for me

[whereagles]

Hmmm... given our heart void and no stayman/xfer from opps, this seems like a case of suits breaking badly.

I going to bet that going passive is the winner here and lead a diamond.

Black suit leads seem normal as well, but I'm going slow this time.

[phil_20686]

Passivity seems wrong to me. I am betting declarer has some tricks. I will lead a small club in case partner has Ax or something I want to make sure he cannot establish a cheap extra club trick with Q98x or so.

I am quite tempted with a spade lead. Even if the clubs are in theory running we might have difficulty in practice getting my hand in. 2S tempting for that reasons.

[whereagles]

Some tricks where? In diamonds?

[xxhong]

This hand suggests an aggressive lead IMO. Void H is rather bad here because declarer is likely to hold long H and after the first round, he would know how to play that suit. D is bad because you hold 4 almost useless. So now only C or S look attractive. C is good when partner holds CAxx and dummy holds CQxx,which is the case you want to cater to lead CJ.

For S lead, you need partner to hold quite good spades to make it effective, for example, Kxxxx, which is possible, but probably not as likely as CAxx.

kgr, on 2011-October-16, 02:14, said:

Teams IMP's

---

What do you rate lead of..(3rd/5th):
- ♠3
- ♣J
- ♣2
- ♦4

[kgr]

At the other table they play weak NT (9-11) when not Vulnerable and the bidding did go:
1D-2D (2D=inv min)
3NT
=> Will that change your lead?

[whereagles]

It will probably change mine. If opps have a diamond fit there's a good chance one of them has 5 and that calls for a more aggressive lead.

Would lead a club now, but wouldn't still be surprised the passive lead would work.

[1eyedjack]

If you choose to lead a Club then I think that there is quite a strong case for leading a low club rather than the J.
Much depends on whether your SQ is an entry, but assuming that opponents can keep you off winning the SQ, then leading low gains when opponents hold Qx opposite 9xxx. J works if declarer has xx opposite dummy Qxx. But if declarer has xxx then nothing works due to blockage. You might think that dummy's failure to use stayman may affect the odds. I wouldn't know about that.

[gnasher]

1eyedjack, on 2011-October-17, 06:35, said:

If you choose to lead a Club then I think that there is quite a strong case for leading a low club rather than the J.
Much depends on whether your SQ is an entry, but assuming that opponents can keep you off winning the SQ, then leading low gains when opponents hold Qx opposite 9xxx. J works if declarer has xx opposite dummy Qxx. But if declarer has xxx then nothing works due to blockage.

A low one will work against Qxx-xx and Qxx-xxx too, because declarer will always put the queen up.

[Free]

How is ♦4 relevant? I don't hold that card...

[kgr]

---

I did lead ♣J for declarers ♣Q.
Declarer played ♦ and my partner returned a ♥ and 3NT made.
(on these ♦ we play lavinthal, but I don't remember if I played a small or a high ♦)

At the other table the bidding was:
1♦-2♦ (1♦=2+ because they play 9-11NT ;inv min)
3NT
and a ♠ was led and 3NT did go -1 (double finesse in ♦)

[gordontd]

kgr, on 2011-October-18, 02:34, said:

At the other table the bidding was:
1♦-2♦ (1♦=2+ because they play 9-11NT ;inv min)
3NT
and a ♠ was led and 3NT did go -1 (double finesse in ♦)

So the difference between the two was declarer's diamond play, not the opening lead.

[kgr]

gordontd, on 2011-October-18, 02:40, said:

So the difference between the two was declarer's diamond play, not the opening lead.

The difference was the ♣ lead and ♥ return at our table. Declarer could not go wrong anymore.

Remark: I think that at the other table the play was 3 rounds of ♠, 3rd taken with the ♠A. ♦J run to ♦K and a ♣returned to ♣A.
Now declarer finessed ♦ again (finessing is better then playing for the drop?).
It is better to test the ♥ first, but then 2nd ♦-finesse is even more clear after discovering a ♥ void with LHO...But you never know that LHO could go wrong when playing 3 rounds of ♥?

Edit: I verified this with my partner and according to him I played a small D and therefor asked C. Is it clearly better to signal S after the C-lead?

[Free]

I guess they read my blog at the other table