Tuesday, October 28, 2008

"The Principles of Logical Bidding"

I would like to feel qualified to write on this subject, sadly I am not; but that’s OK, because a guy named Allan DeSerpa already has already done it and done so superbly. If you read this bridge blog you will know that I rarely recommend bridge books. I am going to stick my neck out in this case and recommend a book entitled “Principles of Logical Bidding” by Alan DeSerpa (1997). What, you never heard of him? Neither had I until I saw a reference to his book in a footnote discussing the fascinating subject of "reciprocal suit fits." What, never heard of that either? That’s why, even in this crappy economy, I am going to recommend a purchase of something you can’t eat or wear. I guarantee you if you only read and understand the first 22 pages you will be a better bridge player.

From time to time I run across bridge books that are real sleepers. Here we have a book by an academician – Allan DeSerpa is a Professor of Economics at Arizona State University. While this is by no means his only book, it is really the only bridge book that he has ever written other than a bridge novel, the Mexican Contract. He not only suffers from not being a big time bridge professional, he didn’t have a big publishing house behind him; the book was apparently self published. Now self publishing is not new to the bridge world, but usually these books are more about vanity and weak on content. I guarantee you, if it is content you want, Alan DeSerpa delivers it in spades.

The book starts out by building a solid base for logical bidding, and then heats up once you get your feet on the ground. It is a good book for novices and intermediates who are seeking to improve their understanding of the game and there is plenty of “food for thought” for the advanced player. The forward is written by Marty Bergen. He says “Although Allan’s writing style is easy going, the logic is tight and the pace is fast. Be prepared to ponder the inferences and be willing to reread when the going gets tough.”

This book, while focusing on bidding, is not about a new bidding system, but rather a book about why you make certain choices in bidding and why those choices are supported by hard logic. The author doesn’t say “Do this and don’t ask questions”, he says here is what I think and here is a logical explanation of why I think my choice is better than other choices you might consider. Even if you know what to do, he explains, in a patient professorial manner, why he makes his choices, so you will have more than rote memory to fall back on in tight situations.

At the beginning you can go at a normal pace as he introduces simple (but important) propositions that form the groundwork for sound bidding, but as he goes on, you will find that you have to slow down and often reread, since there is more there than meets the eye right off the page. This is one of two bridge books I read this summer, much of the time, reading and then rereading, to make sure I not only got the answer, but also understood the logic and the process. It is hard for me to see how any aspiring player would not benefit from this book.

I had occasion to speak with Dr. DeSerpa and he has copies available that he will sell for $8 plus $3 shipping or a total cost of $11. That’s gasoline to your favorite club game and an entry fee (if you don’t live in South Florida). You can order your book directly from Dr.DeSera by e-mailing him at acd@asu.edu .If you encounter any problems, get back to me.

Thursday, September 18, 2008

More on Overcalls (Because we need it)

In Duplicate some of the least productive boards occur when opener and responder have no competition. Most of the bids are well known, often used and over the years have become well defined. Constructive bidding can also occur between Overcaller and Advancer, but bad results frequently prevail because the bidding sequences are less familiar. The problem usually starts with Overcaller and ends with Advancer.

A direct overcall has a multitude of purposes, but the principle purpose should be to engage in constructive bidding when the hand is "ours." You don’t have to nag me about the defensive benefits of getting into the auction, but it’s putting the cart before the horse if your overcalls are so bad that constructive bidding cannot occur. Simple overcalls already have a mega wide range (8-18 hpcs). You might overcall with (i) xxx, KQTxx, Kxx, xx, and also this (ii) Ax, AQTxx, KQx, Kxx. Through out this post I am going to refer to Losing Trick Count (LTC) as I think it is a better measure of strength and playability when partners have an 8 card fit. If you don’t know this hand valuation system, you are doing yourself a disservice. In the March 2007 blog archive you will find a two part post on LTC,

Here is Tommy’s thought #1 (fortunately most experts agree with me) : Do not overcall if you have a hand that has more than 8 LTC! Pass up hands like xx, KQxxx, xxx, xxx. Go back, read it again and tell me how partner is ever supposed to differentiate between this overcall and example (ii) above. Sensible communication has just been thrown out the window and this hand can only have a good result if everybody ignores you.

You are probably looking at example (ii) and saying why not double first and then bid. Here is Tommy’s thought #2: Much unnecessary damage is created by doubling and then bidding when a simple overcall will not have any risk of losing game going hands. If partner has any 3 card support and as much as 5 hcps (9 LTC) he is going to take a bid. If he has a bust or even as much as 5 hcps without a fit, how are you going to feel about bidding your heart suit at the 3 level. The key is don’t be afraid to make a simple overcall with a really good hand and save the double and bid treatment for the monster hands with no more than 4 LTC.

Moving to Advancer’s side, the key to good constructive bidding is the “cue bid” which describes an invitational hand or better. Almost always this hand will have 3+ card support and will have no more than 8 losing tricks. The cue bid by Advancer asks Overcaller a simple question: Do you have opening hand values? If you rebid your suit it says “NO”. If you make any other bid it says “Yes.” A useful understanding is that any suit bid other than the overcalled suit is a “help suit” game try, since a presumed fit has been announced by the cue bid.

Now we can see the importance of maintaining discipline with overcalls and advances. If Overcaller's answer is "Yes", we know he probably has no more than 7 losing tricks. Now, if Advancer has extras and no more than 7 losing tricks in his hand, the two hands have 14 or fewer total losing tricks and taking 10 tricks in our 8 card suit is most likely. If Advancer had a minimum cue bid, 8 losing tricks, he can bid overcaller’s suit at the 3 level and this is “Stop.”

The use of the cue bid is effective because all other bids at the 2 level are non-forcing and all raises are pre-emptive (Law of Total Tricks). Since cue bids strongly imply at least 3+ card support we need bids to deal with very good hands with no support. Cue bidding when you have no fit can lead to many problems. Consider other bids such as 1NT (which does not require a minor suit stopper). If your RHO takes a call over the overcall, a responsive double can work well to show the hand. If you cue bid without support, it should show a good 6 bagger and no more than 6 losing tricks. Without a fit, you need that type of power.

Just so you don’t go away empty handed, here are a couple of ideas you may not thought about. There is not much use for the jump shift by Advancer so a common agreement among better players is that a jump shift by Advancer shows a splinter bid, 4 card support, shortness in the bid suit and about 7 LTC. Another useful bid is the “jump cue bid” to show 4 card support without shortness. Now we can differentiate between a single cue bid (3 card support), the jump shift (showing the "splinter") and the jump cue bid (4 card support and no shortness).

I hope you enjoyed this review. Good basics will get you more results than one more convention.I would like to acknowledge the valuable insights that were provided to me about overcalls and other good bridge by Alan DeSerpa's excellent book, The Principles of Logical Bidding.

Monday, August 25, 2008

Western Cue Bids

If you are as old as I am (as far as I know none of my readers are) you may remember that old child’s game called “button, button, whose got the button.” In bridge, it is “stopper, stopper, whose got the stopper” also known as Western Cue Bid.

The purpose of the Western Cue Bid is to ask partner if he has a stopper in a suit bid by the opponents. Thus, we find a prime requisite for the Western Cue Bid is that it will only be used in competitive auctions. One more definitional issue before we move on. “What is a stopper?” There is some authority that when originally conceived it was the practice to use Western Cue Bid to find partial stoppers. For example, when opener has Jxx in a suit, a partial stop would be Qx held by partner. I think today it almost universally asks for a full stopper in the suit, meaning Qxx or better, but I always verify that criteria with partner. The objective or goal of the bid is to find a no trump game when no fit is immediately apparent. Thus, any bid of opponent’s suit at a level higher than 3NT means something else, usually showing a control and slam interest.

A Western Q bid auction might look something like this: 1c/1h/2d/p/2h. The 2 heart bid asks partner if he has a heart stopper and indicates a willingness to play a no trump contract. Since no one has bid spades, the heart cue bid also implies a spade stopper. If all is well in paradise, and partner has a stopper, he can bid 3NT with a game going values or bid 2NT with an invitational hand. If the response is 2NT, then opener will need 15+ hcps to continue to game. Notice that in this instance the auction enabled the Western cue bid to be made at the 2 level with a minimum balanced hand since responder showed 10+ with his 2 level free bid. Most of the time 23 hcps will make 2NT.

If the auction goes 1c/1h/2c/2h/3h, this is also a Western Cue bid even though both opponents have bid the suit. The difference is that opener must have the 15+ hcp hand since he is forcing partner to 3NT or a bail out at the 4 level. With Western Cue bid hands, the prelude will usually be that opener and partner have not found a suit fit and for that reason are searching for a no trump contract.

Other Western Cue Bid auctions could be 1c/x/xx/1h/2h or even 1c/p/1d/x/p/1h/2h. No matter what your understandings may be for constructive auctions, in competitive auctions Western Cue Bid is always "asking", never "telling". There is an important reason why it is asking. If partner has the stopper, he will be the no trump declarer and thus the lead will be coming up to the stopper hand. A problem common to most stopper showing bids is that the hand gets played wrong sided and the lead comes through the stopper hand. Not a good thing if the stopper is Kx.

Here is a final cue bid auction, but a frequent one. 1c/1h/2d/p/3c/p/3h. Here we have responder making the Western Cue bid. Either partner can institute the Western cue bid, but the activating partner becomes the “Captain” of the hand and has the responsibility to make sure that the auction doesn’t get out of control. In this case responder may have something like Axx, xx, AQxxx, Kxx and hopes partner has a heart stopper and can bring in the entire 6 card club suit at 3 NT. Western Cue bids are often used when one of the partners has a long running minor suit.

What about stopper showing when opponents open a weak 2 bid. Well this has nothing to do with Western Cue Bids, but the best solution is Lebensohl over Weak 2 Bids. I will write about this very useful treatment in a coming blog.

Is a Western Cue bid alertable? Well, no, since you are not supposed to have to wake up your opponents when you have just bid their suit! In fact, if you do alert, you will probably get a director call. That does not mean that you can’t mark Western Cue Bid on your convention card. I want partner to review our card before each game and putting the treatment on the card will serve as a reminder.

This would not be a blog authored by me if I did not heap a little scorn on useless overcalls, particularly minor suit overcalls with weak hands. I will say again, as I have in the past, that there is a cost to every overcall. Most often it is setting up a negative double or locating honors, suits and distribution, but in the case of a successful Western Cue bid auction, without the overcall, it may be impossible to find the stopper and the no trump game, or worse yet, we may have stumbled into 3NT without a stopper. Thanks guys!

Sunday, August 3, 2008

New Minor Forcing (NMF)

NMF primarily addresses how to find an 8+ card fit when responder has 5 cards in his first bid major suit and declarer has 3 card support. Eight card fits are important since they will out perform no trump contracts a majority of the time. Let’s start with that simple fit finding objective.

The bidding goes 1d/1s/1NT/2c. When we play NMF the bid of two clubs, (a new minor) is forcing for one round. Opener cannot pass, he must bid. Openers options will be described later.

What are the clues that it is NMF? (i) partner has opened (generally with a minor) (ii) responder has bid a suit at the one level (in this case spades) (iii) opener has rebid 1NT showing a balanced 12-14 hcps and responder now bids an unbid minor.

There is one NMF sequence where partner will not have opened a minor – 1h/1s/1NT/2m. As long as the rebid is 1NT, the bid of the minor is still NMF. Since a minor has not yet been bid, it’s your choice. Pick your better minor. While in NMF the bid minor does not necessarily show a suit, in this case you minor implies a stopper since you had a choice between the minors. If there is no major suit fit, bidding the better minor may be helpful information in finding a no trump contract.

Now let’s jump to responder’s side. Responder cannot use NMF unless he has at least 11 hcps since opener has limited his hand to 12-14 by rebidding 1NT. There is no maximum on responder’s NMF bid. In the vast majority of cases responder has 5 cards in his first bid major and wants to find out if opener has 3 card support. Yet, like its first cousin, 4th suit forcing, NMF has great flexibility and in end result is nothing more than a request for opener to further define his hand

In the sequence 1d/1s/1NT where responders bid is one spade, it is possible that responder has a hand like KQxxx, KQxx, Ax, xx. In this specific auction responder is interested in whether opener has a three card spade suit or a 4 card heart suit that opener could not show since responder’s first bid was 1 spade. Let’s now give opener Kxx, Axxx, KQxx, Jx. Does opener show his 4 card heart suit or does he show the 3 card spade suit? There are differences of opinion about the priorities. Ignoring all conflicting opinion, I play that opener’s first priority is to show the unbid 4 card heart suit, and then by rebid show the 3 card spade support if responder indicates no fit for hearts. Note that this issue only arises when responders first bid is 1 spade.

If opener does not have a holding to make a positive major suit response to responder’s NMF bid, then opener shows the hcp range of the hand as a minimum (12-13) by bidding 2NT or a maximum (14 hcps) by bidding 3NT.

If opener does have a major suit fit for responder, the same principle of showing the range of the hand applies. If you have a fit and 12-13 hcps, show the fit on the 2 level (2 hearts or 2 spades), and if you have a maximum of 14 hcps show the fit on the 3 level (3 hearts or 3 spades).

What if the bidding goes 1d/1s/1NT and you hold Kxxx, xx, x, QJTxxx. This hand will not play well in no trump and you really want to play the hand with clubs as trump at the cheapest level. Two clubs would be NMF, so with this hand you bid 3 clubs. This is a clear signal to opener to stop bidding and put his hand on the table.

NMF is also “on” when opener rebids 2NT. So 1c/1s/2NT (18-19)/3d is NMF. If responder has already made a 1 level response, he has enough to use NMF. Partner now bids 3 of a major to show 4 hearts or 3 spades and 3NT to show neither. If responder finds a major fit, he bids 4 of the major and if not passes 3NT.

The important thing about NMF is that when opener has a minimum hand he makes a minimum response at the 2 level (up to and including 2NT) and when he has a maximum he makes a jump response at the 3 level (up to and including 3NT)..

There are a number of optional more sophisticated treatments that can be used in connection with NMF, but this represents all the basics. Don’t forget that the NMF and its responses are alertable.

Thursday, July 10, 2008

Opening Leads Against Suit Contracts (Part 3)

In suit contracts I mark one change from the standard leads shown on the convention card.. If I have a suit headed by the AK, KQ, or QJ, I lead the Ace or Queen if I want partner to signal me with attitude (high card asks for a continuation and low card asks for a shift) and I lead the King when I want partner to give me his card count in the suit led (high-low for an even number and low high for an odd number). The short hand name for this is “Ace is for Attitude and King is for Kount.” Get it? Did I just invent this. No, it is recommended in a short monograph by two leading bridge experts. The book is Defensive Signaling (Masterpoint Press 2000) by bridge experts David Bird and Marc Smith. This book is out of print and not available from the publisher, but a few copies are available used at Amazon at $7.60.

Selecting an opening lead at a suit contract is much more complicated than leading against a no trump contract. When opponents reach a suit contract unmolested it is necessary to base your lead on the type of defense you decide to employ. Since we have not bid, we need to listen to the opponents’ bidding to gain insight. We listen to what they bid, the sequence in which they bid it and take what inferences we can from their failure to make certain bids. Propped up by the bidding and a view of our 13 cards we select from one of 5 primary lines of defense.

There is an excellent discussion of the 5 Primary Lines of Defense in How the Experts Win at Bridge (1996) by Burt Hall and Lynn-Rose Hall. This is an excellent read for Intermediates. Here’s an overview of their listing:

Force Declarer to Lose Control of the Hand (“Pumping Declarer”)
Go Active When Tricks Can Disappear
Remain Passive When Your Tricks are Safe
Cut Down Declarer’s Ruffing Power
Creating Trump Tricks (Upper Cuts and Trump Promotion Plays)

Since we are going to discuss leading trump and trump tricks separately, we will concern ourselves here with the first 3 defenses.

1. Forcing Declarer. This is an awesome defense. You may not recognize it by name, but I’m sure you know how it feels. It ain’t fun to lose control of your trump suit and not be able to draw trump to cash side suit winners. Worse yet, sometimes opponents actually draw your trumps and cash all their side suit winners. How does opening leader know to start a forcing defense. You sense that partner has long trumps since you are short in trumps and they sound like they are on a 7 or 8 card fit. It can also be reversed, you can have long trump, it works both ways. Finally, if you hear declarer bid two suits he probably has shortness somewhere in his hand and may be vulnerable.

How do you force declarer? You lead your longest and strongest suit and keep leading them at every opportunity. If partner has bid a suit, you can lead that suit rather than your own. The object is to make declarer trump your long suit winners in his hand and cut down on his trumps. Note that forcing declarer to trump tricks in the dummy only works if dummy has the long trump. This most often occurs where there has been a transfer after a no trump opeing bid. Ideally you sense a situation where dummy has 3 small cards and declarer only one or two cards in your suit. If the trump suit are divided 1-3-4-5 (WNES), declarer only has to be forced to trump only once to get him down to our size, and if you can force him again, he loses control. This is also an explanation why it is bad to lead trump when you either have trump length or a trump singleton. You are usually helping declarer maintain control of the hand. You don’t always know on the opening lead that a forcing defense is going to work, but usually there is little to lose by starting out with that in mind. If it sounds like a forcing defense will work, it pays to make aggressive leads to get it started, even leading away from tenaces may be worth the risk.

2. Going Active. Make aggressive leads so you can get your tricks before they go away. It is particularly important in matchpoints to get your tricks so that declarer doesn’t get an overtrick. Sometimes you only get one chance to “cash.” So what does it sound like when your tricks are about to disappear? How about this auction 1h/2c/2h/4h. The trump suit sounds solid and responder didn’t make a 2/1 club suit bid on thin air. To me this sounds like declare may be ready to draw trump and play clubs to pitch losers from his hand. It is worth a risky lead to get a trick if you have one or can quickly promote one. Aside from laying down your tricks or leading honor sequences, it is worth the risk of under leading a suit of Kxx or QJx or even Qxx (as I did recently). Another time to get active is where opponents bid two suits and you can see from your hand that a key honor in the side suit is "on side" or that the side suit is going to break favorably for declarer. Another “go active" sign is when opponents make a slam try and then back off. It usually means they are close to slam and loaded and you should thing about grabbing your tricks or starting to set up a quick trick in some suit.

3. Remaining Passive. Make safe leads when your tricks are safe and will not go away. The best indicator of staying passive is when you do not find a reason to go active. You don’t want to be snatching winners, breaking suits for declarer or otherwise solving his problems for him if there is no urgency. Often there are two lines for declarer to attack a suit or contract, and you want to make him guess. With less experienced players, when they have to solve the problem for themselves, they often get nervous and make a needless mistake. Indicators of a passive approach are (i) no evidence of a side suit strength, (ii) dummy very weak and declarer very strong (2NT/3NT), (iii) a misfit hand or (iv) defending 6NT or a Grand Slam. Good passive leads are partner’s suit if he has bid one, honor sequences, top of nothing in a long suit or as a last resort, lead through dummy’s strength and not up to declarer.

You don’t have to worry too much about finessing partner since his high cards are likely to be finessed anyway. What you want to avoid if you can is under leading an unsupported honor and finessing yourself. If you have to underlead an honor, prefer a King to a Queen. Partner needs to have only one of two cards to promote a 2nd round trick for you.

Leading doubletons is probably the most abused lead by novices. Don’t do it unless you have reason to believe that it is going to be effective to produce a trump trick that you will not get naturally. Unless partner has bid a suit or otherwise indicated power in a suit, the likelihood of you getting a quick ruff from a doubleton lead is remote and the damage you can do is irreparable. One of the usual by-products is that you give declarer a “tempo”, since it is not an attacking lead. He will be grateful that you gave him time to get his house in order! Leads from doubleton honors are even more ridiculous. You would have a better chance with the lottery. A positive indicator to lead from a doubleton is where you have the top honor in trump so that you will get in again to lead the suit a second time before all your trump are pulled.

Are you left in doubt? Well, leading trump is coming up next.

Thursday, July 3, 2008

Opening Leads Against No Trump Contracts (Part 2)

The bidding of no trump contracts has become so simple and precise, even novices have astoundingly high success rates. Although you can hope that opponents will misplay the hand, they are odds on favorites to make the contract. In no trump contracts, usually the matchpoints are won or lost on the opening lead. It boils down to whether you are going to give opponents an extra trick on the opening lead by finessing partner, finessing yourself (even worse), starting a suit in which opponents have length or giving declarer a “tempo” so that he has time to develop a different side suit before you knock out his single stopper.

The natural advantage declarer has in a no trump contract is that he has a big hand and the lead is often coming up to his AQx and KJx tenaces. Sometimes a "give away" is unavoidable, but you can minimize your exposure two ways. First, don’t make speculative "squirrelly" leads that are long shots in the hopes of finding partner with specific cards that he is not likely to hold. This is sure to put a smile on declarer’s face. Second, look at the hand and ask yourself what are other players going to lead from the mess you are looking at. Even if the lead turns out to be awful, if everybody else makes the same choice, you get an average board. This technique is referred to as “swimming with the fishes” and works quite effectively.

Honor leads in no trump are not common and almost invariably they are from a sequence of honors, a broken sequence (KQTx) or from an interior sequence (KJTx). If partner leads a King in a no trump contract, it is a command for you to unblock with any honor you may hold in the suit. For example, from AKJxx you would lead the King asking partner to jettison any honor he holds. So holding Qx or Txxx, he is asking you to play the honor under his King.

What do you do if you hold two honors but they are not in a sequence such as AQxx or KJxx. If opponents are in a contract of 3NT, start your analysis with the thought that they have roughly 2/3rds of the hcps. Who is most likely to hold the KJ or the AQ in those two examples. You got it, the opponents, and most of the time it will be the declarer. The moisture you see on declarer’s chin is drool and not sweat.

OK, I am sure you can remember a time when opponents bid a no trump game without a stopper and partner held those key cards. Try to remember that bridge is a game of percentages and that you want to develop a habit of making leads and plays that will work most of the time. Under leading a tenace at no trump is a long term loser. Equally unappealing is leading either honor. You want this suit led by your partner and through declarer and you need to develop patience and have confidence that partner will make the lead. If partner does not have an entry, this defense is not going anywhere anyway. Even if partner can not or does not lead this suit, it is better to force declarer to break the suit.

Well, after all that advice you may still decide you must lead either suit. By all means lead from the KJxx, a far superior lead than from AQxx. The reason: If you lead from KJxx there are two cards that can protect you, the A or Q. When you lead from AQxx, there is only one card partner can hold to avoid disaster, the King. So the odds are 2:1 by way of comparison.

Other than honor sequence leads, when defending no trump contracts, generally stay with the time honored rule of 4th best from the longest and strongest. First, you are not likely to defeat a no trump contract by your preponderance of high card points. It is not Aces and Kings that doom most no trump contracts, it’s the 2’s, 3’s and 4’s in that long suit you were able to develop before declarer got 9 tricks. So you need to get started on that right away. Second, when you lead 4th best, partner can employ the Rule of 11 and obtain some idea of declarer’s holding. I follow this rule pretty religiously if I have a 5+ card suit. Experience has taught me that leading from 4th best when you only have 4 cards in the suit headed by a single subordinate honor (Queen or Jack) often gives away more tricks that it gains. Look for something else.

If you don’t have any entries back to your hand after your opening lead, it is pointless to work on your suit, it will never materialize. When I have that kind of hand, I try to lead something that looks like it might help my partner, often an unbid major. If the bidding has gone 1NT/3NT, it sounds like opponents do not have an interest in majors. Since they lack interest in majors, that should be where our interest lies.

If partner has bid a suit, and the opponents bid a NT contract right in his face, you have a tough decision. I generally lead partner’s suit, even if I have a singleton. Better to lose a board than to lose a partner. If I have bid a suit and they bid a NT contract in my face, if I am on lead I will generally not lead my suit unless I have an honor sequence of some kind. Without a sequence, it is better to hope that partner can get the lead and lead your suit through declarer. So, the fact that partner did not lead his bid suit does not indicate lack of interest in the suit, he just does not want to lead it up to declarer.

Here are some “Don’ts”:

1. Don't leada short suit unless partner has bid it or directed the lead.
2. Dont lead a suit opponents have bid, particularly one bid by declarer.
3. Don't lead Aces or other high honors that are unsupported.

In the next blog post we will cover leads at suit contracts. Does anyone want to “guest author” this? Warning: It must fit on 20 pages single spaced!

Sunday, June 29, 2008

Opening Leads (Part 1)

More than half the time, selecting the correct opening lead will make or break the contract. Put another way, most contracts make at least one overtrick because of faulty leads and defense. What’s the easiest way to pick up your game? Learn a few simple rules about opening leads and adhere to them. Note that I didn’t say anything about memorizing the exhaustive opening lead tables that are so common, nor did I imply you needed to be a genius. As quixotic as experts would like to make this, there is a process that will enable your partnership to function efficiently and score better. First you must determine the suit to be lead. Second, and more important, is that you must determine the card to be led in the suit you have selected. Your choice of card will tell partner about your length and strength in the suit.

You are not left to guessing as there are standard lead disciplines that have been developed over time. If you want to be more successful in selecting the right card, just follow 6 simple rules:
1. Lead the highest ranking card from touching honors except lead the King from AKx(x)(x) and the Ace from AK doubleton. (See later discussion).
2. Lead the Second highest card from a broken sequence such as KQTx or KJTx.
3. Lead the 4th best card from a 4+ card suit headed by an honor.
4. Lead the highest card from three small cards (see later discussion).
5. Lead the lowest card from 3 cards to an honor (see later discussion).
6. Lead high from any doubleton.

Let me emphasize that these are standard leads, and partners can choose to make non-standard leads as long as the variance is fairly disclosed to the opponents. Marking the change on the convention card will do. The most common exception to standard leads today is the lead of an Ace from AKx+ and lead King from Ace King doubleton. Don’t ask me why, I don’t understand it, but if that is what your partner wants to do, just humor him. There is also a thriving controversy about what card to lead from 3 small cards. While many stay with the standard and lead the highest card, an equal number lead the lowest card. If that is not bad enough, some partnerships use MUD, middle card, then up and then down. Here briefly are the considerations.

When you lead the top card from three small it is impossible for partner to know if you hold 2 or 3 small cards in the suit. The trade off is that he knows that you do not have a card higher than the card lead. Guess what, so does the opposition! When you lead the small card from 3 small cards, partner will know that you do not have a doubleton, but he will be uncertain about whether you have an honor in the suit since you also lead small from three or four to an honor. In an effort to side step this uncertainty (and add even more uncertainty), some partnerships use MUD, but the downside about this is that you do not know whether it is from a doubleton or three cards until the second card is played. You also forfeit the discipline of the lead of a low card (5 or under) guaranteeing an honor in the suit. Each has their own supporters and none is perfect all the time. You and partner need to decide what to do and mark your card if it is not “top of nothing.”

If partner has bid a suit, you are hopefully going to lead it. If it turns out to be a rotten lead, get a new partner. Who asked him to overcall on KJxxx? Lead low from 3 cards and high from two cards to give partner a count in is suit. There are variations on this scheme as well, but this basic rule will work.

If partner doubles a conventional bid by opponents, this means he wants you to lead that suit. This opportunity often happens on Stayman and Transfer bids in no trump bidding. What if partner doesn’t double a conventional bid? As usual, there are strong inferences to be taken from silence, and in this case lead any suit other than the conventional bid he did not double. Here you may have to woodshed partner to train him to do the right thing.

If partner makes a takeout double, it usually means he has something in the other three suits. If you are on lead and have an honor in any of the unbid suits, lead that suit as it is reasonable to assume that partner will be able to help you out with a supporting honor. That gets you off to an aggressive start. If you have a hopeless hand without any defensive possibilities, and you lead any of the three unbid suits, you likely will finesse one of partners honors. Make declarer figure it out and work for it. Now is the time for a passive lead like trump.

With the next post we will cover leading at no trump contracts. Following that I will cover leads at suit contracts, then trump leads and leading against slams. If you want a reference work for definitive information on opening leads and the play of the hand I recommend Easley Blackwood’s The Complete Book of Opening Leads (1983) or the all time classic, Louis Watson’s The Play of the Hand at Bridge (1933). Both are good references, but a substantial workout to read cover to cover. Just rereading the six rules and getting on the same page with partner may produce quicker results.