[Cascade]

effervesce, on Jul 26 2008, 01:56 AM, said:

I'd like to give 3rds/5ths a try but I've never been able to find much on it. Can someone give me a brief summary of how 3rds/5ths leads? From xxx, xxxx, xxxxxx etc, Hxx, Hxxx, Hxxxx, Hxxxxx.

The way we play them it is pretty simple.

We lead the third or fifth.

Card lead is capitalized:

xxX, xxXx, xxxxX, xxxxXx,

hxX, hxXx, hxxxX, hxxxXx

We also lead thirds from interior sequences

kjT(+), qt*9*(+) etc

[blackshoe]

The best description I've seen of 3 and 5 (more properly 3rd and lowest) leads is in Journalist Leads by Jeff Rubens and Lawrence Rosler (aka "The Journalist"). They go over not only how the leads work, but why one should play them. Note that in Journalist Leads, these leads are only used against suit contracts.

Basically, from an even number of cards in a long suit, you lead the 3rd highest. From an odd number of cards, you lead the lowest. A third highest lead from 3 or 4 is then ambiguous, but in general, on the "two card" principle (there will be a two card difference between leader's possible holdings in the suit) partner should be able to work out the count.

Leading from honor sequences is a different kettle of fish.

[Cascade]

In my experience ...

I usually play 3rd and 5th (really 1st, 3rd, 5th) throughout;

I frequently play 3rd and 5th vs suit and 4ths (really 1st e.g. *8*32, Kqj(+) 2nd e.g. 8*7*2, 3rd e.g. K83 and 4th) vs no trumps;

I sometimes play 4ths (as above) throughout;

I once for a long weekend have played real 2nd and 4ths throughout ...

I like 3rd and 5th vs suit and 4ths vs no trumps the best. The problem with 3rd and 5th versus no trumps is often you do not want to squander your 3rd from a four-card suit e.g. K1082. In fact so much so that we actually explain our leads as 3rd and 5th but occasionally 4ths versus no trumps.

2nd and 4th (real 2nd and 4th) feels very much like 3rd and 5th to me. Essentially they are count leads. There are different inferences but essentially in the same style e.g. if you get the lead of an 8 you know partner has led a singleton or he has exactly one (or three rarely) higher card. Both styles are essentially count leads.

I dislike the ambiguity from 4ths (1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4ths). I can live with this ambiguity against no trumps where the attitude component can be useful but against a suit where an attacking lead is relatively more common from a three-card holding the ambiguity is too big a price to pay.

I haven't tried it but maybe 3rd/5th versus suits and real 2nd/4ths versus no trumps is playable.

Many players that play 3rd/5th lead 2nd and not 3rd from interior sequences.

[blackshoe]

"The Journalist" recommends attitude leads vs. NT. This works well, if you can remember you're playing it. (First time I played with a real expert, we agreed this, and I forgot it. After the third time, he gave up. )

[1eyedjack]

I think that when I first came across 3rd and 5th we butchered the standard methods a bit:
Lead bottom from any odd holding
Lead top of doubleton but otherwise 2nd top of a bad even holding
Lead 3rd from an even holding of 4+ cards headed by an honour (maybe 4th from a 6 card suit if third highest seemed active).
Thus, if you had an odd holding, partner knew the count if not the quality. If you had an even holding, partner had a good stab at knowing both quality and count.
It seemed to work OK for us, except for the irritation of playing an active 3rd highest from hxXx.

The main attraction for 3rd and 5th style in the first place seemed to be the horrible ambiguity of MUD leads from 3 low.

Hence our move now to:
Lead bottom from any even holding
Lead 4th from a good odd holding (of 5+, obviously)
Lead 2nd from a poor odd holding (of 5+)
leaving just hXx and Xxx as the "exceptions to the rule".
We are back to the same basic principle, then:
If you have an even holding, partner knows the count if not the quality. If you have an odd holding, partner had a good stab at knowing both quality and count.
That seems to work OK for us, and overcomes the irritation of MUD.

"Knows" is obviously an overstatement of confidence. There are of course bad hands for the system, and there always will be. It is just a case of minimising them.

[Rossoneri]

Thanks guys, I now have a better idea of what to check with teammates regarding 3/5 leads!

[pigpenz]

maybe another case for Bridgebrowser analysis but then again the results are only from BBO games.