[Kaitlyn S]

You've agreed to fourth best leads. The opponents bid 1NT (15-17) raised to game. Your choice?

---

[MrAce]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-10, 17:53, said:

You've agreed to fourth best leads. The opponents bid 1NT (15-17) raised to game. Your choice?

We can not lead unless you give us a hand to lead from

[Kaitlyn S]

MrAce, on 2017-June-10, 17:59, said:

We can not lead unless you give us a hand to lead from

Well I'll be damned! I put it in, and must have not hit Insert Diagram (funny, if I had 13 choices, that would have worked too )

OP to be edited

[The_Badger]

A horrible decision with this hand! Partner can't have much and any lead could hand declarer an extra trick. My own personal view if I was with a regular partner is to be consistent with our leads.

No Stayman used in the bidding, so in the absence of standard lead we'd always lead a major against this bidding. The problem with leading the ♠5 is that partner may think you have 4♠s and plan the defence on that basis.

[Winstonm]

I lead spade 8 as the least of evils.

Edit: I changed my vote to heart 9. Spade 10 is too big of card.

[ahydra]

Is there an argument for the D2? It's IMPs, we want to beat it. Everything's splitting nicely for declarer, and the only thing that's likely to cause him a problem is the CAQ offside. We could therefore say that we need something good from partner, let's try to find him with Axx or Jxx in diamonds.

ahydra

[nige1]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-June-10, 17:53, said:

You've agreed to fourth best leads. The opponents bid 1NT (15-17) raised to game. Your choice?

---

I rank

• ♦2 As Ahydra says, this seems our best chance to set up tricks; and, at imps, we can take risks to defeat the contract.
• ♦Q To kill doubleton knave.
• ♠T But opponents don't always use Stayman,
• ♠5
• ♥9

[The_Badger]

Yes, on reflection ♦2 is standard, is unlikely to give away any further tricks, and has a 66% chance of finding partner with a useful card.

My suggestion of ♠5 now looks like the lead that does give declarer that extra trick

[silvr bull]

I will gamble with the DK. If I try a passive lead, I expect it is more likely that I will get end played later than that I will win two D tricks. The most I can hope for is that partner will have a king or a QJ to take a major suit trick. On a good day, partner can have DTxxx and my DK lead could force an entry into partner's hand for a C shift. On a REALLY good day, dummy will have 3=3=2=5 and declarer will have 4=4=2=3. Then the top D lead will give us at least 5 tricks (4 D + a C), if partner can stop one of the major suits.

[rmnka447]

2 ♦

Yeah, dummy has denied major length. But there's any even more overriding "fact" that needs to be considered.

You're looking at 11 HCPs. The opponents should have about 25+ points, so that accounts for something like 36 of the 40 HCP. That leaves maybe 4 HCP max for partner.

4 HCP isn't usually enough to provide enough high cards to set up a Major and have the vital entry to it. Guess I pay off if partner has a 6 card major headed by the A9 or A10, but how often does that happen?

Low from KQxx might not work out but seems the best option. If partner has D J, D J10 or even just D 10 it might just work out. (I've seen declarer's misguess and insert the 9 from ♦ AJ9 tight on several occasions.)

[Winstonm]

IMO, the opps have most likely shown a pair of balanced hands facing each other. When there is no long suits to set up and run, there is not so much pressure to make an aggressive lead. This could easily be a 25-27 point hand and how cards are situated is more important than setting up the long diamond. Leading a diamond could give up a trick.

I'm usually in favor of an aggressive lead, but this hand and this auction sounds like a passive lead will work better, and now that I think about it I am more inclined to lead a high heart rather than the spade - as the spade 10 could be a critical card.

I'm thinking a hand like: Axx, KJx, AJ10x, Kxx for declarer and KJx, AQx, xxx, Jxxx for responder.