[sceptic]

xx xxx xxxx

what do you lead from these

against NT and against suit

specifically if on lead to pard

what are the benifits of you personal perference please

[luke warm]

#1 and #2, top card because i don't want partner to think i care whether or not the suit's returned... #3, the 3rd for count

there's a case to be made for the 2nd card on #2, but i can't make it

[Double !]

This excellent question goes hand-in-hand with the thread on lead, signals, and discards that is currently running. I don't like MUD, top of nothing can make it hard for P to know whether or not you have dbltn, and low might imply an honor to many. Note explanation to the meaning of 2/4 leads as it pertains to 2. (2nd highest from yuck.)

[helene_t]

In principle we play MUD but it sometimes costs a trick to play your highest card next, and sometimes partner would like to see directly if your middle-card is likely to be a doubleton. But leading the lowest of three is not good either, partner will play you for an honour.

I'm not sure what to do. I try to avoid leading 3-card suits until we have better agreements.

[awm]

vs NT, high from any number of small cards unless leading a suit partner has bid. If partner has bid the suit and I have raised, then lead high. If partner has bid the suit and I have not raised, then 3rd best. I will lead 4th from five small if holding several outside entries (I really do want the suit back).

vs suits, high from doubleton, 3rd from three or four small.

[Double !]

To some degree the answer to this question also depends on whether or not you are leading partner's suit. If the answer is YES, then a very strong case can be made for leading low from xxx (as though you had Hxx) because this could cause declarer a real dilemma should he/she hold KJx: to play J the second round vs. playing K to hopefully block the suit.

In addition, Eddie Kantar, in one of his millions of Bridge Tips advocated for leading an honor in partner's suit if you hadn't supported that suit during the business. IMO, an issue for partnership agreement. I used to lead yop of nothing for a long time, with another (nearly lifetime) partner, the agreement was low (3/5) even with no honor, and with one ex-partner (a fine player) the agreement was 2nd highest from xxx, xxxx, xxxxx, etc. i.e. 2/4.

I think a more compelling argument about the whole topic of leads and signals can be found in "The Eric Rodwell Interview" (Glen Ashton, "Bridge Matters") where, as I interpreted it, did not favor any one style over another. I recommend the article and form your own opinions.

Have a wonderful one.
DHL

[han]

awm, on Aug 12 2005, 02:19 AM, said:

vs NT, high from any number of small cards unless leading a suit partner has bid. If partner has bid the suit and I have raised, then lead high. If partner has bid the suit and I have not raised, then 3rd best. I will lead 4th from five small if holding several outside entries (I really do want the suit back).

vs suits, high from doubleton, 3rd from three or four small.

Same for me.

[han]

When leading from xxx in partner's suit it all depends on whether I already showed support. If I did I lead high. If I didn't I lead low.

I believe that this is "standard", whatever that means.

[Stephen Tu]

From 3 small vs. suit, if I haven't supported, I much prefer low to high or MUD, because I think that the length ambiguity makes a difference much more often than the honor ambiguity. The honor situation can often be deduced from the bidding, declarer's play from dummy, or will be clarified after declarer follows. 3rd hand's best play is often the same whether or not you have the honor; it just doesn't matter all that often.

[whereagles]

Jeff Rubens analysed the issue in his book "Journalist Leads" and concluded that in trump contracts odd leads are better, while in NT top-of-nothing is preferable.