[Cyberyeti]

---

To people who never look at the yellow boxes, 2♦ is invitational+, completely artificial, says nothing about diamonds, 2N shows 5+♣/4♦ and a minimum opening bid.

What do you lead, what other leads do you consider and how seriously ?

IMPS

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-18, 18:11, said:

---

To people who never look at the yellow boxes, 2♦ is invitational+, completely artificial, says nothing about diamonds, 2N shows 5+♣/4♦ and a minimum opening bid.

What do you lead, what other leads do you consider and how seriously ?

Those who always lead the same at imps as at mps are certainly making bad leads at one form of scoring, if not both. So are we trying to beat the contract or avoid overtricks?

Edit: at the risk of finding myself hoist by my own canard, I would definitely lead the heart K at imps, and consider it at mps. However, such would be for differing reasons.

At imps, I think our best shot at a plus is that partner has useful hearts, such as Q98xx, and an entry. Moreover, I think there is a reasonable chance that, if I am hitting a home run, declarer will duck with AJx(x) in dummy or Axx(x) in dummy and Jx(x) in hand.

I suspect that dummy is 5=4=3=1 mostly because I think he'd rebid spades with 6 and bid 3H with 5.

At mps, the calculus is a bit different. At imps we have to assume that we can beat it, unless blindingly obvious that we can't. However, this auction is not necessarily an indication that they have stretched: north could have a very fine hand indeed, turned off from slam ambitions by the misfit/weakness shown by partner.

So I am influenced at mps by looking for a passive lead. The problem is that I can't find one. While the heart K is at one end of the aggressive spectrum, neither spades nor diamonds have much 'safety' appeal. Plus, in addition to the possible home run nature of the lead (often including some deception from faking possession of the Queen), there are some layouts where the heart works by attacking entries rather than by establishing winners.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2019-January-18, 18:31, said:

Those who always lead the same at imps as at mps are certainly making bad leads at one form of scoring, if not both. So are we trying to beat the contract or avoid overtricks?

Sorry, IMPS, have edited OP, although I'd be interested to know if it changes at MPs

[nige1]

Cyberyeti' writes "IMPS. To people who never look at the yellow boxes, 2♦ is invitational+, completely artificial, says nothing about diamonds, 2N shows 5+♣/4♦ and a minimum opening bid.
What do you lead, what other leads do you consider and how seriously ?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I rank
1. ♥K. Dummy might be 5332 and declarer 2245.
2. ♠Q. Dummy might be 5431 and declarer 1345,
3. ♦5. Declarer might be a personal friend
4. ♣3. You might owe declarer money

---

[Cyberyeti]

The purpose of posting this was that after the 2♦ and 3N bids, E asked a load of questions in a way that made it clear he had something of interest.

I felt this made it 100% certain that a short suit lead would now be found, hence why I asked what else do you seriously consider.

Nigel's logic about rebidding spades with 6 is wrong due to system peculiarities, 2♠ is drop dead, invitational or better starts with 2♦. He might bid 3♠ over 2N with 6 good ones, but 6 indifferent would prob bid 3N (I should add 2N denied 4♥ or 3♠). 64(12) opposite 1345 is perfectly possible.

[Tramticket]

King of hearts at IMPs. Was going to respond last night, but I don't always give the most helpful response after a few glasses of wine and I too was wondering about scoring.

What did West have for his/her questions? Was East experienced enough to know better? Did you call the director? Or was it a match played privately?

[ggwhiz]

Tramticket, on 2019-January-19, 08:08, said:

Was East experienced enough to know better?

Apparently not or they were hedging on a double to direct a lead.

Very unclear what lead a double would ask for and given that an invite got a minimum response and then bid game anyway I think the fact that partner has a little something of interest is AI and don't feel constrained.

With the clubs under control communication rates to be their problem and I'm tempted to lead a small diamond. The ♥K could be the last time I'm on lead and subject partner to repeated endplays.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2019-January-19, 08:08, said:

King of hearts at IMPs. Was going to respond last night, but I don't always give the most helpful response after a few glasses of wine and I too was wondering about scoring.

What did West have for his/her questions? Was East experienced enough to know better? Did you call the director? Or was it a match played privately?

AKJ8x Q98xx xx x declarer has stiff 10 of spades. Yes I did call the director who said score stands. Why it made a difference was that I played a heart back at trick 2 to try to persuade them not to cash 4 spades next and so I went 3 down, any other lead I'm -1.

EW are experienced enough to know better (Norfolk B/C team standard although not a regular partnership).

[rmnka447]

♥ K based on the following ---

I'd take a couple inferences from the auction. Opener probably has no more than 2 ♠ and 3 ♥. The 2 NT bid says it shows 4 ♦ and 5 ♣ accounting for presumably 9 cards. It would seem like opener with 4 ♥ or 3 ♠ would probably bid them over 2 ♦ in order to not lose a potential major suit fit.

The auction is also one of those tortured invitational auctions suggesting a passive lead because the declaring side probably doesn't have extra values with which to make game.

With 11 cards between opener and me, there's too much chance a ♣ lead gives away something, partner has to have a ♣ honor to prevent that. A ♦ lead into opener's known 4 card suit also isn't very appetizing. So it looks like the choice is between the 2 majors. But often when the response is 1 ♠, responder is on 5+ ♠ and leading from Qx is more likely to give something away.

So it looks like a ♥ lead is best. The proper card to lead in that case is the ♥ K.

[Cyberyeti]

rmnka447, on 2019-January-20, 14:00, said:

♥ K based on the following ---

I'd take a couple inferences from the auction. Opener probably has no more than 2 ♠ and 3 ♥. The 2 NT bid says it shows 4 ♦ and 5 ♣ accounting for presumably 9 cards. It would seem like opener with 4 ♥ or 3 ♠ would probably bid them over 2 ♦ in order to not lose a potential major suit fit.

The auction is also one of those tortured invitational auctions suggesting a passive lead because the declaring side probably doesn't have extra values with which to make game.

With 11 cards between opener and me, there's too much chance a ♣ lead gives away something, partner has to have a ♣ honor to prevent that. A ♦ lead into opener's known 4 card suit also isn't very appetizing. So it looks like the choice is between the 2 majors. But often when the response is 1 ♠, responder is on 5+ ♠ and leading from Qx is more likely to give something away.

So it looks like a ♥ lead is best. The proper card to lead in that case is the ♥ K.

As it happens both club and diamond leads are completely passive (dummy has a stiff club honour and declarer's diamonds are all winners, but he only has 8), Q♠ and you'll cash 5 then declarer cashes 8.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-19, 09:33, said:

AKJ8x Q98xx xx x declarer has stiff 10 of spades. Yes I did call the director who said score stands. Why it made a difference was that I played a heart back at trick 2 to try to persuade them not to cash 4 spades next and so I went 3 down, any other lead I'm -1.

EW are experienced enough to know better (Norfolk B/C team standard although not a regular partnership).

My feeling is that, whilst I would lead the K♥, there are Logical Alternatives and there is no obvious choice (there usually are LA for leads, my second choice would be a diamond). I am also satisfied that asking questions, then not bidding (twice) creates Unauthorised Information that East was considering bidding (or doubling). I can only assume that the director reasoned that you seem to be off on any lead? And going three-off seems to be based on your later decisions, with only an indirect relationship to the UI and choice of lead.

But East's behaviour is not to be condoned.

[Cyberyeti]

Tramticket, on 2019-January-21, 03:14, said:

My feeling is that, whilst I would lead the K♥, there are Logical Alternatives and there is no obvious choice (there usually are LA for leads, my second choice would be a diamond). I am also satisfied that asking questions, then not bidding (twice) creates Unauthorised Information that East was considering bidding (or doubling). I can only assume that the director reasoned that you seem to be off on any lead? And going three-off seems to be based on your later decisions, with only an indirect relationship to the UI and choice of lead.

But East's behaviour is not to be condoned.

Well if I cash 8 tricks first the winning defence is obvious. Also it is NOT unrelated to the UI, I "knew" W would find it difficult to make a lead from Kx and justify it because of the UI, so assumed he had KQ and my sole aim was to prevent him finding the defence to cash 4 spades.

[Tramticket]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-21, 05:39, said:

Well if I cash 8 tricks first the winning defence is obvious. Also it is NOT unrelated to the UI, I "knew" W would find it difficult to make a lead from Kx and justify it because of the UI, so assumed he had KQ and my sole aim was to prevent him finding the defence to cash 4 spades.

Yes, I understand and synpathise with your logic. But I also understand why a director would be unwilling to give a ruling based on your assumption over constraints on their actions due to the UI - a sort of second order use of UI

If you were Paul Lamford, you would set this in some fictitious North London club with some convoluted story line ...!

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2019-January-20, 15:04, said:

As it happens both club and diamond leads are completely passive (dummy has a stiff club honour and declarer's diamonds are all winners, but he only has 8), Q♠ and you'll cash 5 then declarer cashes 8.

The fact that, on the actual hand, both a club and a diamond are 'safe' does not make either lead 'passive'. A lead is not to be assessed based on how the cards actually lie but on the auction as known to leader, and his holdings. I think a club lead is beyond idiotic: the fact that dummy has a stiff honour is hardly to be 'expected' as 'most likely'. The fact that a diamond doesn't pickle the suit is, again, fortuitous. Imagine dummy with J9x and partner with Qxx or Kxx. Now declarer may misguess, but that doesn't make the suit 'passive'. A minor lead is passive only double-dummy.

I have no idea whether leader was influenced by questions: I would have expected a series of questions to make spades the indicated lead, not hearts....the one suit where we know with certainty, absent any comments by anyone, that partner has some length.

As I stated in my initial post, to me the heart K is a standout at any form of scoring. I assume that what then happened was that declarer, with 97xxx in spades in dummy, having a stiff 10 in his hand, and clearly having some heart length (win the Ace and play one back!), was pissed off because the opponents weren't so completely comatose as to ignore what was in front of their eyes.

I assume that East won his 4 heart tricks and cashed 3 spades.

While I can appreciate that South was annoyed at all the chatter, asking for a ruling requires a remarkable amount of chutzpah.

Put another way, back when they had appeal committees in ACBLand, had I been on a committee and had the OP appealed the ruling, there would have been a forfeiture of the deposit (when such was required).

Yes, the opening leader was constrained by the UI, and a lead of the spade Q would have led to an adjustment and at least a strong talking to. But the lead of the heart K was demonstrably suggested by the hand/auction. You can't have it both ways: the chatter demonstrably suggested that a spade lead would be good...the leader chose something else. Then declarer assumed that his opponents were idiots (while criticizing them for the chatter because they are good enough to know better...good enough to not chatter but too stupid to realize that declarer has at most a stiff spade.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2019-January-21, 14:57, said:

The fact that, on the actual hand, both a club and a diamond are 'safe' does not make either lead 'passive'. A lead is not to be assessed based on how the cards actually lie but on the auction as known to leader, and his holdings. I think a club lead is beyond idiotic: the fact that dummy has a stiff honour is hardly to be 'expected' as 'most likely'. The fact that a diamond doesn't pickle the suit is, again, fortuitous. Imagine dummy with J9x and partner with Qxx or Kxx. Now declarer may misguess, but that doesn't make the suit 'passive'. A minor lead is passive only double-dummy.

I have no idea whether leader was influenced by questions: I would have expected a series of questions to make spades the indicated lead, not hearts....the one suit where we know with certainty, absent any comments by anyone, that partner has some length.

As I stated in my initial post, to me the heart K is a standout at any form of scoring. I assume that what then happened was that declarer, with 97xxx in spades in dummy, having a stiff 10 in his hand, and clearly having some heart length (win the Ace and play one back!), was pissed off because the opponents weren't so completely comatose as to ignore what was in front of their eyes.

I assume that East won his 4 heart tricks and cashed 3 spades.

While I can appreciate that South was annoyed at all the chatter, asking for a ruling requires a remarkable amount of chutzpah.

Put another way, back when they had appeal committees in ACBLand, had I been on a committee and had the OP appealed the ruling, there would have been a forfeiture of the deposit (when such was required).

Yes, the opening leader was constrained by the UI, and a lead of the spade Q would have led to an adjustment and at least a strong talking to. But the lead of the heart K was demonstrably suggested by the hand/auction. You can't have it both ways: the chatter demonstrably suggested that a spade lead would be good...the leader chose something else. Then declarer assumed that his opponents were idiots (while criticizing them for the chatter because they are good enough to know better...good enough to not chatter but too stupid to realize that declarer has at most a stiff spade.

I would never push it to an appeals committee, and bear in mind I actually asked for the ruling before I knew exactly what the hands were (the play was curtailed by "how many winners do you have, I then have the rest" when the second top spade hit the table).

Declarer could easily play a heart back from 2 tbf, so could be 2245 (is what I'd do with the same honours or ♠J10), stiff spade is by no means guaranteed, and equally could be the K or A where you need to lead a small one. A club is actually quite likely to be safe, partner having the 10 or either dummy or partner having stiff A/K/Q.

It's also dummy that's more likely to have the heart stop than declarer despite me bidding NT, I've not shown anything in hearts, it's artificial showing diamonds, K♥ could easily be the only way of letting the contract through if the hand is actually ♥Axx in dummy, Jxx in hand and the diamond honours not all in dummy.

♠Q would not lead to an adjustment although possibly a penalty, same 8 tricks as a club or diamond lead.