[awm]

---

It's the first day of a major matchpoint event; the field overall is huge and not that strong yet. The opponents are one of three top seeded EW pairs in your section. They play a fairly standard 2/1 system; if you ask about 3♠ it is described as the only available game try which guarantees 5+♠ (2nt by responder would be a NF game try with 4♠, other rebids would have been game forcing).

What's your lead?

[Fluffy]

If dummy has 3 spades he will have 5 clubs, our club holding is dreadful, so a trump is unlikely to work, I just lead the standard diamond.

[Mbodell]

I agree with the reasoning that there are lots of black tricks coming, quite likely, so we should attack a red suit. But we need less from partner in hearts. AQx is 3 off the top, AJx is 3 off the top, Qxx might be good enough for 2 tricks if partner has a trump entry to shoot through the declarer, and having either the A or the Q is enough not to blow a trick. In diamonds AKx is the 3 off the top, AJx is not enough, KJx is enough if partner has the quick trick in trump, and Kxx probably is good if partner has the quick trick. That all seems like diamonds needs more than hearts.

[CSGibson]

Diamond. I don't hate a heart.

Partner had an opportunity to overcall and did not, and is marked with some values because they are not in slam/barely got to game, so I think percentages are to look for help in suits that partner is less likely to be long in - ie, our own longest suit.

[Winstonm]

Opponents have shown no great strength so I do not want to give anything away. I lead trump.

[mike777]

I will attack with a h.

I kinda hate a d lead but I see that is the overwhelming choice.

I guess I hate a trump lead a bit less.

[MrAce]

I lead a spade.

-I have no reasons to believe that they have a long suit running for an aggressive lead

-Even if they do have a 5 card suit, running or not, i may be leading the wrong red suit.

-It is MP, i tend to lead passive more often when the focus is not only defeating their contract.

-Trump leads work better from xxx than xx

-My leads sucks

[akwoo]

Any tempo indications that show opps had a tough decision?

Assuming not, there is no reason to expect any significant portion of the field won't be in 4♠. (For non-ACBL folks - entry into Blue Ribbons requires a first or second place in a prior 2 session (or longer) event - this doesn't mean everyone is good, but it does mean almost everyone is at least BBO Advanced.)

Also, you're playing against a good pair, so there is no reason to expect better than 50% on normal play, so there is no incentive to go with the field (which leads a red suit) in order to reduce variance.

I lead a spade, which is the least likely to give away a trick.

[gszes]

the bidding sounds reasonable the fact the opps invited vs blast means it is unlikely they have
much in the way of extra values. The hcp power rates to be around 25-15 in their favor but with
any luck at all they will have 9 spades and use 10 of those 25 to get 5 spade tricks and then
both sides will have 15 apiece to fight for the final 8 and the opps will need 5 wihile we only
need 4 to set. The clubs (if there are any losers there) rate to be offside so we have an
additional advantage. This looks like a good hand to sit back relax and see if those strong
declarer skills can bring this hand home. I prefer leading a

trump

because I do not wish to give anything away and setting 4s is nowhere near the priority at
MP that it is at IMPS. These are the kinds of hands that generate a lot of ideas and help
everyone think about why they are making a particular lead good problem.

[awm]

This was my opponents problem; I was declarer on the hand. They lead a heart, which was the only lead to set the contract and got them a near top (and me a near bottom). Our hands:

Declarer: ♠AKxxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣Ax
Dummy: ♠Qxxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣KQxx

Honestly I would never have considered the heart lead at MP and was very surprised!

[mike777]

Adam as a nonexpert I would always lead a h.


I don't get these trump or passive leads. again I am a nonexpert so I attack.

what it worth it seems expert lead passive or trumps often....nonexperts attack often.

as a nonexpert I try to never or almost never lead trump or away from Q or passive....fwiw.

This may be bad expert thinking...but standard nonexpert thinking..
1) don't lead passive'
2) don't lead trump
3) don't lead from q
4) etc
5_) attack

------


Adam you play great in blue ribbons and other top events.....don't change.

[awm]

mike777, on 2013-December-08, 21:36, said:

as a nonexpert I try to never or almost never lead trump or away from Q or passive....fwiw.

I'm not sure why you're averse to leading away from queens. My general view is that leading away from a king is likely to be a disaster if the opponents hold both the ace and queen. Sometimes there is an exception if both AQ are behind you anyway, but otherwise it seems that you will often give them a trick they can never score on their own. Obviously at MP this is disastrous! The odds that opponents hold both A+Q will be more than 50% (it's about 55% if those cards are equally likely to be in any hand; actual odds will vary a little because opponents are known to have the majority of the missing points but also because partner has relatively few spades). Leading from a queen is fine if partner has any of the A,K,or J, and there are also more times that a queen can't take a trick if you don't attack the suit early (whereas a king more often will take a trick if you just wait for it).

Obviously all of this is MP-centric and things change a little at IMPs where "giving a trick" is not always disaster if the contract is cold anyway etc.

mike777, on 2013-December-08, 21:36, said:

Adam you play great in blue ribbons and other top events.....don't change.

Certainly I play better than a lot of the bridge population (we did make day 3 of the blue ribbons and yet I view this nationals as having been a "bad tournament" for me). However I would prefer to have fewer "bad tournaments" and win one of these things at some point, and there are plenty of players who regularly do better than me.

[Fluffy]

When queen is in dummy you are not giving them an extra trick, they have that trick from the start, but you might be losing a defensive trick that won't come anywhere else if one of them has doubleton or you don't have the timing to score the king back.

[MickyB]

In terms of what honours players prefer to lead from, I've come across

K > Q > J
J > Q > K
Q > K or J

but never before

K or J > Q

[sathyab]

awm, on 2013-December-08, 21:19, said:

This was my opponents problem; I was declarer on the hand. They lead a heart, which was the only lead to set the contract and got them a near top (and me a near bottom). Our hands:

Declarer: ♠AKxxx ♥xxx ♦xxx ♣Ax
Dummy: ♠Qxxx ♥Qxx ♦Ax ♣KQxx

Honestly I would never have considered the heart lead at MP and was very surprised!

I agree, most people would be hesitant to lead away from KTx. It can work badly on so many lay-outs of the suit, which is why they got a near top. Don't you wish the recaps could include the lead so you don't have to keep wondering at post-mortem how could have played the hand differently/better ? Nice job getting to the finals.

[mfa1010]

I would lead diamonds. Aggressive leads tends to pay if dummy from the bidding will have or may have a useful suit. I think a heart is over-aggressive all in all, but I prefer that to a trump.

[mike777]

This hand seems to be a good example of just how hard it is to know if dummy may or may not have a useful suit.

If making an attacking lead is important when dummy does have a useful suit, how can we know or not on auctions such as OP?