[Walddk]

Scoring: IMP

E: 7C
Lead: ?

---

You are playing in a major international tournament against good opponents. You are South, and your RHO opens a 14-16 NT. Your methods allow you to overcall 2♥, and West bids 2NT (transfer to clubs). The rest of the auction is

3♣1) - 5♥ 2)
6♣3) - 7♣
p

1. Forced.
2. Exclusion Roman Key Card Blackwood, showing a heart void.
3. 2 Key Cards outside hearts.

What do you lead and why?

Roland

[Free]

I can't immediatly find a hand where leading ♥ would be good (maybe small ♥, but that's it). ♣ is also quite useless. So that leaves us with ♠ or ♦. Where are the ♠s? Partner must have some imo... I'll lead ♠.

[helene_t]

♣ - I'm less likely to give a finese away than if I lead ♠ or ♦.

[joker_gib]

helene_t, on Mar 11 2005, 06:28 AM, said:

♣ - I'm less likely to give a finese away than if I lead ♠ or ♦.

♣ too for me !

I don't want to help declarer in side suits (but maybe i've just help him in ♣ )

[inquiry]

♥JACK

Ok, this seems weird. Normally i lead a trump against grand slam. Here I am not going too, as that might give up our only trick should partner have Qxx or Jxxx in clubs. With my singleton trump, one of my best chances is a bad club split leads to a trick for us.

The heart ace is dangerous, as it could set up two heart tricks for EW. The low heart should only give one. Sounds like one pitch on heart is not what West has in mind when he bids the grand. IF opener has KQ of hearts, as expected, he can force a heart trick anyway.

Ben

[luke warm]

10♥ ... it's safe (lho will ruff even if dummy has the king) and safety is all i want... any other lead runs the risk of finessing partner (imo)

[mike777]

Middle H if I want to be written up in bulletin.

Club in real life.

[Rebound]

I think I'll put the ♠10 on the table. I'm with Ben as far as not wanting to chance giving up a club trick.

[luis]

Heart Ace I've seen this before.

[joker_gib]

luis, on Mar 11 2005, 08:52 AM, said:

Heart Ace I've seen this before.

Was it a "psychic" void ? LOL

[Walddk]

luis, on Mar 11 2005, 08:52 AM, said:

Heart Ace I've seen this before.

Scoring: IMP

S: 7C
Lead: ?

---

Well remembered Luis!

I have now rotated the hand to show you how it was played in real life. The poor player in the West seat who faced this problem was Jason Hackett of England in the China Cup a few years back.

Jason considered the bidding and finally led ........ a diamond! So the "impossible" grand slam rolled in. I haven't asked Jason's twin brother, Justin, if he was amused.

No one on earth can blame Jason Hackett for not leading ♥A. He believed what he saw in the bidding. Wouldn't we all have?

Now, why do I bring this impossible lead problem at all you may ask. Because, in another thread, we have been discussing psychs. North psyched on this deal by pretending that he was void in hearts. He was a liar, but an honest liar if you see what I mean. He did not violate any bridge law.

So now I have this question for those of you who are against psyches:

Should the score have been adjusted to 7♣ -1, or should the inspired North who took a chance and who was successful have been reprimanded?

It's a rhetorical question of course. North (name unknown) did great. He gambled, and his gamble paid off. The only thing you can actually do is congratulate him, also if you are one of his opponents. In fact, I know that Jason did! If this North player ever makes his way to BBO, I think it would be shame to bar him from taking part in certain tourneys!

MY view; you are all entitled to yours.

Roland

[ArcLight]

A club.

RHO has at least 2, as he bid NT, and probably has 3.
LHO has 5 or 6, I think 6. So its possible that a club lead will cost if pard has Jxxx.
However I think this is unlikely. I certainly don't want to lead a side suit into declarer, for a free finesse (though if he takes one he'll win anyway).
I think its more likely the opps have 8-9 clubs.
I place declarer with around 3 hearts, so thats 3 ruffs, or discards. Leading an Ace makes it easier, as a King is now good. (unless the void bid was a psych, which sems like a bad idea)

[Walddk]

ArcLight, on Mar 11 2005, 09:25 AM, said:

(unless the void bid was a psych, which sems like a bad idea)

It wasn't a bad idea (see above), it turned out to be a great move! It also fooled you, like it fooled Jason Hackett and all others (except Luis who remembered the hand).

Roland

[ochinko]

I almost never psyche mainly because I'm not good at it. That being said, I'm the first to congratulate the opponents for a successful psyche. I believe there's nothing unethical in it as long as the partner of the player making the psyche is as unaware of it as our pair is.

Petko

[luis]

Walddk, on Mar 11 2005, 02:28 PM, said:

ArcLight, on Mar 11 2005, 09:25 AM, said:

(unless the void bid was a psych, which sems like a bad idea)

It wasn't a bad idea (see above), it turned out to be a great move! It also fooled you, like it fooled Jason Hackett and all others (except Luis who remembered the hand).

Roland

Actually I didn't remember the hand Roland :-)
But in the recent trials here in Argentina the guy on my right bid 5h exclusion with xxx in hearts and a void in clubs, I lead the hA -bored- down 1. That's why I said "I've seen this before" :-)
When the player bidding exclusion is good and has done some """"smart""" or fancy bids if there's not a clear reason to lead something else I think that the percentage lead is the supossed void suit.

[Free]

Yeah, in "the art of psychic bidding and it's pitfalls", there are also similar examples of fake splinters and voids... It wouldn't be the first time something like this works

[ArcLight]

The reason I say its a bad idea is if you have the small slam, is at IMPS (as opposed to MPs) it really worth risking it with a psych cue bid to go for the grand?
It did fool me, but might it not result in blown slams as well? What is the expected pay off.

[Walddk]

ArcLight, on Mar 11 2005, 11:59 AM, said:

It did fool me, but might it not result in blown slams as well? What is the expected pay off.

Well, it is highly unlikely, though feasible, that the NT opener (14-16) doesn't have at least one ace outside hearts, so it was a well controlled psyche really.

If opener had shown 1 Key Card outside hearts, North would have settled for a safe small slam. Now that South showed ♠A and ♦A (2 Key Cards outside hearts), there was a good chance that West would not lead a heart after North convinced everyone that he was void in hearts.

On a non heart lead responder knew that his losing heart would go away on ♦A, so he took a well calculated chance. I am sure he thought about all this before he bid 5♥.

It takes a lot of imagination and courage to do it at the table. Easy enough at the desk, but in real life .....

Roland

[kgr]

Walddk, on Mar 11 2005, 10:14 PM, said:

ArcLight, on Mar 11 2005, 11:59 AM, said:

It did fool me, but might it not result in blown slams as well?  What is the expected pay off.

Well, it is highly unlikely, though feasible, that the NT opener (14-16) doesn't have at least one ace outside hearts, so it was a well controlled psyche really.

If opener had shown 1 Key Card outside hearts, North would have settled for a safe small slam. Now that South showed ♠A and ♦A (2 Key Cards outside hearts), there was a good chance that West would not lead a heart after North convinced everyone that he was void in hearts.

On a non heart lead responder knew that his losing heart would go away on ♦A, so he took a well calculated chance. I am sure he thought about all this before he bid 5♥.

It takes a lot of imagination and courage to do it at the table. Easy enough at the desk, but in real life .....

Roland

...and next time after same bidding they lead ♥A against slem when he has a void in ♥

[Winstonm]

I remember another hand played by one of the "Blue Team" members: he bid a grand in a competetive auction knowing he was off a cashable ace but also knowing that at the vulnerability the opponents could not afford NOT to sacrifice. This semi-psyche produced a +300 result when at the other table the normal 6-level sacrifice was made.

Do we penalize this excellent thinking and daring bid? I think not.

WinstonM