Help
I see that Meckwell lead J from QJxx(x) but Q from QJ(x) vs NT, what is the logic behind this?
Page 1 of 1
Lead agreements vs NT Rusinow/Meckwell
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2011-March-14, 10:16
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,950
- Joined: 2008-April-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen
- Interests:Model-Railways.
Posted 2011-March-14, 11:13
MickyB, on 2011-March-14, 10:16, said:
I see that Meckwell lead J from QJxx(x) but Q from QJ(x) vs NT, what is the logic behind this?
Not to fire away in your 3-3 fit, and not to unblock Kxx facing QJx.
I have been playing something similiar for appr. 8 years. Three times we have been able to diagnose partner had led from a short suit into a short suit. And all three times, we have not been able to afford a high discouraging card. Still hoping.
_____________________________________
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,950
- Joined: 2008-April-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Copenhagen
- Interests:Model-Railways.
Posted 2011-March-14, 11:21
Just to be fair to the idée:
There has probably been numerous occasions, where the certainty that partner held four in the suit, made the right defence easy to find.
There has probably been numerous occasions, where the certainty that partner held four in the suit, made the right defence easy to find.
_____________________________________
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
Do not underestimate the power of the dark side. Or the ninth trumph.
Best Regards Ole Berg
_____________________________________
We should always assume 2/1 unless otherwise stated, because:
- If the original poster didn't bother to state his system, that means that he thinks it's obvious what he's playing. The only people who think this are 2/1 players.
Gnasher
#4
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,290
- Joined: 2004-May-03
- Gender:Male
- Location:London, England
Posted 2011-March-14, 17:10
Great, thanks. Anyone else with experiences of this? Or anyone who can make a case for this being better or worse than other methods?
#5
- Under bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 11,797
- Joined: 2004-July-25
- Gender:Male
- Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Posted 2011-March-15, 09:35
I was just discussing this yesterday with my partner. He had led the J from J10 tight in the only unbid suit. We do not have the agreement to lead the highest from short suits, but apparently it was also natural to him. We do lead the highest in partner's suit, and this is not so different.
Maarten Schollaardt and Meike Wortel also play this btw.
Maarten Schollaardt and Meike Wortel also play this btw.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.
- hrothgar
- hrothgar
#6
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 12,029
- Joined: 2009-February-21
- Gender:Male
- Location:St. George, UT
Posted 2011-March-15, 10:09
The lead of queen versus Jack, forget length for a minute, is a trickle down effect from what your partnership uses for it's Power lead vs. Nt (Ace for some, King for some).
Those who lead K from KQT9 (Meckwell) must then choose Q from KQXX. So, the J is lead from QJXX. If Partner sees the K, and leader has led the Queen, it would be a wake-up call that the opening leader is shorter than 4 in the suit.
Those who lead K from KQT9 (Meckwell) must then choose Q from KQXX. So, the J is lead from QJXX. If Partner sees the K, and leader has led the Queen, it would be a wake-up call that the opening leader is shorter than 4 in the suit.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
#7
- Limit bidder
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 8,482
- Joined: 2004-November-02
- Gender:Female
- Location:England
- Interests:Bridge, classical music, skiing... but I spend more time earning a living than doing any of those
Posted 2011-March-16, 14:09
We play the method which I think was originally suggested by Rubens.
K is the power lead (unblock or count)
A looks for attitude often from either very long or very short holdings
10 is strong, showing an interior sequence (we're debating dropping this, but that's another discussion)
Q is either from KQ9x (usually lead low from KQxx) or from a strong QJ holding ie. QJ10 or QJ9 to length. Jack is either from J10 without a higher honour, or from a weak QJ holding. This isn't quite the same as Q shows 4, J shows 3 but it's very similar. The idea is that partner knows whether to unblock or not.
K is the power lead (unblock or count)
A looks for attitude often from either very long or very short holdings
10 is strong, showing an interior sequence (we're debating dropping this, but that's another discussion)
Q is either from KQ9x (usually lead low from KQxx) or from a strong QJ holding ie. QJ10 or QJ9 to length. Jack is either from J10 without a higher honour, or from a weak QJ holding. This isn't quite the same as Q shows 4, J shows 3 but it's very similar. The idea is that partner knows whether to unblock or not.
#8
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,261
- Joined: 2005-September-04
- Gender:Male
Posted 2011-March-16, 16:44
FrancesHinden, on 2011-March-16, 14:09, said:
Q is either from KQ9x (usually lead low from KQxx) or from a strong QJ holding ie. QJ10 or QJ9 to length. Jack is either from J10 without a higher honour, or from a weak QJ holding. This isn't quite the same as Q shows 4, J shows 3 but it's very similar. The idea is that partner knows whether to unblock or not.
I think this agreement makes sense. We lead Rusinow normally (with the K as the power lead). The other day, pard (inadvertantly) lead the J from JT9 and holding AKXX, I was somewhat surprised when declarer won the Q.
In retrospect, leading the J from a shorter holding (or weak QJ holding) makes sense because it helps clarify the stronger QJ holding as well...
foobar on BBO
Page 1 of 1