[cloa513]

---

BBO Free Express (SAYC)

Only two pairs in 3NT and my partner leads his lowest diamond misdirecting me to keep leading diamonds.
Another leads his lowest club (granted he got slightly different bidding)

Why doesn't anyone lead the low heart?

[hotShot]

South does not want to help East to delevop Wests ♠ to a source of tricks.
East should have stopper in the red suits, so South would like East or North to start playing ♥.
♣ was bid by East so it's not very attractive, leading from the Q can give away a trick far to often.

South has no ♦ values and since West showed 5-6 ♠ and [East] opened ♣, ♦ seems the best bet to find some honors with North. It's not very attractive to lead ♦ because of East potential stopper, but it is the leas unattractive lead.

[campboy]

Why are you complaining? The heart lead gives away a trick; the diamond lead does not as declarer can always make two diamond tricks.

[cloa513]

campboy, on 2010-October-29, 19:15, said:

Why are you complaining? The heart lead gives away a trick; the diamond lead does not as declarer can always make two diamond tricks.

If he wants a useless lead, a 10 of D is much better and not misleading. They made.

[mtvesuvius]

Ahem, bridge may not be at it's very best in "BBO Free Express (SAYC)" tournaments. Single-dummy, I consider it completely normal to lead a Heart. Leading a high diamond is worse than leading a low one, since the Ten may be an important card later in the hand.

I would consider a heart lead fairly normal, but sometimes normal things don't happen in free tournaments (or in real tournaments either).

[cloa513]

mtvesuvius, on 2010-October-29, 20:02, said:

Ahem, bridge may not be at it's very best in "BBO Free Express (SAYC)" tournaments. Single-dummy, I consider it completely normal to lead a Heart. Leading a high diamond is worse than leading a low one, since the Ten may be an important card later in the hand.

I would consider a heart lead fairly normal, but sometimes normal things don't happen in free tournaments (or in real tournaments either).

Exactly you can potentially knock out one honour from declarer hand from the KQxx of hearts.

[655321]

The diamond lead seems OK to me. Heart lead is fine too.

I looked up the hand, the problem was not the lead, the problem was that at trick 2 South played the ♦T under the Ace for no reason. If he keeps the ten the contract has no play (unless North still plans to lead the ♦J on the third round of the suit.) There were many other opportunities for the defense later too.

[cloa513]

655321, on 2010-October-29, 21:05, said:

The diamond lead seems OK to me. Heart lead is fine too.

I looked up the hand, the problem was not the lead, the problem was that at trick 2 South played the ♦T under the Ace for no reason. If he keeps the ten the contract has no play (unless North still plans to lead the ♦J on the third round of the suit.) There were many other opportunities for the defense later too.

He didn't by the way.

[655321]

cloa513, on 2010-October-29, 22:24, said:

655321, on 2010-October-29, 21:05, said:

The diamond lead seems OK to me. Heart lead is fine too.

I looked up the hand, the problem was not the lead, the problem was that at trick 2 South played the ♦T under the Ace for no reason. If he keeps the ten the contract has no play (unless North still plans to lead the ♦J on the third round of the suit.) There were many other opportunities for the defense later too.

He didn't by the way.

---

This post has been edited by Gerardo: 2010-October-30, 00:18
Reason for edit: Wrap diagram URL in HV tag

[barmar]

The contract makes on a ♥ lead, declarer get 5♠ 1♥ 1♦ 2♣. So while the lead was unusual and misleading, it turned out to be best.

[655321]

barmar, on 2010-October-29, 23:30, said:

The contract makes on a ♥ lead, declarer get 5♠

That turns out not to be the case.

[barmar]

Oops, I didn't notice that North's ♠9 is a second stopper.

[Cyberyeti]

barmar, on 2010-October-30, 00:13, said:

Oops, I didn't notice that North's ♠9 is a second stopper.

No, but this is why a diamond lead is in fact fine, it knocks the side entry out from dummy and kills the spade suit. I would lead the middle diamond to try to show 3 small if I led one, but the middle diamond is in fact too small as partner may play you for Q1085(4). I still don't see how declarer made 3N without serious subsequent errors. Reverse the 8 and 9 of spades and the heart lead does indeed let this through.

The most he can make is 2 spades, 2 diamonds, 3 clubs and a heart if you let him with the entry to the long spades killed, even if N leads diamonds at every opportunity provided S keeps hold of the 10.

[barryallen]

cloa513, on 2010-October-29, 20:00, said:

If he wants a useless lead, a 10 of D is much better and not misleading. They made.

Why not hold up your ♠A and congratulate partner for an excellent lead?

[gnasher]

barryallen, on 2010-October-30, 06:27, said:

Why not hold up your ♠A and congratulate partner for an excellent lead?

Or just play the right card at trick 12. At that stage North had seen ♦K, ♣A and ♥K, and he knew from the play in clubs that declarer had ♣K. Hence South was known to have ♥A, regardless of what else he held.

[barryallen]

gnasher, on 2010-October-30, 06:57, said:

Or just play the right card at trick 12. At that stage North had seen ♦K, ♣A and ♥K, and he knew from the play in clubs that declarer had ♣K. Hence South was known to have ♥A, regardless of what else he held.

Several opportunities, I was just considering the maximum impact. Declarer could possibly be 1-3-3-6 and with the right cards there is nothing you could do to stop him after that lead. As it is, I think it is excellent.

[TheoKole]

I remember the hand now, I had forgotten about it

I had the choice of a ♥ or a ♦ lead on the hand, rightly or wrongly I decided that on a ♦ as the least dangerous lead I could find. Leading is not an exact science and sometimes as in this case a ♥ lead would have made it easier to defeat the contract.

The reasons I played the 10 on the second trick was to show partner that I did not have a 4 card suit and in order to which to a ♥ when he had a chance.

When this did not work out as planed. I played the Q ♣ knowing that partner had a second ♠ stopper (I had a count on the entire hand at this point) and switched to a low ♥, if I wanted to continue ♦ I would have either continued them myself or led a HIGH ♥ to my partner for him to play ♦ through declarer.

By the way the opening LEAD of the 10 from 10xx will cost a trick as many times as the opening LEAD of a low card from AJxx. After the lead and return however I could SEE that declarer had no other way to make 3 diamond tricks (if he needed them) other than playing the Q on the 3rd round, I also knew that this play would work, so the playing of the 10 cost nothing but it permitted me a way to try to send a message to my partner.

Theo

[bucky]

cloa513, on 2010-October-29, 20:00, said:

If he wants a useless lead, a 10 of D is much better and not misleading. They made.

Would you care to elaborate? I cannot see how the contract can possibly be made on ANY lead. Even if the lead misled you and you kept playing diamonds (which happened to be the best defense anyway), what were declarer's 9 tricks? I am assuming that North didn't duck the first spade (a huge error IMO), but still the defense could get at least 6 or 7 tricks.

[Cyberyeti]

bucky, on 2010-October-30, 16:44, said:

Would you care to elaborate? I cannot see how the contract can possibly be made on ANY lead. Even if the lead misled you and you kept playing diamonds (which happened to be the best defense anyway), what were declarer's 9 tricks? I am assuming that North didn't duck the first spade (a huge error IMO), but still the defense could get at least 6 or 7 tricks.

They misdefended grossly later, crashed ♦J/10 and gave declarer a heart trick so 3♦3♣2♠1♥ were made. The lead was irrelevant, they just committed suicide later. If you click the next button on the second posting of the hand you can see. They also let it through again at trick 12.

[mtvesuvius]

mtvesuvius, on 2010-October-29, 11:22, said:

Sh*t happens.