[VixTD]

This hand came up in an online EBU virtual club matchpoint game:

---

It was played at nine tables. At one South played in 3♣, but at the other eight South was in 3NT. Assume the bidding was 2NT - 3NT; there are no clues to the distribution. West led either ♥3 or ♥2, according to agreement.

You can see that EW can take the first five tricks, but not surprisingly that didn't happen at all tables. Five Souths made 3NT, one with an overtrick, when dummy played low at trick one and East put in the nine.

Of those Easts who played the king at trick one, one blocked the suit by returing the original fourth best 7. Two returned the 10, but one West played the eight (!) at trick three to undo all the good unblocking work.

Those who blocked the suit had the last laugh when East switched to a diamond to try to reach partner with the last heart and declarer took the finesse for two down.

Is there any guide to whether to play the nine or the king at trick one? Is it just a guess? I can see that one works when partner has led from Axxxx and the other when they've led from Jxxxx.

[mikeh]

This is a fairly common problem.

For example, give east K10x


Assume he wins the king and returns the 10. Declarer covers from J9x

Now, here, west knows east has no entry but on other hands, where west has nothing outside hearts and needs east to have an entry, he has to duck the Jack. If east had K109x, the play goes the same way and south steals a trick (and the contract).

In real life a lot of players, advertently or otherwise ‘solve’ the problem by returning the 20 quickly, from K10x (indeed, this is normal) but playing only after agonizing thought with K109x

I don’t think there is any legitimate answer.

Btw, inserting the 9 at trick 1 is a mistake. Partner would/should not lead low from xxxx, and if declarer held Ax or Axx, his clearly correct play is the Queen from dummy, winning legitimately when west has the King

[mikeh]

This is a fairly common problem.

For example, give east K10x


Assume he wins the king and returns the 10. Declarer covers from J9x

Now, here, west knows east has no entry but on other hands, where west has nothing outside hearts and needs east to have an entry, he has to duck the Jack. If east had K109x, the play goes the same way and south steals a trick (and the contract).

In real life a lot of players, advertently or otherwise ‘solve’ the problem by returning the 20 quickly, from K10x (indeed, this is normal) but playing only after agonizing thought with K109x

I don’t think there is any legitimate answer.

Btw, inserting the 9 at trick 1 is a mistake. Partner would/should not lead low from xxxx, and if declarer held Ax or Axx, his clearly correct play is the Queen from dummy, winning legitimately when west has the King

[FelicityR]

Just poor defence, in my opinion, as the cards lie. As mikeh as indicated there are situations where inserting the ♥10 is the best option, but it's easy enough to fathom out using the rule of 11, Declarer will have two ♥s higher than the ♥3. So given all the ♥ cards that the defenders have - ♥AK10987 - and that the lead is more likely to come from strength ♥K than a suit headed by ♥J, most declarers would have tried putting up the ♥Q at trick one surely if they had the ♥A, too?

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2020-August-11, 16:46, said:

TBtw, inserting the 9 at trick 1 is a mistake. Partner would/should not lead low from xxxx, and if declarer held Ax or Axx, his clearly correct play is the Queen from dummy, winning legitimately when west has the King

But he might lead the 3 from 832, such leads are becoming more common nowadays, dummy should obviously play the Q but more often a non expert doesn't when the J is held than without it.

Most of the time declarer has Jxx and we all move on unaware of the mistake.

At least the 2/3♥ lead rules out declarer having stiff A which would be sickening if you played the K.

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-August-12, 03:51, said:

But he might lead the 3 from 832, such leads are becoming more common nowadays, dummy should obviously play the Q but more often a non expert doesn't when the J is held than without it.

Most of the time declarer has Jxx and we all move on unaware of the mistake.

At least the 2/3♥ lead rules out declarer having stiff A which would be sickening if you played the K.

Why anyone would lead the 3 from 832 mystifies me.

It is common to lead the second highest from xxxx(x), but I’ve not seen it (by any good player) from xxx and there’s a very good reason why.

The rule of 11 is a very sound rule, although many good players prefer ‘low from interest’ rather than 4th best, and for them the rule doesn’t apply. Of course, they offset that loss by the fact that their low spot lead promises a decent holding in the suit.

When you lead 3 from 832, you lose the benefit of the rule of 11 and also of ‘low from interest’.

Second highest from xxxx(x) is usually easy to read, in that on most hands the rule of 11 obviously won’t work. Get the lead of, say, a 7, and it will usually be the case the partner can see, including inferentially from the auction, too many cards higher than the 7 for that to be 4th best.

I admit that I’ve more than once stated that not good pair’ does ‘x’ only to learn that I was wrong, so it might happen here as well, but the logic of this situation strongly suggests, to me, that it won’t

If one is going to lead from 832, and there are definitely times when that’s the best lead, lead the top card. Reserve the second best for length.

[mikeh]

Cyberyeti, on 2020-August-12, 03:51, said:

But he might lead the 3 from 832, such leads are becoming more common nowadays, dummy should obviously play the Q but more often a non expert doesn't when the J is held than without it.

Most of the time declarer has Jxx and we all move on unaware of the mistake.

At least the 2/3♥ lead rules out declarer having stiff A which would be sickening if you played the K.

Why anyone would lead the 3 from 832 mystifies me.

It is common to lead the second highest from xxxx(x), but I’ve not seen it (by any good player) from xxx and there’s a very good reason why.

The rule of 11 is a very sound rule, although many good players prefer ‘low from interest’ rather than 4th best, and for them the rule doesn’t apply. Of course, they offset that loss by the fact that their low spot lead promises a decent holding in the suit.

When you lead 3 from 832, you lose the benefit of the rule of 11 and also of ‘low from interest’.

Second highest from xxxx(x) is usually easy to read, in that on most hands the rule of 11 obviously won’t work. Get the lead of, say, a 7, and it will usually be the case the partner can see, including inferentially from the auction, too many cards higher than the 7 for that to be 4th best.

I admit that I’ve more than once stated that not good pair’ does ‘x’ only to learn that I was wrong, so it might happen here as well, but the logic of this situation strongly suggests, to me, that it won’t

If one is going to lead from 832, and there are definitely times when that’s the best lead, lead the top card. Reserve the second best for length.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2020-August-12, 09:37, said:

Why anyone would lead the 3 from 832 mystifies me.

It is common to lead the second highest from xxxx(x), but I’ve not seen it (by any good player) from xxx and there’s a very good reason why.

The rule of 11 is a very sound rule, although many good players prefer ‘low from interest’ rather than 4th best, and for them the rule doesn’t apply. Of course, they offset that loss by the fact that their low spot lead promises a decent holding in the suit.

When you lead 3 from 832, you lose the benefit of the rule of 11 and also of ‘low from interest’.

Second highest from xxxx(x) is usually easy to read, in that on most hands the rule of 11 obviously won’t work. Get the lead of, say, a 7, and it will usually be the case the partner can see, including inferentially from the auction, too many cards higher than the 7 for that to be 4th best.

I admit that I’ve more than once stated that not good pair’ does ‘x’ only to learn that I was wrong, so it might happen here as well, but the logic of this situation strongly suggests, to me, that it won’t

If one is going to lead from 832, and there are definitely times when that’s the best lead, lead the top card. Reserve the second best for length.

almost all club players here lead MUD from 3 small, and many better ones

[cherdano]

I think the standard agreement in the UK is to lead the second from xxx (along with 4th-best from good suits). Now obviously you may choose to deviate from that when you hold 832, but it might not occur to partner.

Of course, declarer would probably still put up the Q when partner has 832 (he certainly can't now that the lead is not from KT83), so it's a bit of a moot point.

[VixTD]

Thanks, everyone, for your comments.

Mikeh, it's the "declarer would have played the queen" clue that I was missing.

In the UK fourth-highest leads are common, and from xxx I and many others favour the top card against no trumps, but Cherdano is right that MUD leads are common, particularly in partnerships that don't like to take the trouble to learn one method against suits and another against no trumps. (I don't like MUD in any situation, but it's less odious against suit contracts.)

[Cyberyeti]

VixTD, on 2020-August-12, 11:58, said:

Thanks, everyone, for your comments.

Mikeh, it's the "declarer would have played the queen" clue that I was missing.

In the UK fourth-highest leads are common, and from xxx I and many others favour the top card against no trumps, but Cherdano is right that MUD leads are common, particularly in partnerships that don't like to take the trouble to learn one method against suits and another against no trumps. (I don't like MUD in any situation, but it's less odious against suit contracts.)

You should play the K, but even then it's not 100% clear you're beating this

[mikeh]

cherdano, on 2020-August-12, 10:00, said:

I think the standard agreement in the UK is to lead the second from xxx (along with 4th-best from good suits). Now obviously you may choose to deviate from that when you hold 832, but it might not occur to partner.

Of course, declarer would probably still put up the Q when partner has 832 (he certainly can't now that the lead is not from KT83), so it's a bit of a moot point.

I played MUD leads for a few years many, many years ago. They were inexplicably common for a while. There are almost surely a few pairs still playing this at the club level in NA, and for all I know it may be ‘standard’ in many localities, among club players. I have difficulty understanding why any expert pair uses it, and in any event, when I played it, my understanding was that it was played only against suit contracts.

That old saying of 4th best from longest and strongest may not be venerated as it was years ago (attitude leads in long suits, and leading different suits based on the auction and one’s hand mean experienced players sometimes eschew a lead from a long suit), but it’s still common even at the highest levels, and it seems to me close to unplayable to lead MUD and also 4th best. There’s simply too much chance that partner won’t read it. Unless you’ve hit his suit, he’ll often be best off to switch if you’ve lead from xxx, while he’s often better to continue if you have length. This is especially so on uninformative auctions such as 1N. 3N.

However, I’m no expert on club level play anywhere, let alone in the UK, so I defer to your knowledge. I just don’t think an advancing intermediate ought to play it.

[Cyberyeti]

mikeh, on 2020-August-12, 13:41, said:

I played MUD leads for a few years many, many years ago. They were inexplicably common for a while. There are almost surely a few pairs still playing this at the club level in NA, and for all I know it may be ‘standard’ in many localities, among club players. I have difficulty understanding why any expert pair uses it, and in any event, when I played it, my understanding was that it was played only against suit contracts.

That old saying of 4th best from longest and strongest may not be venerated as it was years ago (attitude leads in long suits, and leading different suits based on the auction and one’s hand mean experienced players sometimes eschew a lead from a long suit), but it’s still common even at the highest levels, and it seems to me close to unplayable to lead MUD and also 4th best. There’s simply too much chance that partner won’t read it. Unless you’ve hit his suit, he’ll often be best off to switch if you’ve lead from xxx, while he’s often better to continue if you have length. This is especially so on uninformative auctions such as 1N. 3N.

However, I’m no expert on club level play anywhere, let alone in the UK, so I defer to your knowledge. I just don’t think an advancing intermediate ought to play it.

MUD's actually the preprinted standard on the convention card here, you have to hatch over a box to say your leads are nonstandard if you don't play it, suit or NT (the card has the same for both)

[VixTD]

I think beginners like MUD because they like the idea of conveying their holding to partner on the second round. I think any signalling system that takes two rounds to convey a message is too slow. The message has to be got across (as far as it can be) with the first card.

In the same way beginners like to signal length with 9743 by playing the 4, then the 3. Advanced players learn they should play the 7, then the 3 (or the 4).

[cherdano]

As always, Mike is way too negative about something he doesn't see top players around him using. Leading the 9 from 962 against 1NT is quite dangerous, you can easily give up a trick when you are hoping to make a "safe" lead. (How would you feel if dummy shows up with J43?)
"2nd from bad suits, 4th from good suits" is a perfectly common agreement vs NT at all levels. Usually you can figure out whether it was 2nd or 4th at trick one, and you don't give up silly 3rd-round tricks by sacrificing a spot in the name of signalling. Here is a fairly decent "club-level" partnership playing a more attitude-oriented variant (but with middle from xxx) of it: http://clairebridge....ken-Welland.pdf

Others play "4th from good, highest you can afford from bad suits", which e.g. seems a common agreement among top US players based on a quick scan of 2019 USBC convention cards (i.e., XXx from three small).

[Tramticket]

Ok, I'll admit it. I like MUD!

But I am also aware that if I lead the 3 fro 832 I am asking for trouble. Yes, partner is trained to look at the low spot cards, but why make life difficult? I lead another suit. And if that is impossible, it may be sensible to feign a doubleton and lead the 8. Rules (such as MUD) are there to help, not to hinder.

[mikeh]

cherdano, on 2020-August-12, 16:29, said:

As always, Mike is way too negative about something he doesn't see top players around him using. Leading the 9 from 962 against 1NT is quite dangerous, you can easily give up a trick when you are hoping to make a "safe" lead. (How would you feel if dummy shows up with J43?)
"2nd from bad suits, 4th from good suits" is a perfectly common agreement vs NT at all levels. Usually you can figure out whether it was 2nd or 4th at trick one, and you don't give up silly 3rd-round tricks by sacrificing a spot in the name of signalling. Here is a fairly decent "club-level" partnership playing a more attitude-oriented variant (but with middle from xxx) of it: http://clairebridge....ken-Welland.pdf

Others play "4th from good, highest you can afford from bad suits", which e.g. seems a common agreement among top US players based on a quick scan of 2019 USBC convention cards (i.e., XXx from three small).

I’d be surprised, but I’ve been surprised many times, to learn that a good pair, playing attitude lads v notrump,led the 3 from 832