[SchTsch]

Playing IMPs I held this hand nonvulnerable vs. vulnerable:

♠ -
♥ K109xx
♦ J10
♣ A1098xx

RHO opens 1♣ which is 2+♣. I bid 1♥, LHO passes and my pard bids 1♠. Now RHO bids 1NT, I bid 2♣, LHO bids 3♦, partner passes, and RHO bids 3NT. Pass, pass to my pard who doubles to make it final contract.

So it went:

1♣ - 1♥ - p - 1♠
1NT - 2♣ - 3♦ - p
3NT - p - p - X
all pass

What do you expect from your partner? What do you lead?

[Al_U_Card]

let's see....opener has 18-19 hcp with 4 S cards and a dbl H stop, KQ of C and a few D cards... does pard know that your 2C bid does NOT promise S support? If so, he may have 7-9 hcp and is ready to lead a S........ so you can't....how bout a C?

[SchTsch]

Well, I presumed that this should be a lead directing double, although iy could really be a plain penalty.

So, if it is plain penalty it probably doesn't matter much what I lead as they are always going down. If this is a LD double what lead it suggests?
We bid three suits. Pard already bid 1♠ to show some values so double probably shouldn't be spade oriented. Now, what concerns me is: did partner double to tell me please lead anything but spades? Or did he try to send some message about what suit to lead?

I reasoned like this:
As I managed to show my two suiter pards double is probably oriented on one of my suits and not on spades.
As he couldn't support my clubs because of 3♦ bid by LHO, and he could support my hearts it seems to me that normal lead from my hand would be the ten of clubs. So if my partner wants me to lead a heart (because he has doubleton honor or something) then he has to either support my nonvul bid with doubleton to show the lead, and I don't like that approach, or he can double 3NT to suggest a heart lead.

I'm not sure my reasoning is good so I would like to hear why.

[Winstonm]

Sounds like 6 fair diamonds and a reason to believe they can be reached...

What would Joe Grue lead?

How about the heart King, expecting to find:

---

[Al_U_Card]

Declarer is likely 4-4-2-3, your pard 6-2-3(4)-2(1). Since they feel that D are a source of tricks, he wants you to get S going ASAP as he may only have 1 sure diamond guard. That said, dbl to NOT lead your suit usually only applies at the 5 level i believe. Here it is likely, as JL says, just his shot at a good result as he expects more from you perhaps......(like S support?)

[Al_U_Card]

Winstonm, on Nov 16 2005, 12:05 PM, said:

Sounds like 6 fair diamonds and a reason to believe they can be reached...

What would Joe Grue lead?

How about the heart King, expecting to find:

---

Responder might well have made a Neg. dbl with that hand......

[Robert]

Hello everyone

I tend to lead a partners' suit. So I will lead... ? Oh? Whoops!

Diamond Jack. We seem to have very strong diamonds in an auction that LHO jump bid 3Ds and partner also 'thinks' that the diamonds are not running. If Partner holds, any two of the AKQ honors four times(??9x) or any one of the AKQ honors heading a ?98xx suit this hand could become a lot of fun.

Partner thinks that we are beating this, so I will try to get off lead and let my partner make his usual 'killing' return.

Partner should have the diamonds 'under' control. Otherwise they are very likely making 3NTXed.

Since you have no agreement calling for a certain lead, he should not have doubled 'if' it required you to make some 'unknowable' special 'killing opening lead.'

If his double suggested that beating 3NT required a spade opening lead...

I also like to play a delayed bid of openers minor as natural. Are you sure that your partner also shares this same style? If he thinks that you were showing a cuebid in support of spades, this hand could have a really, really bad ending.

My normal style is to 'not double' auctions that include strong bids by the other pair(1NT=18-19 or Blackwood!) or an invitational type jump bid by the other pair(that 3D bid may have invited!) This auction has not just one but 'two' of these possible warning bids included.

If this hand went down would you really be asking for our opinions here? Or would you just tell your partner that he had made a really good double?

I sometimes used to tell partner 'that was a great bid' and very quickly add, 'do not do that again.' Sometimes bad bids pay off, however, I do not want to include them in my normal bididng style.

Regards,
Robert

[mikeh]

SchTsch, on Nov 16 2005, 12:01 PM, said:

Well, I presumed that this should be a lead directing double, although iy could really be a plain penalty.

So, if it is plain penalty it probably doesn't matter much what I lead as they are always going down. If this is a LD double what lead it suggests?
We bid three suits. Pard already bid 1♠ to show some values so double probably shouldn't be spade oriented. Now, what concerns me is: did partner double to tell me please lead anything but spades? Or did he try to send some message about what suit to lead?

I reasoned like this:
As I managed to show my two suiter pards double is probably oriented on one of my suits and not on spades.
As he couldn't support my clubs because of 3♦ bid by LHO, and he could support my hearts it seems to me that normal lead from my hand would be the ten of clubs. So if my partner wants me to lead a heart (because he has doubleton honor or something) then he has to either support my nonvul bid with doubleton to show the lead, and I don't like that approach, or he can double 3NT to suggest a heart lead.

I'm not sure my reasoning is good so I would like to hear why. 

I think your reasoning is correct (that is not to say that partner is on the same wavelength).

When both partners have bid their own suit, advancer expects overcaller to lead advancer's suit. This makes sense, because declarer usually has cards in overcaller's suit, such that a tempo (and sometimes a trick) will be lost when overcaller leads into declarer. OTOH, advancer's cards are always in front of declarer, so usually nothing is lost in that suit (assuming dummy has any entries, which is not clear here).

Thus, in my experience, a double by advancer asks for overcaller's suit. Obviously not all doubles are lead-directional, since the double may be based on power, but doubler should be catering to the lead-directing interpretation.

Ok: we have eliminated the ♠ lead, which is very fortunate given the nature of our ♠ holding....

But here we have a very unusual situation in that we have bid two suits.

Partner could have raised ♥ immediately or on a delayed basis, altho any inference arising from the pass of 3♦ is dangerous: he would need a strnge hand to bid 1♠ and then 3♥ on an auction that screams both misfit and the presence of a good defensive hand on his left.

I think that it is unclear which of my suits he wants me to lead, but I lean towards ♣ due to the slight inferences flowing from the non-raise. I add to that the fact that declarer definitely showed both majors stopped with 1N.

Finally, I need much less from partner to make a ♣ lead the winner: the Jx may be enough if he has an entry, and I am sure that he does.

[Kalvan14]

Leading ♣ is attractive, and should not cost a trick in any case.
The double looks like requesting ♦: OTOH, LHO has 6 diamonds, RHO has at least 2 (hope not 3 ), so pard has 2 or 3 of the lil beggars.
The arguments against leading ♥ are quite compelling.
Pard is likely to have 6 spades, 3 diamonds and 2-2 in the round suits. In such a case, Jx in clubs would be quite enough.
I lead ♣T