tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post6454021243036352417..comments2024-03-14T18:02:56.265-04:00Comments on Robin's Bridge Blog: When is a sequence not a sequence?Phasmidhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-69794125006642434442013-10-21T22:11:50.080-04:002013-10-21T22:11:50.080-04:00Sorry, kind of missed this comment earlier. I coul...Sorry, kind of missed this comment earlier. I couldn't lay my hand on my copy of Winning Notrump Leads but it's not concerned at all with the realm of agreements and how partner will interpret the lead. It is only about efficacy (double-dummy).<br /><br />Clearly, there is no difference in efficacy between the T and the 8 (or 9) -- so that won't factor in at all. There is a difference between leading the K, T98 and/or 2 but the differences between the T98 and 2 are very small and tend to balance out.<br />See Jeff's last comment for the real reason that my play of a low card was misguided.Phasmidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-47282887562975813372013-10-15T23:38:46.784-04:002013-10-15T23:38:46.784-04:00You are certainly right that in this particular la...You are certainly right that in this particular layout, knowing that partner has the T9(8) in sequence (together with the K) would be useful. But don't hold your breath. When partner has led from the critical holding against 1 NT passed out (pretty rare in and of itself), you will hold AJx approximately once every 130 occurrences. If they had opened a 12-14 notrump, the frequency would be slightly higher. Perhaps it might happen once or twice in a lifetime? If they are in 3NT, instead, the frequency drops to about 1 in 100.<br /><br />Perhaps the most significant issue is the one that Barry raised: what do you lead from a bad suit. If you're unlikely to be leading the T then it makes leading the T from KT98(x) [a good suit] more attractive because there is less possibility of ambiguity.Phasmidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-35207251274765859292013-10-15T20:12:35.446-04:002013-10-15T20:12:35.446-04:00You asked whether, (presumably as a practical matt...You asked whether, (presumably as a practical matter), if leading the T from KT98 holding could materially help partner. The answer is "yes". If Qxx showed in dummy and third hand held AJx, third hand would duck if dummy ducked on the ten lead. But if the eight were led instead of the ten, third hand might be tempted to win the ace and switch to a more promising suit.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09402419741923703786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-23150447339159791642013-10-14T18:44:47.835-04:002013-10-14T18:44:47.835-04:00It seems to me that "Winning Notrump Leads&qu...It seems to me that "Winning Notrump Leads" was written to answer this kind of question. However it does make intuitive sense to me that the T is the correct lead and that Q is the correct play. The goal is to run the suit and that won't happen until the other honors are forced out. I don't see the point of withholding the Q because declarer is marked with the J. If declarer has the K also your Q is dead anyway (no harm done). If not then you can trap the J by leading the suit back when you get in. In more general terms, stick with third hand high unless you are sure. Slarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11473385549812836620noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-85904128978222670882013-10-14T08:36:02.841-04:002013-10-14T08:36:02.841-04:00Ha, you're right about the 7, Jeff. It seems t...Ha, you're right about the 7, Jeff. It seems that a more complete analysis of this particular suit would have commanded the queen to step up.<br /><br />But my comment about sympathy was more just to get your attention. What about the KT9xx sequence in general? Does it really help partner in any material way to lead the T? Phasmidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-16766051210976695112013-10-14T01:24:19.775-04:002013-10-14T01:24:19.775-04:00My excuse being that I read your post remotely, th...My excuse being that I read your post remotely, thus making it harder for me to see it all, I now see that you have tried to answer the question about when withholding the queen might help.<br /><br />Unfortunately, you know that situation does not apply in the instant case. Declarer can't have AKJ7, because the seven is in dummy. And declarer can't the equivalent of AKJ6, because the six is in your hand. Thus, if your partner has led from T98 tight, then declarer has AKJ5. There's no chance of the 5 setting up as a trick, given your keeping length parity with declarer, right?<br /><br />Sorry, no sympathy this time.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09402419741923703786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-67137080153455272132013-10-14T01:11:49.116-04:002013-10-14T01:11:49.116-04:00meant to say "isn't my queen likely dead ...meant to say "isn't my queen likely dead anyway"Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09402419741923703786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-54795610455374998152013-10-14T01:08:56.318-04:002013-10-14T01:08:56.318-04:00Robin, did you say that the standard lead from KQT...Robin, did you say that the standard lead from KQTx and QJ98 is the second high honor?<br /><br />I do not believe that is the case; I think standard is to lead the high honor, just as if the third card were completing a three-card sequence instead of being one card away from completing a three-card sequence.<br /><br />As far as what to lead from KT98, given that standard is to lead the T, if my partner led the 8 I would be unlikely to correctly fathom his actual holding. Meanwhile, if I hold the Q and he has led the T from T98, isn't my ten likely dead anyway? If so, then why not play the Q just in case the T lead is from KT98? Stated otherwise, what holdings were you hoping to gain from by withholding your Q?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09402419741923703786noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-67880144197379673352013-10-13T08:34:21.827-04:002013-10-13T08:34:21.827-04:00Interestingly, Stephen Rzewski has an interesting ...Interestingly, Stephen Rzewski has an interesting article on when not to lead Q from QJ983: http://www.acblemba.org/Media/Articles/To_Duck_or_Not_to_Duck....pdfPhasmidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-4046479127360012282013-10-13T08:31:56.284-04:002013-10-13T08:31:56.284-04:00Good point. It depends a lot on your agreements ab...Good point. It depends a lot on your agreements about leading from bad suits. Many experts like to play second highest from bad suits and yes, the 8 would look like that. But I'm assuming "standard" if there is such a thing where the top card is led from a bad suit. We would hope that the layout would come to light after the first trick if the 8 is indeed fourth best. My problem here was a trick one decision - which I got wrong :(Phasmidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09870140728729031615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7181380552290465298.post-48904525898136815652013-10-12T23:46:00.153-04:002013-10-12T23:46:00.153-04:00I prefer to lead the T because the 8 looks like to...I prefer to lead the T because the 8 looks like top of nothing.Barry Margolinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12783892454985845455noreply@blogger.com