[andy_h]

Pict, on Feb 20 2010, 08:55 AM, said:

Still club Ace for me. Well done to the successful diamond leaders.

Declarer had a club void, dummy had KQ, partner had diamond Q.  Are there any other possible layouts?

Sure there are.
- Declarer having a singleton club (dummy doesn't need the ♣Q) so he now has an entry for a pitch.
- Dummy has ♦AQ ♣QJx(x) and declarer has 0-1♣ and will have sufficient entries for a ruffing finesse and also get back to dummy for a pitch.

[Pict]

I think the point is not that nearly 60% of the time partner has one or diamond honours. The point is that nearly 40% of the relevant times a diamond lead gives the contract at trick one.

On this auction and at this vulnerability I expect declarer to have an 'optimistic' eight plus tricks (eg AK to seven and A(Q) outside.

That's why people play Ace of clubs to look at dummy and see a signal, and I would rather play a spade or a heart than a diamond if I wasn't allowed to play Ace of clubs.

[CSGibson]

Pict, on Feb 20 2010, 03:36 PM, said:

I think the point is not that nearly 60% of the time partner has one or diamond honours. The point is that nearly 40% of the relevant times a diamond lead gives the contract at trick one.

I think that 99% of the time you use percentages, you are making stuff up. Like this time, for example.

[Pict]

Odds on finding partner with a diamond honour was given as a reason to lead one.

I am puzzled that thoughts about different leads need to be described as 'making things up'.

[whereagles]

I think the only lead that's clearly bad is small club. Anything else is plausible.

I'll probably go passive with a heart because pard is short in hearts and thus rates to have some spades to prevent declarer from setting up that suit.