[awm]

What do you lead from KQ-tight against a trump contract? How about other doubleton consecutive honor holdings (AK, QJ, JT)?

I recently had a disagreement with partner about what to lead (it was not in our notes, we had agreed "standard honor leads" with a few exceptions of which this was not one... but we disagreed on what was standard).

[Stephen Tu]

I'm close to 100% certain that the expectation is:
-if playing standard:
Lead K from both KQx and KQ tight.

-if playing Rusinow, and not leading a suit where normal exception applies (e.g. leading partner's suit):
Lead Q from KQx
Lead K from KQ tight.


From AK tight, lead the opposite of what you lead from AKx for both std and Rusinow.
From other doubleton touching honors, std leads high from all holdings, Rusinow reverses from usual lower of touching for doubletons (always high from doubleton honor for rusinow, instead of 2nd).

[Cyberyeti]

Playing standard you lead the K from KQ so partner with Axxx or AJ10x doesn't overtake the Q to give you a ruff, embarrassing for partner to overtake the Q and lead the J on the second one so declarer eventually scores the 9.

[Winstonm]

In the words of Tim Blake Nelson to break a tie, I’m with you fellas

[Gilithin]

The only thing to add to Stephen's excellent summary is that it is common in parts of Eastern Europe to lead low from a doubleton and of course in combine systems like Slawinski you lead the same from Hxx as from xx (by default the lowest).

[mikeh]

On BW at the moment there is a thread on Rusinow, in which many posters state or imply that they lead the lower of two touching honours (presumably the middle of three touching honours) with 4+ cards in the suit, and the higher from two or three card length. I play rusinow (but only v nt) with one partner and we’ve not discussed that, but I’ve always assumed we play the top only from a doubleton…..I’m pretty sure he’s led second from 3+ length and I know I have, without comment from partner later.

So while I agree with Stephen, it seems that many do not

Of course, old fashioned standard was to hesitate, pull the Queen, put it back, pull the king, put it back, then lead it….if it holds, play the Queen very quickly*









* joke

[sfi]

In the one partnership where I do play Rusinow leads, we have defined situations where the leader is more likely to be leading from shortness and lead top of sequences in those situations. We have three general rules when Rusinow is off:

• We show a long suit (such as a preempt) and lead a different suit.
  
• We have denied 4+ cards in that suit.
  
• We're leading partner's suit.

It does help reduce the times for confusion.

[Stephen Tu]

mikeh, on 2021-September-17, 19:17, said:

On BW at the moment there is a thread on Rusinow, in which many posters state or imply that they lead the lower of two touching honours (presumably the middle of three touching honours) with 4+ cards in the suit, and the higher from two or three card length. I play rusinow (but only v nt) with one partner and we've not discussed that, but I've always assumed we play the top only from a doubleton…..I'm pretty sure he's led second from 3+ length and I know I have, without comment from partner later.

So while I agree with Stephen, it seems that many do not

That thread was in the context of leading vs a notrump contract, where considerations are a lot different than vs a trump contract. Also, vs NT, probably a large majority of the Rusinow leaders are doing it in the context of the K being the power ask for unblock/count lead from strong holdings like AKJT/KQJT/KQT9/AKQT

[johnu]

mikeh, on 2021-September-17, 19:17, said:

Of course, old fashioned standard was to hesitate, pull the Queen, put it back, pull the king, put it back, then lead it….if it holds, play the Queen very quickly*









* joke

The worst kind of joke, one based on facts.