[OleBerg]

A spade.

If I can include attitude (non-interest), I will.

[ArtK78]

♠9.

Assuming that partner wins trick one, he may be able to work out whether it makes sense to continue spades or to switch.

Leading a heart initially may be the winning action, but I am hoping to get more than one shot at the right answer.

[pclayton]

There's two possibilities:

1. A spade. This caters to declarer having a single spade stopper, 6 diamonds tricks, a double heart stopper, and the need to develop two tricks.

2. A heart. This caters to a single heart stopper, a double spade stopper, 6 diamonds, and something in clubs.

Every time a lead a spade, declarer's hand is KQx, Kxx, xxx, QJxx. When I lead a heart, declarer has Kxx, KQx, xxx, QJxx.

My sense tells me that declarer needs the spade tricks more than the heart tricks, so I'm firing a low heart. I think its something of a guess, but I'm sure many will say a ♠, wtp?

Only try this with an understanding pard. I'm sure KMB is fine either way.

[jtfanclub]

ArtK78, on May 30 2008, 02:36 PM, said:

♠9.

Assuming that partner wins trick one,

Tough to believe that they bid this way with only one stop between them. Oh well.

Sorry.

[fachiru]

Before leading, it would be nice to know what would a X of 3nt by prd. mean: lead ♠ or don't lead ♠. (I don't even know if there is a std. or consensus here in the expert field)
Without any aggrements (on the X or lack of), I'll go with a ♥ lead.

[kenrexford]

Not sure. Heart sounds right, but this is a guess, IMO.

That said, I'm not real happy with this development and wonder if I might have done something to ease my pain, or even take it away entirely.

We just discussed in another thread the concept of fit bids without jumps. Had I been able to do that, I think a 3♥ call might have been better. If partner holds the magic cards in hearts necessary to defeat 3NT, we probably also make 4♠. Even if partner cannot bid 4♠, the heart bid would likely nip the 3NT in the bud and we would be declaring 3♠.

Now, we have a WAG as to what lead to make where it is likely that one of three suits will work, but only one.

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on May 30 2008, 03:33 PM, said:

3H is a nice option if it means that, but neither you nor partner are mentally handicapped you do not play it that way.

Mentally handicapped?

Pray tell...

What would 3♥ show?

[andy_h]

pclayton, on May 31 2008, 05:46 AM, said:

snip

2. A heart. This caters to a single heart stopper, a double spade stopper, 6 diamonds, and something in clubs.

My instinct tells me that also.
I hate leading..

[kenrexford]

I felt the need to do a little research on this, just to assure myself of exactly how retarded this question actually is.

After reviewing my Robson-Segal, I cannot imagine how this auction is not a classic case of a fit non-jump bid. I am a passed hand, which is a classic situation for a fit non-jump, for starters. The Robson-Segal guidelines in this situation is any new suit call, typically after a major overcall by partner, at the three-level or higher. We are at that level. My RHO has just bid 2NT, as a passed hand, which is a fairly strong indicator of at least fragmentary diamond support and values. I have a stiff in diamonds, a feature that partner often will be able to visualize anyway, especially if I make a fit non-jump bid. I have a good 5-card side suit to mention, with control of both other suits and four trumps. So, 3♥ seems to be about as classic as you can get.

Had I done this, 3NT would not likely be bid on a runner diamond suit if Opener has a heart problem. If partner has something like QJxxx-KQx-xxx-xx, a POC, he can probably bid 4♠ successfully anyway. Instead, I show the stiff diamond, which helps nothing. Plus, BTW, had I bid 3♥ and Opener 3NT, partners double probably has meaning now, like to lead a heart.

So, I'll play with retarded people like Robson and Segal.

[655321]

4th best heart.

Usually I would just lead partner's suit WTP, especially with 4 card support...
But declarer is likely to have two spade stoppers. Also, it is very unlikely that either opponent has 4 card hearts, so if partner has some help they may have only one heart stop.

Still, I don't feel hugely confident about this, and I will be ... keenly interested... during the play to see how a spade lead would have worked.

[nige1]

Jlall, on May 30 2008, 02:15 PM, said:

2nd seat r/w: ♠ 9xxx ♥ AT9xx [D] x ♣ Axx
(_P) _P (1♦) 1♠
(2N) 3♦ (3N) AP
Your lead

IMO ♥A = 10, ♠ = 9, ♥x = 7
Partners turn a bit deaf when you try explain why you didn't lead their bid suit to defeat the contract. Here however, he may be more forgiving when you start with ♥A because if he doesn't smile encouragingly, you can switch dutifully to ♠.
♥A may also work when RHO has say
♠AQx ♥K ♦ xxxx ♣Qxxxx

[gnasher]

I'm mentally retarded to the extent that I play 3♥ as a fit bid. You boys seem to save a lot of bids for hands that might have preempted but didn't.

I'm not sure that I'd bid 3♥ with this hand though - hearts aren't the only feature of my hand, and anyway I'm worth 4♠. I'd bid 4♦, showing a high card raise to 4♠. The "high card" part is a slight stretch, but two aces are two aces.

[nige1]

gnasher, on May 30 2008, 06:24 PM, said:

I'm mentally retarded to the extent that I play 3♥ as a fit bid.  You boys seem to save a lot of bids for hands that might have preempted but didn't.

I'm not sure that I'd bid 3♥ with this hand though - hearts aren't the only feature of my hand, and anyway I'm worth 4♠.  I'd bid 4♦, showing a high card raise to 4♠.  The "high card" part is a slight stretch, but two aces are two aces.

Like gnasher, our loony team also play splinters, fit jumps, and so on. Here, for us, 3♥ would be a fit non-jump. Robson would argue that all other interpretations of this passed-hand bid are loony If you consider this hand suitable for 3♥ and your partner then doubles 3N, it would suggest that you lead your suit rather than his

[jdonn]

gnasher, on May 30 2008, 06:24 PM, said:

I'm mentally retarded to the extent that I play 3♥ as a fit bid. You boys seem to save a lot of bids for hands that might have preempted but didn't.

True, better to have 8 bids that raise partner and 2 bids that don't....

[kenrexford]

Jlall, on May 30 2008, 08:36 PM, said:

kenrexford, on May 30 2008, 03:38 PM, said:

Jlall, on May 30 2008, 03:33 PM, said:

3H is a nice option if it means that, but neither you nor partner are mentally handicapped you do not play it that way.

Mentally handicapped?

Pray tell...

What would 3♥ show?

3H would show........wait for it........wait for it........HEARTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! IF YOU HAVE SPADES YOUW ILL OMG RAISE SPADES!!!!!!!!!!! WOWwwwwwwwwwwww!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Starting with the first laughable comment.

You ignore Robson-Segal, of course. However, you also miss the reality that the bid actually made was 3♦. Now, I understand that 3♦ "is a cuebid" and therefore raises spades. However, you obviously opted to use a call other than a spade bid to raise spades. In case you missed the concept, 3♥ is also a bid, other than spades, that raises spades.

The fact that noted experts advocate this method, although not necessarily an authoritative statement that nothing else is possible, might have toned down a reasonable man. Know one?

A 3♥ bid that "shows hearts" is a rather stupid agreement. I would hope that the definition of your calls have more meat to them than to identify a suit that qualifies as "natural" by GCC standards. That mere definition would be "4+ hearts, 0-37 HCP, shape unknown."

I would expect that you could ascertain that a "fit bid" also, get ready, sit down for this, shows hearts. However, some of us actually have more to the meaning of our bids than simply that the suit is 4+ in length.