[RunemPard]

When playing with my g/f, we tend to lead from almost anything. Our card looks something like...

How we usually lead from honor sequences..often more than one possibility for the same sequence..(shown)
Usually lead from lowest in xxx and top in xx..
Followed by a warning that we may lead with imagination based on bidding or instincts..

I write usually in CAPS.

Is this considered enough disclosure based on the laws/IYO?
Some players in the past at our club felt "robbed" when a lead is unusual.

[Quantumcat]

If playing a long match, if someone gets their declarer play wrong because of your lead, just remind them your defence will be much less accurate than their teammates, and they will probably get away with a few contracts that will be beaten at the other table - they probably won't be so upset anymore. As long as you don't have any implicit agreements and really do lead random cards there's probably no problem. If however you start seeing say, a nine in some particular auction and you think that you pard probably has q9xx, then you are developing implicit agreements and will have to either find some way of describing what you do, or go back to standard leads.

[JLOGIC]

RunemPard, on 2012-September-11, 03:02, said:

Some players in the past at our club felt "robbed" when a lead is unusual.

Ask them if they'd like some cheese with their whine.

[JLOGIC]

Tell them that you feel robbed when they do anything better than follow suit (and if they follow suit for an entire session, you also feel robbed), since they are so awful it is unfair to you when they do not give you a donation.

[phil_20686]

JLOGIC, on 2012-September-11, 07:25, said:

Tell them that you feel robbed when they do anything better than follow suit (and if they follow suit for an entire session, you also feel robbed), since they are so awful it is unfair to you when they do not give you a donation.

Or better yet, just imagine saying that. Then you get all the satisfaction without a fine.

[barmar]

Everything you disclose is agreements with partner, not promises to the opponents. Creativity is always allowed, and you can ignore agreements totally if you think the situation requires it. Unless there's some consistent way that you do this, there's nothing to disclose.

[mycroft]

Played once in Flight A with an absolute novice and no notice (because half the team bailed 20 minutes before game time, after the other half of the team had already left the house, of course). We weren't asked until about round 5, but the response to "what's your signals?" was "what's a signal?" (with a smile, from me).

The opponents took that exactly the way they were supposed to, and we continued on.

It was fun for a session just playing the lowest card in a suit I could afford to pitch on, and challenging declarers to work it out with minimal help. But I wouldn't want to do it on a regular basis.

[nigel_k]

There are certain people who will always get upset if you do something unusual that works.

But the way you described it, I can understand opponents might think you know more than you are telling them. For example, if you might lead either K or Q from KQ, is it truly random. Does it depend on the rest of the hand/auction? Even if it is random, are you more likely to lead the Q this time if you led the K on a previous hand? These are things I would be suspicious about if someone described their agreements the way you did.

[barmar]

When holding 4-4 in the minors, I practically always bid ♦ first. Last night, I had ♦ QJTx and ♣ AKxx. Normally I don't let the suit quality deter me, but for some reason, I had a feeling it would be better to bid the clubs this time, so I did.

Partner dutifully led a club when the auction was over, but as it turned out, it wouldn't have made any difference which minor partner led. The strange thing was that partner led low from QJxx, rather than lead the Q as I think most would. This totally confused me about the distribution of the suit (dummy had Txxx, so I was certain partner had Hxx and declarer had Hx), and after partner discarded x and J later in the hand I held on to my A. For some reason, he also held onto his Q, so neither of us guarded diamonds -- both our club honors fell under dummy's last card.

So on this hand I made an uncharacteristic bid, and partner made an unusual lead. As a result, we pseudo-squeezed ourselves and gave up an overtricks.