[Shugart23]

Defending a 3NT game where partner threw in a Spade bid and you have decided to lead a spade....Can I see if there is a consensus on your lead if you have:

1) xx .....do you play high or do you give count or attitude
2) xxx.....assuming you didn't support, do you give count or attitude ?
3) Qxx.....assuming you didn't support, do you lead the Q or do you give count or do you give attitude ?
4)...same as 2 but you DID support
5)....same as 3) but you DID support

Thank you...I am doing a write-up for my son on defending NT, and I am too rusty to be certain anymore

[jillybean]

This is dependant on partnership agreement, my agreements are;
1) High, top of nothing
2) High, top of nothing
3)x low from an honor
4) high
5) high

[smerriman]

Low from Qxx, high from xx(x) regardless of support for me. More important for partner to know if we have an honor, and I'm not leading the queen except in unusual circumstances. But I know some hold to the principle of leading the honor.

Against a suit, count is more useful in general, so that's when it changes based on the bidding; low from xxx but high if we've supported and can give the honor info instead.

[DavidKok]

Whatever my partnership agreements are. Over here Polish leads are popular, which dictate 1) low, 2) middle, 3) middle (or queen if you have a very strong reason to want to be on lead next), 4) same as 2, 5) same as 3.
I think the main takeaway is to play whatever is easy to remember and locally somewhat popular. Personally I think having different agreements for supported suits and unsupported suits does not match that description.

[Stephen Tu]

For me, high from xx, xxx if supported during auction.
Low from Qxx, and from xxx if not supported during auction (idea partner needs count info more often, honor info can often be inferred or there is no chance to beat anyway)

[Shugart23]

Thanks all that replied....I think I am coming down to the following :
1) xx....lead High
2) xxx lead high ( upside down attitude) if you supported the suit.
3) Hxx lead low ( upside down attitude) if you supported the suit.

In cases 2 and 3, partner will assume you have 3+ card support

4) xxx lead high to show count (upside down count) if you have NOT supported the suit.
5) Hxx lead top to show count ( upside down count) if you have NOT supported suit.

6) xxxx ...give attitude or count signal depending upon if you supported or dd not support the suit respectively


I should have also asked about, what you do with Q,J x (x)......either with or without having given support.

I appreciate any comments on the notes I am working on

[Stephen Tu]

Shugart23, on 2023-March-21, 07:33, said:

Thanks all that replied....I think I am coming down to the following :
1) xx....lead High
2) xxx lead high ( upside down attitude) if you supported the suit.
3) Hxx lead low ( upside down attitude) if you supported the suit.

In cases 2 and 3, partner will assume you have 3+ card support

4) xxx lead high to show count (upside down count) if you have NOT supported the suit.

Upside down count if agreed applies when following suit 2nd/4th hand to declarer's play, not opening lead. It has nothing to do with lead agreements. Using "4" is not good in combination with "1", because you are leading high in both cases, with both doubleton and tripleton. The idea is to lead low with 3 and high with 2, then partner at trick 1 can better gauge how many stoppers declarer will have and how best to maintain communication or if the original suit is hopeless and to switch.

Quote

5) Hxx lead top to show count ( upside down count) if you have NOT supported suit.

With Hxx you definitely don't want to lead the H. You often need to keep an honor over declarer for trick taking purposes. Imagine for example you holding Qxx, partner with Axxxx, and declarer with KJx. Leading the Q would be a disaster. There are many different combos where you need to retain the honor. Just lead low, not top.

Quote

6) xxxx ...give attitude or count signal depending upon if you supported or dd not support the suit respectively

One normally doesn't make attitude leads in suits partner has bid. You lead your agreed count card. Vs. NT, that's 4th best normally. You reserve leading high for when leading from doubleton. Now if this were a blind lead, a suit where partner *didn't* bid it, then some people make attitude leads and lead top, or maybe 2nd from top, from no honors, particularly if there were a side say AJTx suit where you'd welcome a switch (but don't want to break yourself on opening lead)

Quote

I should have also asked about, what you do with Q,J x (x)......either with or without having given support.

From any sort of honor sequence in partner's suit, you lead the top honor normally, because you need to unblock the suit.

[Shugart23]

[quote name='Stephen Tu' timestamp='1679408946' post='1051898']
Upside down count if agreed applies when following suit 2nd/4th hand to declarer's play, not opening lead. It has nothing to do with lead agreements. Using "4" is not good in combination with "1", because you are leading high in both cases, with both doubleton and tripleton. The idea is to lead low with 3 and high with 2, then partner at trick 1 can better gauge how many stoppers declarer will have and how best to maintain communication or if the original suit is hopeless and to switch.

I agree upside down count and attitude applies to declarer's play. But I have to think about what you are saying and ask (myself), why can it not apply when opening lead of partner's suit against NT ? The partner sees his suit led, thinks back to the bidding and whether or not his suit was supported and then looks to see whether this was an attitude or a count lead of his suit. It may not be clear immediately as opener is leading high from x, xx, xxx (attitude), and xxx(count).....From Q82 and not giving support, could show count with the 8 and could show attitude with the 2

But I will think on what you have said....

I'm not too worried about the Spade lead when we have a 9+ card Spade fit...good chance any lead is going to knock out declarers stop.

[Shugart23]

So after mulling it over, where you are on lead against a NT contract, partner has thrown in a suit bid and you have decided to lead his suit on the open :
Consensus seems to be:
1) x,xx,xxx,xxxx lead the top x ( essentially an upside down attitude lead)
2) with touching honors of any length, lead the top honor
3) with a single Honor ..Hxx, Hxxx (Hx?) lead the low x ( also essentially an upside down attitude lead)

If I have this right, the advantages are a) it's easy to memorize and b) most people are comfortable with it so that you can play with a stranger for the first time. The disadvantage seems to be that leading, say a 9, is ambiguous...9.9x.9xx.9xxx. Partner has little idea of your count other than you probably don't have a higher card than a 9. 'Count' is simply not given with the opening lead.

*****************************************

I'm still mulling over whether there may be an advantage to giving partner count of your suit when you did not support him on the auction.

1) if you have a singleton, you lead it
2) if you have a doubleton, you lead the low one (to show an even count) - Partner likely can deduce that you have a singleton or doubleton and thus can get a pretty good handle on the distribution of the suit in all 4 hands.
3_ if you have touching honors of any length (2 3 4+). lead the top honor

This leaves 3 card suits with no honors (xxx), or a 3 card suit with a singleton honor (Hxx).
Assume you have shown support for your partner's suit. You will make an attitude lead ( just as before)

4) from xxx, lead the top x
5) from Hxx, lead the small x
(If you happen to have 4 cards and not 3, partner will be pleasantly surprised when he learns that)

SO up to this point, the only thing I have changed is leading low from a doubleton, otherwise everything else is the same as consensus

so the last case is if you have xxx or Hxx and did NOT support partner and whether there is anything to be gained (or lost) by giving count (playing the middle card) instead of attitude.

If you lead the middle x, partner may often times know right away that you have a triplet from looking at his hand, the dummy and considering the bidding. The lead of a 9, as in my example above, is not really ambiguous - it's no longer top of nothing with any length.

Disadvantage is, a little more taxing on the brain and not going with the consensus. The other disadvantage might be if you have Hxx and did not support partner, he may not realize that you have the H.

SO these are my thoughts this morning. Time to go ave coffee and see if any of this makes sense.

[DavidKok]

Shugart23, on 2023-March-22, 09:01, said:

So after mulling it over, where you are on lead against a NT contract, partner has thrown in a suit bid and you have decided to lead his suit on the open :
Consensus seems to be:
1) x,xx,xxx,xxxx lead the top x ( essentially an upside down attitude lead)
2) with touching honors of any length, lead the top honor
3) with a single Honor ..Hxx, Hxxx (Hx?) lead the low x ( also essentially an upside down attitude lead)

I think 1) and 3) are wrong, and terribly so. Informing partner of your length in the suit is often relevant, for example for knowing whether declarer's 10 will drop, if we have communication or not after knocking out a guard, to evaluate the risks of being thrown in or to decide how many slow tricks we have coming. Leading small from Hx is very strange, this risks blocking the suit and will be difficult to read for partner.
I think most of the advice in this thread is less than helpful. I recently read Deadly Defence by Wladyslaw Izdebski, Roman Krzemien and Ron Klinger. They make a case for Polish leads but focus more on the inferences that can be drawn regardless of choice of agreements. I think this thread is going down the wrong path in two ways, focusing on agreements over inferences and choosing uncommon and ineffective agreements at that.

I would (again) recommend choosing a simple set of lead agreements and sticking with them. I would not be happy to play the agreements you suggest in that last post.

[Stephen Tu]

I disagree that there is a consensus for attitude. Most books and web articles follow what I said, AFAIK, the consensus is the other way. If you haven't supported, high only from small doubleton.

Also, I don't think you want to switch to a system where you are leading low from doubleton and also low from Hxx, which are going to have vastly different implications for partner. With 3 cd support he will want to continue suit often (whether or not you have the honor); with doubleton it will more often be hopeless if his suit isn't solid and he may want to switch unsuccessfully. If you want to give count info lead low from 3+ regardless of honor. Or if you really insist on low from doubleton probably supposed to lead middle from HXx, not low so there is better hope it can be read.

[Shugart23]

Stephen Tu, on 2023-March-22, 09:42, said:

I disagree that there is a consensus for attitude. Most books and web articles follow what I said, AFAIK, the consensus is the other way. If you haven't supported, high only from small doubleton.

Also, I don't think you want to switch to a system where you are leading low from doubleton and also low from Hxx, which are going to have vastly different implications for partner. With 3 cd support he will want to continue suit often (whether or not you have the honor); with doubleton it will more often be hopeless if his suit isn't solid and he may want to switch unsuccessfully. If you want to give count info lead low from 3+ regardless of honor. Or if you really insist on low from doubleton probably supposed to lead middle from HXx, not low so there is better hope it can be read.

You wouldn't necessarily confuse partner by leading x from both Hx and Hxx. The lead of x from Hxx would only be if you showed 3+ support and suggests an honor is held whilst leading high would show no honor held but 3+ card support......If you didnt show support, you would be leading Middle. But you do make a point that partner has to try and deduce if your card led was low or a middle one if he didn't show support....
'
I'll also add that I'm not saying (yet) what I have been 'proposing is better... I was just pondering it last night and this morning, so I thought to present it. I definitely appreciated everyone's comments

PS..I just went back amd reread what you were saying, and yeah...I don't disagree with your approach - probably better than mine actually