Your lead against 3NT
#21
Posted 2011-March-08, 02:15
kgr, click on the GIB button of your own diagram. only a diamond or a small heart lets it through.
... and I can prove it with my usual, flawless logic.
George Carlin
George Carlin
#22
Posted 2011-March-08, 02:49
#23
Posted 2011-March-08, 03:09
If that's your partner's argument, I'd say he could've just doubled for a ♠ lead...
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
#24
Posted 2011-March-08, 04:30
kgr, on 2011-March-07, 15:05, said:
I did lead a small ♦. My partner said that a Major lead was obvious after this bidding, but I thought leading my longest suit was better with 2 entries.
As you can see from the comments by experienced players, it's pretty obvious NOT to lead a major
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f0731/f07315330c72d721a433df91b1dcf64ddc348248" alt=":)"
Like everybody else, I'd blow a trick with my small diamond lead.
#25
Posted 2011-March-08, 04:49
My simulation tells me that:
A♠ = 384
3♠ = 339
A♥ = 369
5♥ = 343
J♦ = 375
T♣ = 401
(times the lead defeats 3NT on 1k hand sample)
So I am leading a club next time I am dealt this hand.
This is the second time lately when I would expect major suit lead to be a winner but it isn't. Last time it was Kxx holdings now Axx.
If we substitute our Axx of spades to 8xx then the results would be:
♠ - 388
A♥ - 326
5♥ - 315
J♦ - 294
x♦ - 309
T♣ - 351
It seems that underleading Hxx sucks even double dummy. Obviously it's even worse in practical play.
EDIT:
For Q43 A85 JT43 T94 the results are:
3♠ - 205
A♥ - 253
5[hearts= - 249
J♦ - 238
4♦ - 251
T♣ - 285
and for the same hand with Jxx of spades:
x♠ - 327
A♥ - 299
x♦ - 295
T♣ - 325
and the last one for Txx of spades:
3♠ - 396
A♥ - 363
5♥ - 350
3♦ - 352
T♣ - 399
The trend is clear: if there safe major suit lead available it's the best. If not, clubs > diamonds.
I have found that 1k hand sample still have some variance but is quite reliable (by that I mean that if the difference is 25+ hands it's rarely due to luck).
A♠ = 384
3♠ = 339
A♥ = 369
5♥ = 343
J♦ = 375
T♣ = 401
(times the lead defeats 3NT on 1k hand sample)
So I am leading a club next time I am dealt this hand.
This is the second time lately when I would expect major suit lead to be a winner but it isn't. Last time it was Kxx holdings now Axx.
If we substitute our Axx of spades to 8xx then the results would be:
♠ - 388
A♥ - 326
5♥ - 315
J♦ - 294
x♦ - 309
T♣ - 351
It seems that underleading Hxx sucks even double dummy. Obviously it's even worse in practical play.
EDIT:
For Q43 A85 JT43 T94 the results are:
3♠ - 205
A♥ - 253
5[hearts= - 249
J♦ - 238
4♦ - 251
T♣ - 285
and for the same hand with Jxx of spades:
x♠ - 327
A♥ - 299
x♦ - 295
T♣ - 325
and the last one for Txx of spades:
3♠ - 396
A♥ - 363
5♥ - 350
3♦ - 352
T♣ - 399
The trend is clear: if there safe major suit lead available it's the best. If not, clubs > diamonds.
I have found that 1k hand sample still have some variance but is quite reliable (by that I mean that if the difference is 25+ hands it's rarely due to luck).
#26
Posted 2011-March-08, 12:48
kgr, on 2011-March-07, 15:05, said:
I did lead a small ♦. My partner said that a Major lead was obvious after this bidding, but I thought leading my longest suit was better with 2 entries.
They didn't stayman. A major is right quite often. 50/50 guess between spades and hearts.
You shouldn't have posted the results so quickly.
#27
Posted 2011-March-08, 13:38
bluecalm, on 2011-March-08, 04:49, said:
My simulation tells me that:
A♠ = 384
3♠ = 339
A♥ = 369
5♥ = 343
J♦ = 375
T♣ = 401
(times the lead defeats 3NT on 1k hand sample)
So I am leading a club next time I am dealt this hand.
A♠ = 384
3♠ = 339
A♥ = 369
5♥ = 343
J♦ = 375
T♣ = 401
(times the lead defeats 3NT on 1k hand sample)
So I am leading a club next time I am dealt this hand.
Your simulation says that leading ♠A is 15 points better than leading ♥A. Common sense says that it can't be better to lead an ace from A43 than from A85. That suggests that a difference of 15 isn't large enough for us to draw any conclusions. Given that, I don't see why you think that the difference of 17 between a club and ♠A is significant.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
#28
Posted 2011-March-08, 14:03
Quote
Your simulation says that leading ♠A is 15 points better than leading ♥A. Common sense says that it can't be better to lead an ace from A43 than from A85. That suggests that a difference of 15 isn't large enough for us to draw any conclusions. Given that, I don't see why you think that the difference of 17 between a club and ♠A is significant.
I took average for Axx and the difference is quite big.
Lead from A8x is probably in fact worse though (cause 8 could be a trick). I will run it on bigger sample out of curiosity.
In my opinion those A leads only works double dummy though as in real life it could be difficult to switch in time to other suit which double dummy player always does.
#29
Posted 2011-March-08, 14:04
kgr, on 2011-March-08, 02:11, said:
Everybody wrong, only a spade will defeat it?
Or ♥ Ace and ♠ switch.
Seeking input from anyone who doesn't frequently "wtp", "Lol" or post to merely "Agree with ..."