[Kaitlyn S]

nige1, on 2017-July-03, 13:00, said:

Sorry I'm prone to mistakes when editing lin files
Just my guess at a likely layout consistent with the bidding and play.
Its not up to us to gripe about opponent's bidding and play...
IMO, their bidding was reasonable.
Although cashing ♣A seems a mistake

While I'm not inclined to agree that their bidding was reasonable, I have to admit that it is far more often that I learn from your posts than that I disagree with them.

On this hand, I think that (a) East should play in a black suit once West bids 3S (otherwise why bother bidding 3S at all and telling the defenders about your shape?), (b) West with a single short heart stopper and awful diamonds should retreat from notrump after East has shown a "black hand", and © after North leads the recommended ♥7 on your example hand. South should find the correct defense, making E-W pay for not reaching 4S.

Am I being unduly harsh? Probably. If any of my "advanced" students had the above auction with your hands, I would be satisfied. Somebody mentioned "good club players" so I'm assuming that means above student level. I would also think a student would lead the H3 and not return a diamond with the South hand after partner led the H7.

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-July-03, 13:27, said:

Perhaps.
Perhaps pd is a moron and did not start a ♦ honor on first lead.
Perhaps we should play exactly for pd to hold AKJx in ♦. Instead of playing declarer for Qx ♥ and hope pd is a moron.
Perhaps pd does not play smith echo either.
Perhaps...you are right because I do not see anything interesting in this board to make its way to forums unless we beat it on ♦Q lead now. (Smith echo could change my mind on playing ♥ though)

It's a matter of judgement and Mr Ace might well be right.
If partner does indeed hold ♦AKJx, then it's lucky that he's a "moron" because (as manudude03 pointed out), the lead of a ♦ honour by partner, destroys defensive chances.on this layout.
Certainly, Smith peters would help if NS play them. Presumably, Jinksy would have told us.
IMO, however, after showing your minors, it's OK to rebid 2N when holding ♥Ax. For example, partner might have ♥JTx,
Holding ♥Qx, some might prefer to rebid 2♠ with the doubleton ♠ honour, hoping to show the half-stop in ♥ later.

[Kaitlyn S]

Of course, MrAce is correct - the first question I should have asked is "are we playing Smith or reverse Smith echo or neither?"

The opening lead question is not without interest. I've sent it to a friend to post on BridgeWinners.

EDIT: The early results (56 minutes) are kind of disappointing.

1 vote for the DK
1 vote for the H2 (leading fifth best playing fourth best!)
5 votes for the H3
1 abstain (probably would have overcalled 1H?)
1 vote for the H7 (because I made him!)

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-03, 14:02, said:

It's a matter of judgement and Mr Ace might well be right.
If partner does indeed hold ♦AKJx, it's lucky that he 's a "moron" because (as manudude03 pointed out), the lead of a ♦ honour by partner, destroys defensive chances.on this layout,
Certainly, Smith peters could help, if NS play them. Presumably, Jinksy would have told us..
IMO, however, after showing your minors, it's OK to rebid 2N when holding ♥Ax. For example, partner might have ♥JTx,
Holding ♥Qx, some might prefer to rebid 2♠ with the doubleton ♠ honour, hoping to show the half-stop in ♥ later.

Ok, we will have to agree to disagree in most counts and how we see things differently.

But, maybe what I am about to say can change your mind. If declarer has the hand you suggest then pd will hold this

xx Qxxxx AKJx xx and would probably overcall 1♥. Not sure if he would overcall with xx Axxxx Jxxx Qx. I don't know...

[nige1]

MrAce, on 2017-July-03, 15:29, said:

Ok, we will have to agree to disagree in most counts and how we see things differently.

But, maybe what I am about to say can change your mind. If declarer has the hand you suggest then pd will hold this

xx Qxxxx AKxx xx and would probably overcall 1♥. Not sure if he would overcall with xx Axxxx Jxxx Qx. I don't know...

It imight be irrelevant whether partner would overcall on the second example hand because declarer would then have
♠ J x ♥ Q x ♦ A K x x x ♣ A J x x
With that hand, declarer might open 1N.
And he would run for home after sneaking 1 X ♠ trick to go with 1 X ♥, 2 X ♦s and 5 X ♣s.
To defeat the contract, you would have to play ♠A on the 1st round -- as Mr Ace specified in his first reply.

Katlyn's BridgeWinner Poll is a useful indicator to what "a good club player" might lead. Interestingly, however, Joshua Donn (world class) would lead ♦K, like Kaitlyn, Manudude03, and Mr Ace

[Kaitlyn S]

nige1, on 2017-July-03, 17:21, said:

Katlyn's BridgeWinner Poll is a useful indicator to what "a good club player" might lead. Interestingly, however, Joshua Donn (world class) would lead ♦K, like Kaitlyn, Manuddude03, and Mr Ace

Actually, I am advocating for the ♥7 lead. Right now, I have no company

[MrAce]

nige1, on 2017-July-03, 17:21, said:

It imight be irrelevant whether partner would overcall on the second example hand because declarer would then have
♠ J x ♥ Q x ♦ A K x x x ♣ A J x x
With that hand, declarer might open 1N.
And he would run for home after sneaking 1 X ♠ trick to go with 1 X ♥, 2 X ♦s and 5 X ♣s.
To defeat the contract, you would have to play ♠A on the 1st round -- as Mr Ace specified in his first reply.

Katlyn's BridgeWinner Poll is a useful indicator to what "a good club player" might lead. Interestingly, however, Joshua Donn (world class) would lead ♦K, like Kaitlyn, Manuddude03, and Mr Ace

As you said I already wrote i would have won the first ♠.
But you can always have declarer hold Jx Qx AJxxx AQxx

[nige1]

The set of South hands with ♥Q is larger than the set with ♥A but on most of the former, 3N is a poor contract and opponents would rather be in 4♠.

However, with
♠ K Q T x x ♥ K ♦ T x ♣ K x x x x opposite
♠ J x ♥ A x ♦ x x x x x ♣ A Q J x
3N is an reasonable contract, defeated only by an uneven ♦ break, no blockage, and (according to BBF) inspired defence

[The_Badger]

Jinksy! Where are you? Please show us the whole hand. I believe we have discussed this enough, and need a definitive answer.

[Kaitlyn S]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-03, 13:15, said:

Another interesting question:

You hold 75, Q7432, AKJ2, T5 on lead against 1D-1S-2C-2H-2NT-3C-3S-3NT. The opponents must have game going strength, so if your partner has a top heart, they have little else of value and the opponents are going to take tons of black suit tricks. So if you want to set 3NT you have to assume that partner has a black card (because the DQ isn't enough.)

Given that you need partner to have a black suit entry (meaning that the opponents have two heart stoppers), and that the opponents probably have lots of black suit tricks once they regain the lead, why on earth would you emphasize hearts by leading the ♥3? When partner gets in, you don't want him to play hearts because it's unlikely to beat the contract! You need partner to have a diamond holding that will beat the contract; either ♦Qx or ♦T9x. So wouldn't you lead the ♥7?

I'd like to add to this analysis - if partner's only card is the ♥A, then partner needs to get the benefit of the heart information without the benefit of a Smith Echo, and the defense must get their five tricks before declarer takes a bunch of black suit winners. Only the ♥7 lead gets partner in, while emphasizing that the leader's strength lies outside hearts. (The ♦K works as well, except in the cases where it blocks the suit.)

[Kaitlyn S]

So far, we have 18 votes for the ♥3, 2 votes for the ♥2, 4 votes for the ♦K. I'm somewhat shocked that I'm the lone ♥7 leader. Let's see how much luck I have convincing people.

Can I convince anyone? On BridgeWinners

[The_Badger]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-04, 09:22, said:

So far, we have 18 votes for the ♥3, 2 votes for the ♥2, 4 votes for the ♦K. I'm somewhat shocked that I'm the lone ♥7 leader. Let's see how much luck I have convincing people.

Can I convince anyone? On BridgeWinners

It seems, Kaitlyn, that you've invented a new way of leading to certain contracts: either high/low (or odd/even) attitude, one showing an ace or king; and the other showing the Q or lower

[Kaitlyn S]

The_Badger, on 2017-July-04, 09:48, said:

It seems, Kaitlyn, that you've invented a new way of leading to certain contracts: either high/low (or odd/even) attitude, one showing an ace or king; and the other showing the Q or lower

Not at all. I am leading the ♥7 on this hand simply because I have figured out that I can't beat this hand by running hearts. On a different auction or a with a different hand, where it was possible that the contract could be beat by setting up and running hearts, I would lead the ♥3 like everyone else.

[Winstonm]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-03, 10:43, said:

Would you pass 3NT with this hand? Would anybody in a pair that knows enough to bid 3C over 2NT sometimes pass 3NT with this hand?

In case there's anybody that would, your partner bid 3C (either showing fear of notrump, or looking for a club slam) without the club ace, the club queen, or the club jack. They also bid 3NT over 3S (with S-AKQxx they would probably bid 4S) so you probably have a spade loser or finesse. Partner bid 3C for a reason - they must have a lot of black cards. A lot of black cards means not very many red ones; meaning that you either lose four diamond tricks when the opponents win their spade trick, or that partner doesn't have help in hearts and there will be an avalanche of hearts when you lose a spade trick.

I would think partner's 3C bid would be a question about whether or not NT is the best contract, 4S and 5C are also still in play, as well, and club slam try is in that mix. That opener bid NT twice indicates to me a solid heart stop and most likely a minimum hand: Ax in this situation.

With that to go on, and the play in clubs, Jx, Ax, xxxxx, AQxx seems the most likely hand to me.

[Kaitlyn S]

Winstonm, on 2017-July-04, 10:15, said:

I would think partner's 3C bid would be a question about whether or not NT is the best contract, 4S and 5C are also still in play, as well, and club slam try is in that mix. That opener bid NT twice indicates to me a solid heart stop and most likely a minimum hand: Ax in this situation.

With that to go on, and the play in clubs, Jx, Ax, xxxxx, AQxx seems the most likely hand to me.

I would hope that if this was declarer's hand, partner would have led a higher heart than the ♥3 to suggest the "obvious" from seeing dummy diamond return.

However, BridgeWinners players don't seem to agree with that assessment. According to one of our top players, 20 of 24 of them are morons. One of those "morons" is another top BBO poster, who wrote a detailed answer telling me why I (and also Timo) are wrong and suggested that I am overthinking the problem. I was brought back to those dark days in the Water Cooler when the same poster would spend a fair amount of energy telling me how misguided and brainwashed I am. (Come to think of it... oh, maybe I should quit while I'm ahead )

So I have to concede that while I would have led a higher heart if declarer held that hand, that I am playing with another human being and most of them would not lead a higher heart, even after hearing the arguments for the higher heart lead.

So while I don't think declarer should hold that hand based on partner's low heart lead, most players good enough to use BridgeWinners as a resource lead a low heart from the hand you are giving partner, so perhaps I am too quick to rule it out.

However, Timo brings up another good point - you are giving partner ♥Qxxxx and ♦AKJx and partner didn't overcall at game all. In the original problem, I was not a passed hand, so a heart overcall seems perfectly normal (I changed the conditions of contest to make the heart overcall less attractive when posting to BridgeWinners, but I still would bid 1H.)

[Winstonm]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-04, 10:49, said:

I would hope that if this was declarer's hand, partner would have led a higher heart than the ♥3 to suggest the "obvious" from seeing dummy diamond return.

However, BridgeWinners players don't seem to agree with that assessment. According to one of our top players, 20 of 24 of them are morons. One of those "morons" is another top BBO poster, who wrote a detailed answer telling me why I (and also Timo) are wrong and suggested that I am overthinking the problem. I was brought back to those dark days in the Water Cooler when the same poster would spend a fair amount of energy telling me how misguided and brainwashed I am. (Come to think of it... oh, maybe I should quit while I'm ahead )

So I have to concede that while I would have led a higher heart if declarer held that hand, that I am playing with another human being and most of them would not lead a higher heart, even after hearing the arguments for the higher heart lead.

So while I don't think declarer should hold that hand based on partner's low heart lead, most players good enough to use BridgeWinners as a resource lead a low heart from the hand you are giving partner, so perhaps I am too quick to rule it out.

However, Timo brings up another good point - you are giving partner ♥Qxxxx and ♦AKJx and partner didn't overcall at game all. In the original problem, I was not a passed hand, so a heart overcall seems perfectly normal (I changed the conditions of contest to make the heart overcall less attractive when posting to BridgeWinners, but I still would bid 1H.)

I think you are putting too much emphasis on 4 hearts in partner's hand. In this auction, it would not be a surprise to find partner had led a heart from Qxx, would it?

Your points are valid. I'm just offering my thinking and what I would do in this situation. I have been wrong many, many times, but at least I have my reasons for being wrong.

[Kaitlyn S]

Winstonm, on 2017-July-04, 11:00, said:

I think you are putting too much emphasis on 4 hearts in partner's hand. In this auction, it would not be a surprise to find partner had led a heart from Qxx, would it?

Not against this auction; however, on this particular hand where declarer bid 3S and is almost certainly 2-2 in the majors, partner is marked with five hearts.

[MrAce]

Winstonm, on 2017-July-04, 11:00, said:

I think you are putting too much emphasis on 4 hearts in partner's hand. In this auction, it would not be a surprise to find partner had led a heart from Qxx, would it?

Winstonm! Really?

[johnu]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-July-03, 13:15, said:

Another interesting question:

You hold 75, Q7432, AKJ2, T5 on lead against 1D-1S-2C-2H-2NT-3C-3S-3NT. The opponents must have game going strength, so if your partner has a top heart, they have little else of value and the opponents are going to take tons of black suit tricks. So if you want to set 3NT you have to assume that partner has a black card (because the DQ isn't enough.)

I ran a simulation on Dealmaster Pro. Choice of assumptions can affect the results, but the best leads (including ties) over 200 simulations were:

♠ - 155
432 ♥ - 169
7♥ - 169
A/K♦ - 171
♣ - 151

The winner in this set of simulations was a high diamond by a small amount. The main advantage of a diamond is that you can make a switch at trick 2 if spades or clubs is the suit you need to attack. I played around with changing some other parameters, and ♥7 can be worse than a low heart a couple of times out of 200 hands when the wasted 7 card promotes a late round heart trick for declarer. Also, these simulations are double dummy, but a real life partner would not know you have led from an honor and may misdefend.

[Kaitlyn S]

johnu, on 2017-July-04, 13:27, said:

I ran a simulation on Dealmaster Pro. Choice of assumptions can affect the results, but the best leads (including ties) over 200 simulations were:

♠ - 155
432 ♥ - 169
7♥ - 169
A/K♦ - 171
♣ - 151

The winner in this set of simulations was a high diamond by a small amount. The main advantage of a diamond is that you can make a switch at trick 2 if spades or clubs is the suit you need to attack. I played around with changing some other parameters, and ♥7 can be worse than a low heart a couple of times out of 200 hands when the wasted 7 card promotes a late round heart trick for declarer. Also, these simulations are double dummy, but a real life partner would not know you have led from an honor and may misdefend.

Yes indeed, if I know my partner is going to defend double dummy, I need not lead the H7 to suggest a switch as any heart would work as well.