[diana_eva]

What would you lead here?

---

5D is 1-4, everything else natural 2/1 stuff

[P_Marlowe]

Ace of hearts.

[billw55]

OK, so we have the trump ace and need a second trick. What will it be? It sounds like partner is totally broke, so I can't count on any help there. Maybe a second round spade ruff if I lead one? Although, if declarer had two spades, they might be playing there. Plus that could help him gain a pitch or two. A club trick? Could be, but leading suit will probably hurt rather than help. Diamonds are not bid, but partner likely has nothing at all, never mind the ♦Q specifically.

I guess I go passive. ♥A, look at dummy, and probably just wait for a natural trick in a minor. I really hate giving up that tempo, but there it is.

[mikeh]

Spade 9.

I could write a lot explaining my choice. In part it is because nothing else appeals, and in part because this is very unlikely to cost immediately, and in part because partner may well have a stiff spade. Meanwhile, the 9 may create a misleading impression in declarer as to how the suit lies, and may cause him to go wrong.

[PhantomSac]

mikeh, on 2015-May-01, 14:53, said:

Spade 9.

I could write a lot explaining my choice. In part it is because nothing else appeals, and in part because this is very unlikely to cost immediately, and in part because partner may well have a stiff spade. Meanwhile, the 9 may create a misleading impression in declarer as to how the suit lies, and may cause him to go wrong.

It also has a decent shot to start knocking out the entries to dummy in the not unlikely event that their keycard is the ace of spades. Before I read your post I was just gonna lead a spade but the 9 seems better!

[nige1]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 12:58, said:

What would you lead here?
5D is 1-4,
everything else natural 2/1 stuff

---

Agree with P Marlowe and BillW55: ♥A = 10, ♠9 = 9, ♠x = 8, ♦J = 7, ♦x = 6, ♣x = 5. Although Mikeh's cunning ♠9 could well work better. Perhaps opener has something like:
♠ x ♥ K Q J x x x ♦ A Q ♣ A K x x

[PhantomSac]

nige1, on 2015-May-01, 15:05, said:

Agree with P Marlowe and BIllW5: ♥A = 10, ♠9 = 9. Although Mikeh's cunning ♠9 could well work better. Perhaps opener has something like:
♠ x ♥ K Q J x x x ♦ A Q ♣ A K x x

That means dummy opened a 9 count?

I mean it is really weird we have so many points here, it definitely points to declarer being 1615. It seems like if we go heart heart we will just get squeezed or something, but a spade will take out the entry/put declarer to a guess immediately./something like that.

[diana_eva]

OK no real experts around here it seems

So I posted this because a friend lead the ♦K and when I asked why he said Oh, that's marked expert lead - dummy is known to be short in diamonds. And so I wondered... I guess he was just messin' with me, but I believed he was seeing something in the bidding that I couldn't.


Dummy was indeed short in diamonds, with singleton ♦Q too. K lead worked OK, but slam makes on any lead with trumps splitting nicely and South squeezed in all suits.

[nige1]

PhantomSac, on 2015-May-01, 15:14, said:

That means dummy opened a 9 count? I mean it is really weird we have so many points here, it definitely points to declarer being 1615. It seems like if we go heart heart we will just get squeezed or something, but a spade will take out the entry/put declarer to a guess immediately./something like that.

OK Give East the same shape but weaker. Then declarer may lack enough tricks after 2 rounds of trumps. Of course, I admit that Mikeh's/your ♠9 could work better.

[mikeh]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 15:19, said:

OK no real experts around here it seems

So I posted this because a friend lead the ♦K and when I asked why he said Oh, that's marked expert lead - dummy is known to be short in diamonds. And so I wondered... I guess he was just messin' with me, but I believed he was seeing something in the bidding that I couldn't.


Dummy was indeed short in diamonds, with singleton ♦Q too. K lead worked OK, but slam makes on any lead with trumps splitting nicely and South squeezed in all suits.

Not even close, imo. Since when was dummy marked with short diamonds?

I think we can infer that he lacks a stopper, altho with say AKJxxx Jxx Qxx x, he should bid 3♥ rather than 3N, but otherwise his bidding is entirely consistent with xx or xxx in diamonds. Meanwhile, if we can infer that either opp is short, it is declarer, whose 3♣ bid then driving to slam in hearts marks him with at least 10 round cards, and no way does he have a spade void, so declarer will often be stiff or Ax in diamonds.

The diamond lead is horrible, and your partner wasn't (at least on this hand) thinking at all like an expert.

[MrAce]

Diana, after you said about ♦ K lead I wondered the name of the person on lead and the hand. Imo you are being unfair to the person because the auction was pretty different than the one you posted here. His pd preempted 3♦ over 1♠.

http://www.bridgebas...D4%7Cmc%7C12%7C

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 15:19, said:

OK no real experts around here it seems

So I posted this because a friend lead the ♦K and when I asked why he said Oh, that's marked expert lead - dummy is known to be short in diamonds. And so I wondered... I guess he was just messin' with me, but I believed he was seeing something in the bidding that I couldn't.

Yeah, he was just simply looking at the auction a little more focused than you

[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-May-01, 16:21, said:

Diana, after you said about ♦ K lead I wondered the name of the person on lead and the hand. Imo you are being unfair to the person because the auction was pretty different than the one you posted here. His pd preempted 3♦ over 1♠.


http://www.bridgebas...CSA%7Cmc%7C9%7C

That's not a hand played at my table, Timo.

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 16:25, said:

That's not a hand played at my table, Timo.

i know i posted the wrong url, now corrected. I accidentally posted the hand that I reported for GIB bug.

[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-May-01, 16:29, said:

i know i posted the wrong url, now corrected

I mean, the auction and friend I was kibbing were NOT at my table. I could totally understand why there was a DK lead at my table on that bidding, but then I moved over to the tables who were still playing and was quite surprised to see the same lead without the diam preempt.

This is the hand:

---

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 16:32, said:

I mean, the auction and friend I was kibbing were NOT at my table. I could totally understand why there was a DK lead at my table on that bidding, but then I moved over to the tables who were still playing and was quite surprised to see the same lead without the diam preempt.

This is the hand:

---

http://www.bridgebas...D4%7Cmc%7C12%7C

Then what is this?

[MrAce]

Oh I see, you are talking about seeing the hand twice later and the one you posted here, opening leader did not have a 3♦ call by his pd?

Then it is a weird lead.

[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-May-01, 16:37, said:

Oh I see, you are talking about playing the hand twice and the one you posted here, opening leader did not have a 3♦ call by his pd?

It's a tourney hand, I'm talking about how it went at another table yeah. I wouldn't make up a story when anyone can just look in hand records sheesh.

[MrAce]

diana_eva, on 2015-May-01, 16:38, said:

It's a tourney hand, I'm talking about how it went at another table yeah. I wouldn't make up a story when anyone can just look in hand records sheesh.

I know you did not make a story. I also know too many people call you to play with them + BBO work. I thought you missed the 3♦ overcall tbh. And in your OP and the post that you explained it all, I could not see anything that indicates this happened while you were watching. I just checked the records to make sure I do not accept this guy at my table, to check his name.

[diana_eva]

MrAce, on 2015-May-01, 16:43, said:

I know you did not make a story. I also know too many people call you to play with them + BBO work. I thought you missed the 3♦ overcall tbh. And in your OP and the post that you explained it all, I could not see anything that indicates this happened while you were watching. I just checked the records to make sure I do not accept this guy at my table, to check his name.

I was simply trying to find out what people would lead and why Didn't seem relevant that I was just watching or actually playing that hand.

[MrAce]

Very interesting 3♦ preempt as well, at your table....And all this time I thought I make crazy preempts.