[rduran1216]

---

pick a lead

[MrAce]

I think they have at least 5-4 or 6-4 ♥ fit, i am not leading trump.

That leaves me with a minor lead, and i choose ♣. But my leads always suck so if u go with opposite of what i just said, u will probably find the correct lead

[CSGibson]

Matchpoints I'd lead a trump every time. Imps I'd think about the ♦A, trying to maybe force S to use his trump entries before the spades are set up...It would be very close in my mind between that and a trump, and I think I might talk myself into it.

[gnasher]

I'd lead a trump. I'd almost say that there's no need to look at your hand first.

[MrAce]

Call me stubburn but i am still not convinced.

This is not a situation where responder showed a preference on 2nd suit. He raised and he made an unexpected raise. On the other hand declarer is known to hold AT LEAST 5 ♠ and i dont know how long are u planning to stop him establishing his long suit with Kxx ♠ Andy ?

Put yourself in declarer's shoes, u have 5-4 or 6-4 fit + a side 5 or 6 card suit, wouldn't you be happy when they lead trump ? Especially when trumps are 2-2 and they can only play 1 more time ?

Of course if they are playing to a 4-4 fit, trump lead could be killer, and its a possibility, but i doubt thats the case. Don't get me wrong, i am not saying what u lead is wrong, but i am not convinced that it is as auto as you see it Andy.

[Free]

Since it's a problem posted on BBF, a small ♦ must be correct.

[MrAce]

 Free, on 2011-June-10, 02:33, said:

Since it's a problem posted on BBF, a small ♦ must be correct.

Heh, you maybe right

[bluecalm]

Quote

I'd lead a trump. I'd almost say that there's no need to look at your hand first.

??
Looks like basic stuff to me. Declarer's plan will be to draw trumps and establish spades which gives him more than enough winners as we can see that spades are breaking. We should take our minor suit winners before it happens.
♣ looks the best to me, but A♦ could also be right.

[gnasher]

Why should we assume that dummy has five or six hearts? In this auction dummy often has only four hearts, together with a singleton spade.

Even if dummy has five trumps, if declarer has to ruff three times in dummy and draw two rounds, that will exhaust dummy's trumps, so the discard on the long spade is of no use to declarer. If dummy has five trumps and the spades set up with two ruffs, that still gives declarer only two discards, so it will usually only matter if he needs to be able to discard from dummy's 3-card suit.

One advantage of the trump lead is that it may induce declarer to take a spade finesse. If declarer has AQxxx opposite a singleton, and thinks that he can't arrange to ruff three times in dummy, he may take a spade finesse. He doesn't know that the king is ruffing down, and if it's a 9-card fit he doesn't know that trumps are 2-2.

And it's not as though the minor-suit leads are a sure route to success - a diamond lead could trivially cost the contract, and a club might hit dummy's length and wreck partner's holding.

[Hanoi5]

I think the bidding sequence calls for a trump lead. I'd even say it looks like a text-book sequence to show a trump lead is called for.

Leading anything else might be good, but probably in very particular situations. For example, not leading a trump might make declarer think we hold an honour in the suit, so maybe he'll finesse into partner. Leading a small diamond might fetch Kx from partner. Leading a club might get us an early 'through-dummy's-strength'. I would have chosen the ♣3 as my lead if I felt... 'creative'.

The thing is that all those ideas are fantasies and might work every once in a while but a trump lead will get us a good result more often than not.

[billw55]

 gnasher, on 2011-June-10, 01:14, said:

I'd lead a trump. I'd almost say that there's no need to look at your hand first.

Well I would look first, but I agree a trump. 1NT followed by 4♥ sounds like a hand that got better after opener's rebid, which means a ruffing value. Opener is two suited so he also has shortness. Overall it sounds like a crossruff.

 Free, on 2011-June-10, 02:33, said:

Since it's a problem posted on BBF, a small ♦ must be correct.

Close, ♦A and another

 bluecalm, on 2011-June-10, 04:06, said:

??
Looks like basic stuff to me. Declarer's plan will be to draw trumps and establish spades which gives him more than enough winners as we can see that spades are breaking. We should take our minor suit winners before it happens.
♣ looks the best to me, but A♦ could also be right.

I can understand this approach at matchpoints to save overtricks. But if I want to beat this contract, I am trying a trump.

[bluecalm]

Quote

The thing is that all those ideas are fantasies and might work every once in a while but a trump lead will get us a good result more often than not.

It's amazing that you could be so sure to call standard idea of taking our winners before declarer establish his long suit a "fantasy".
Even in double dummy simulation (assuming dummy has 0-2♠, and either 4hearts with 10-11hcp or 5hearts with 8+hcp or 6hearts with 5+hcp and declarer has 5-4/5-5 or 6-4 in majors) club lead has significant edge but remember that in double dummy play declarer always get the trumps right anyway which is not true in real play and which is an argument against trump lead.

Quote

I'd even say it looks like a text-book sequence to show a trump lead is called for.

I would say: weak pattern recognition. Looks like texbook example for aggressive lead. Opponents showed 5+ card suit on the way to their game with 8+ trumps.

Quote

Even if dummy has five trumps, if declarer has to ruff three times in dummy and draw two rounds, that will exhaust dummy's trumps, so the discard on the long spade is of no use to declarer. If dummy has five trumps and the spades set up with two ruffs, that still gives declarer only two discards, so it will usually only matter if he needs to be able to discard from dummy's 3-card suit.

I can't prove it but intuitively the most common scenario is spade setting up with either one ruff or without any (dummy has 2 of them or declare has enough high cards so he needs only one ruff in dummy, for example AQJxx to x). 2 spades in dummy and 3 in partner's hand also looks like the most common layout.

[JLOGIC]

I would lead a club

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

1NT was (semi-) forcing?

I am not sure, the auction cries for an agressive lead, so I would try to
go passive, i.e. lead a trump.

The Ace is the alternative.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[gnasher]

 bluecalm, on 2011-June-10, 06:38, said:

I can't prove it but intuitively the most common scenario is spade setting up with either one ruff or without any (dummy has 2 of them or declare has enough high cards so he needs only one ruff in dummy, for example AQJxx to x). 2 spades in dummy and 3 in partner's hand also looks like the most common layout.

With AQJxx opposite a singleton, he needs two ruffs, not one.

Is a doubleton spade in dummy really very common? If dummy is 24xx, presumably he was planning to show an invitational balanced hand. Isn't that what 1♠-1NT;2♥-3♥ shows? OK, I know that some balanced hands will have improved to the extent that they're worth game, but most balanced invitations will still be balanced invitations.

[bluecalm]

Quote

With AQJxx opposite a singleton, he needs two ruffs, not one.

I was thinking one ruff and one spade lost.

Quote

Is a doubleton spade in dummy really very common? If dummy is 24xx, presumably he was planning to show an invitational balanced hand. Isn't that what 1♠-1NT;2♥-3♥ shows

This is very difficult as in standard 2♥ rebid is basically in 11-17hcp range so 3♥ sometimes has to be bid with 8. That's why with 10-11 I think many people would consider 4♥ especially with good values.
Maybe my assumptions are a bit too loose but still i can't imagine it changes too much. Imo most of dummy range has 2-5 or 1-5 majors.

[pooltuna]

without any great conviction I'l bite for a trump lead

[MrAce]

 gnasher, on 2011-June-10, 04:49, said:

Why should we assume that dummy has five or six hearts? In this auction dummy often has only four hearts, together with a singleton spade.

No, not even close to "often" but yes it is a possibility. Its very optimistic to think that someone hoped to 4 with only 4 trumps and no support to his pd's side suit, unless he has a decent side of himself.

 gnasher, on 2011-June-10, 08:01, said:

With AQJxx opposite a singleton, he needs two ruffs, not one.

You are defending 4♥ Andy, not 6 ♥, he doesn't have to establish his suit w/o giving any. Again, you maybe correct with trump lead, i just think it is neither "auto" nor they are in 4-4 fit "often".

[Phil]

Trump at IMPs, club at MPs.

[rduran1216]

it is MP, I led a club.

Dummy tabled

x
KJ10x
K987x
Kxx

a trump lead is devastating.

turns out partner holds QJ109 of clubs.