spot card leads against suit contracts.

[kenberg]

I have often played 3/5 leads against suits. This includes leading small from three spots, say the 853.  Currently, second and fourth is more popular.

The argument I have heard is that if you lead the 3 from 853 and also from Q53 this can give your partner a problem when he has to play at T1. That's true. But with 2/4 leads you lead the 5 from 853 and also from Q75. So I am not so sure that you are not simply trading one problem for another.  I have been playing 2/4 for a while with a partner, and I think, given my choice, I prefer 3/5 including 3rd from three, or four, spots. There are problems either way. but at least when the 2 is led you know the length.

Here is a problem that arose recently. I probably should have gotten it right, but it still illustrates a difficulty.

The bidding begins on my left, we are silent,, the uncontested auction. 
1!D
1NT 2!C *
2!S Pass

The  2 * was NMF.


The opening lead, playing 2/4 was the 7


Dummy and my hand:

	A86 J84 AK95   543
532 KQ92 QJ8 K87

The 8 is played from the dummy. I must decide. If partner holds the T, I should play the 9. If partner does not hold the T. I need to play the Q.  Or do I? Here is how far I got. If partner does not have the T then declarer has it. But if declarer has it then we only have one trick in hearts. But wait. Maybe partner has the A and has led that 7 from, say,  the 72. Then I need to go up and, when partner is in, he leads a second heart and we get a ruff.

Could partner have a doubleton? That gives declarer a four card heart holding. Well, that's consistent with the NMF bid. Otoh, if he had four hearts and he just wanted to play at the 2 level, why did he not simply bid a (presumably) pass/correct 2 ? On the other other hand, maybe if he found a 4-4 fit he would consider game, but with a 5-3 he decided it was too iffy. On still another hand, if he lacks four hearts and just wants to get out at the 2 level, what was the point of NMF? If, over 2 , his partner shows three spades he will pass. But he will do what if his partner denies three spades?  With a weak hand he would not be comfortable with bidding 2 NT. But if he will sign off in 2 whether or not his partner has three card support, then he could have kept it simple and just rebid an auction ending 2 .

Anyway, I am supposed to play a card. I got it wrong.


Whatever it is that I should have done here,  I am interested in what other's have encountered with these 4/2 leads. I have frequently found that they give me problems I cannot work out. Just for starters, repeating the simple observation at the beginning, the fact that the 5 is led from  853 and also from Q75 is a problem, is it not? Many many now play 4/2 so I am cautious about saying much. But I have found it creates problems. So does 3/5, granted, but I have found the problems of 2/4 to be more frequent and less solvable.

The issues at NT are different.

[onoway]

 I read somewhere that 2 /4 leads are 4rth from a good suit, 2nd from a bad one. Since the 7 cannot be 4rth then presumably partner has the Tx left  Unless it was a singleton or possibly even a doubleton, not sure how doubletons fit into it.   It's unlikely to be a singleton though as that would have left declarer with 5 and unlikely to bypass them to bid 2 C OR to have opened 1!D.

I would probably take the 2!c bid as saying name your major  I've got it  and  dont want to play NT, so possibly 2344 distribution or maybe even 1444. 

Not that i would have thought of that at the table.....most of the time knowing if we are playing standard or udca carding is about as far as agreements go.

[OliverC]

Counting the 10 as an honour, I lead 3rd/4th from 3/4+ to an honour. I've always led MUD against suit contracts and top of nothing against NT's. This is a legacy when Jason Hackett and I were playing "attitude" leads.

The nice thing about MUD against suit contracts is that Partner is never confused as to whether you've led from a Doubleton or a 3-card suit (as long as you really do play middle-up-down), and is rarely confused as to whether you've led from xxx or Hxx(xx).

The above, combined with "Strong 10's" (or Coded 9's and 10's depending on your preference) has always served me well.



Lowest from 3 small has some expert adherents, but world-class experts are better at "reading" the hand, taking inferences from the bidding, and deciding the likely placements of the outstanding high cards than most IAC Members, so they are less likely to make the wrong decisions at trick 1. They're not immune, however, and I have seen some misdefences over the years from pairs playing lowest from 3 small.

[kenberg]

Pam, on this layout a singleton is pretty unlikely. it would give declarer five hearts.  Perhaps not impossible, but unlikely. I think a doubleton is pretty possible. It gives declarer four hearts but he did bid 2 .


Oliver., from what I have seen many who play 2/4 leads do so even when the top card is the ten, and not infrequently I see people with the J85 lead the 8. I don't agree with it, but I see it.


This hand:
On this hand I went up with the Q. As the bard says, and thereby hangs a tale. Pard had the T, he was leading from T753. He had the KQ tight in spades. Declarer, after taking his A,  played a spade to the A and another and another spade, so pard is in. This now gets a little tricky. If he now plays the   T all will be well. If he is going to play any heart at all, I think the T is right. As you say, if we are doing middle up down we should not forget the up part. The logic: If declarer started with the A9, playing the T will be fine as it will go TJK9. If declarer started with Ax, playing the T will also be fine as it will go TJKx and my 9 is good.  Of course declarer might have started with A9x in which case playing any heart,  the ten or small, will cost a trick.So he might well not lead a heart at all but I think that the Ten is his best choice if he does.  Alas, he played the 2 and I once again do not know where the ten is. If I guess to play the 9 I am a hero, but I went up.

My purpose here is not so much to second guess partner. I think these 2/4 leads, especially if the top card can be the T or even the J,  are not such a great idea.


Somewhere I have a book by Marshall Miles where he advocates, I think. the 2/4 route but with some exceptions. I may track it down.

What to lead from spots has been an issue for as long as I can remember. I liked the 3/5 route, including 3 from 743. It seems to have fallen out of favor. 

[OliverC]

Lowest from 3 small does have its adherents: There's no danger of getting confused between that lead and a doubleton, for example. I've never seen any advantage in 2/4 Leads as such unless you are playing MUD and are disciplined enough to follow that through.