[Apollo81]

I would lead the ♣A because it won't be ruffed and it lets me look at dummy and partner's card before making a more committal play.

[whereagles]

pard should have a void spade and some side tricks for his double (I can't believe he has 2 voids and to dbl on sing club is silly).

x♦ here

[jdonn]

I really have to admit to the ace of clubs. It's hard for me to imagine why this would be here if that was the winning choice.

Couldn't a diamond from the queen just let them draw trumps and run diamonds to throw a loser if partner's void is in clubs, if he even has one? Seems way too risky to me. Or maybe we were even cashing AK of clubs, or two aces...

[jtfanclub]

Jlall, on Jun 1 2007, 01:35 PM, said:

You hold white/red

xxxx QJx Qxx Axx.

Partner opens 4H, RHO bids 4S, you bid 5H, LHO bids 5S, partner bids 6H, pass pass 6S, partner doubles it and you have to lead. What is your choice and why?

In my less than expert opinion...

Huh. Partner pushed them into 6 and then doubled, so he should have one sure trick outside of hearts. Can't be spades, unlikely to be clubs, should be diamonds. I somehow doubt that he's looking for a ruff.

The possibilities seem to me to be...

1) Partner bid 6♥ to make. We need to set them 4 tricks. Lead a spade, they'll
end up taking 7 or 8 spade tricks, we'll take the rest.

2) Partner X'd because nobody else is going to be anywhere near that high, settting it two tricks is a good board. Lead the ace of clubs, continue if partner encourages. Otherwise I'll shift to a diamond.

I'll go with option 1. And pray.

Curious to see what the experts think.

[mike777]

spade.

Partner did not bid 6c or 6d for some reason.

[cherdano]

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 01:45 PM, said:

I really have to admit to the ace of clubs. It's hard for me to imagine why this would be here if that was the winning choice.

Couldn't a diamond from the queen just let them draw trumps and run diamonds to throw a loser if partner's void is in clubs, if he even has one? Seems way too risky to me. Or maybe we were even cashing AK of clubs, or two aces...

Wait. So partner bid 6H and doubled with no cards in diamonds and a club void? So it was a lightner double and opponents bid to 6S on an 8-card fit?

I think partner's double is for penalty and is impossible without an outside ace, or cards in both side suits, so a diamond seems pretty safe. If Partner's ♦A gets ruffed at least it sets up one trick only for now. (If it is a Lightner double then it's probably based on ♦AK and a diamond is still right.)

[jdonn]

cherdano, on Jun 1 2007, 03:03 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jun 1 2007, 01:45 PM, said:

I really have to admit to the ace of clubs. It's hard for me to imagine why this would be here if that was the winning choice.

Couldn't a diamond from the queen just let them draw trumps and run diamonds to throw a loser if partner's void is in clubs, if he even has one? Seems way too risky to me. Or maybe we were even cashing AK of clubs, or two aces...

Wait. So partner bid 6H and doubled with no cards in diamonds and a club void? So it was a lightner double and opponents bid to 6S on an 8-card fit?

I think partner's double is for penalty and is impossible without an outside ace, or cards in both side suits, so a diamond seems pretty safe. If Partner's ♦A gets ruffed at least it sets up one trick only for now. (If it is a Lightner double then it's probably based on ♦AK and a diamond is still right.)

I agree with you that I dislike my reasoning now. But I am still 100% sure I would have led the ace of clubs at the table.

[mike777]

As I mentioned, I do not see why partner cannot simply bid 6c or 6d, if they want that lead, as opposed to making a double to make us guess what suit they want lead.


Trying to make things easier for partner, even for top class players, I assume is a top priority.

[cherdano]

Jlall, on Jun 1 2007, 07:02 PM, said:

cherdano, on Jun 1 2007, 03:03 PM, said:

I think partner's double is for penalty and is impossible without an outside ace, or cards in both side suits

I really really don't agree with this. It is very common to just double with a void and hope for the best. Sometimes they make but your imp odds are heavily in your favor. Besides, on an auction like this where they clearly didn't just power into it if you have a void and partner finds the lead you're very likely to beat them. If they can withstand the ruff and still make it they grossly misjudged to begin with. As far as it being unlikely that partner is 1-0, I think given the auction (partner opening 4H and later bidding 6H), that's not so unlikely.

I wasn't saying partner should not make a lightner double if he is void in clubs and has a spade singleton, I ruled this out (rightly or wrongly) because I didn't think opponents would bid like this on an 8-card fit.

[the hog]

Well, an unpopular trump lead for me.

[skjaeran]

jtfanclub, on Jun 1 2007, 09:48 PM, said:

Partner bid 6♥ to make.  We need to set them 4 tricks.  Lead a spade, they'll
end up taking 7 or 8 spade tricks, we'll take the rest.

If partner bid 6♥ to make, there's something seriously wrong with his 4♥ opening.... or he expected some other hand from me.

I don't think opps are sure who is saving here, but for me it looks to be us.

Partner should have a non-heart trick for his double, doesn't have to be a void. I'll lead the ♣A, since then I might know how to beat it at trick 2. The alternative would be a trump, to avoid too many ruffs.

[Sambolino]

if pard is void in diamonds and i bet he is (i mean problem-wise) he should've bid 6d. he should be aware that he created eerie environment by opening his 66 or whatever so he may help.

i'd lead cA within a second.

[kenrexford]

I agree with Mike777 entirely. This is a ridiculous problem that Opener has created for us. In theory, the only plausible holding Opener can have, after 6♥, is equal strength in both minors, meaning both minor kings. In that event, I'll lead the club Ace to see from which side we need to attack diamonds.

These types of lazy competitive calls irritate me. Not really so much because I find that the person who is lazy is a poor player. What irritates me, I suppose, is that the theory of the game somehow does not automatically result in a charge to the person who is, IMO, being lazy. Somehow, the view is that the 6♦ call was a "great bid" and 6♥ simply "par" bidding, whereas IMO 6♦ (especially with A-K, but also with a void) is as obvious as Stayman and 6♥ as wrong (in the example) as bidding 3NT, instead, with 4441/4414.

[hrothgar]

Hi Justin

This hand raises a number of different topics, the most interesting of which is probably whether partner's 6♥ bid should deny a minor suit void. A case can be made that partner should always make a lead directing bid to show his void on the way to 6♥. In this case, the direct 6♥ bid followed by a double can't be Lightner (partner is presumably showing offensive strength or defensive tricks or whatever)

However, I can also see strong arguments suggesting that 6♥ should not deny a minor suit void. If you make a lead directing 6m bid, this might very well convince the opponents to penalty double you in 6♥ rather than competing to 6♠. If 6♠ rates to go down because of a Lightner double at the other table with NO lead directing 6m bid then 6HX rates to score quite poorly. It also needs to be noted that this lead directing bid also gives the opps some extra bidding space.

If we want to be really masochistic, we can imaging a a psychic 6m bid without a void trying to scare the opponents into doubling us in 6♥ rather than competing to 6♠. (I've never had the chance to perpetrate anything like this)

I have no idea what the best strategy is here. (I suspect that it is probably mixed) However, until I see a convincing argument one way or another I prefer to believe that the double is still Lightner.

[kenrexford]

As to hrothgar's theory question.

Sure, this might be debatable. However, I really dislike this problem:

Option #1: Bid 6♦ and defeat 6♠ when it can be set (+100/+50)
Option #2: Bid 6♦ and buy it for a good save at 6♥ (-100? -300? -500?)
Option #3: Bid 6♥, double, and hope partner guesses right (+100? +200? Or, minus some god-awful hundreds and hundreds that I have to look up on the back side of the bid-card?)

I'll always take out insurance, unless the double here calls for a specific minor lead when I pass.

WITH that agreement, NOW 6♥ makes sense (when, of course, you have the right void).

[kenrexford]

LOLOLOLOL

Out of curiosity, I just asked my wife (who has about 80 ACBL masterpoints so far) what she would lead after this auction, with her hand.

Her initial response was "I don't get the question."

I asked here again, "What would you lead against the doubled slam?"

Her response: "This is a dumb question. If you wanted a minor lead, you would have bid 6♣ or 6♦, and nothing else makes sense."

Now, admittedly, she did not come up with Kx-Kx in the minors.

LOLOL