Histriadogsilver wrote:
> On May 9, 7:52 pm, Hank Youngerman <dontspa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> the reason I posted that hand, is that these are the hands:
>>
>> Jxx
>> AK
>> AQxxx
>> Axx
>>
>> AQTxxxx
>> xx
>> Jxx
>> x
>>
>> My partner, as declarer, won the low diamond lead with the Ace, lost
>> the spade finesse, and scored a 10% board for making 5. His later
>> comment was "I should have looked at the guy's profile. He was an
>> intermediate player, and an intermediate might have led away from the
>> diamond K, but I assumed it had to be a singleton because why risk
>> leading from the King?
>>
>> It's one thing to lead passively yourself. But I thought it was a bit
>> extreme to assume a far less likely layout (small stiff on his left)
>> than that the opponent might have failed to lead passively. The small
>> stiff is about a 5% shot, I think.
>>
>> On May 8, 3:25 pm, Hank Youngerman <dontspa...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>> Matchpoints, both vul, you hold:
>>> Kx
>>> Txx
>>> Kxx
>>> T8xxx
>>> With your side silent, your LHO opens:
>>> 3S - 4C
>>> 4H - 4S
>>> 4C is keycard, 4H shows one keycard. (Please ignore the bidding,
>>> there was a mixup - this is what you have been told.)
>
> I am not a world champion but just look at Hugh Kelsey's, Mike
> Lawrence's and Kantar's books on defense and what they have to say on
> the subject mentioned by your partner i.e. the never ending story that
> you can hear from time to time and it goes: 'never lead away from the
> king'.
>
Yes, but for an expert, 'never' isn't as long as for a beginner.
Let's reduce this to a simple solution: you can, let us say, eliminate
one suit from consideration. Your other choices are trumps, and you
know they have at least eight and not more than nine cards in it. You
have low doubleton. The other two suits are each K42, and you are told
specifically that leading one side suit will gain a trick and one will
lose a trick and the trump lead will break even. Which do you lead?
You may suffer and stew over it, but I lead the trump. Why? Well, the
gain one-lose-one equation will break even on guessing at MP AND
DECLARER MIGHT BOTCH THE PLAY WITHOUT IT. In other words, it's not win
one lose one, a straight 50% shot, it's win one 48%, lose one 52%. Or
maybe more. And, of course given the foog of war, you don't know this
specifically; any of these leads might be right in real life, since you
may be stopping a ruff. And of course, it doesn't matter whether you're
winning eight tricks with the neutral lead or 12, you expect the field
to be at about the same level.
That's at MP, of course. At IMPs the equation changes dramatically.
You tell me once again that the trump lead lets the contract make on the
nose, while underleading one of the kings sets it and leading the other
will let the overtrick make, you will see me stewing and finally
underleading a king. Nominally I have a 50% chance of letting an
overtrick through, which will give up an IMP, but I also have a 50%
chance of setting the contract, which can range from five IMPs (partial
contract vulnerable) to seventeen IMPs (6 of a major or NT.... and if
you include grand slams, it's more). I will take any even odd bet when
the other side is offering between five and seventeen to one odd. It's
what makes Lightner Doubles worthwhile.
That's why I prefer IMPs: at IMPs the payoff comes when you're right.
At MP it comes when you're simply not wrong. It feels better, too.
Bob
|
