[oldmoondog]

At Teams, What to lead if the auction went 1H, P, 3H, P, 4H?
I held:
S Q752
H: 5
D:KJ6
C:87532

I lead the 8C (High for Hate). They made the contract.
At the other table they led the 6D and made 4 straight tricks - one down. Needless to say we got a large negative score of IMPs.
I’m not showing the other hands as that may sway your judgement. But my thought were to protect my KD, leading a H would not be any good
I could possibly have led the two of spades (lot for like) and we would have got them down. Having five clubs my thoughts were my partner might have be short or even have a singleton.
Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

the first question to answer, looking only at the auction, not looking at your hand:
Do you should go active or passive?
Do they have something to spare, or do they need something to make the contract.

The given auction does not give a clear answer, responder is limited, but opener may or may not be
stretching. Facing an inv., you dont need a lot of add. strength to have enough, so the auction
indicates more an active lead, than a passive lead.
If they play 5 card majors, and 3H showes 4+ support, this also indicates a more active approach,
they have a 9 card fit.

A diamond lead is active, a club lead is passive, at least less likely to blow a trick as a diamond.
The argument, that partner may be short in club is ok, but if this is so, what good will it do?
You need to get in a 2nd time to play 2nd round, and you need partner to control trumps, and given he
has length in trumps, you also need, that the ruff is not a natural trump trick.

I dont think you should lead a spade, there is not much upside in contrast to diamonds, and similar,
maybe even higher risks.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[nige1]

OldMoonDog "Lead at teams?"
++++++++++++++++++++++++


FWIW, I would lead a ♣ too

---

[FelicityR]

The state of the match is also a factor to take into consideration. I remember a hand where Benito Garozzo lead away for KJx against a small slam and his side collected the first two tricks. It wasn't an obvious lead on the bidding for the slam had been bid direct and quick but Garozzo advocates aggressive leads against freely bid slams, I believe, so there's probably also a case for aggressive leads against freely bid games, too.

One other fact about an unusual lead is that it sometimes wrongfoots a declarer immediately - but it could also wrongfoot your partner also - as declarer would never believe that you would have lead small from KJx

[oldmoondog]

Thanks for your response. I feel better after your explanation. The other table led a D to the A and returned a D to the K. Then led a spade to the A and K - down one!! Beats me how they hit on that one? It was a pity it was just a two table team event. At pairs it would show other leads as well and give an idea as to the thoughts of other players!
Thanks Again