Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
Many books, including Goren, recommend leading K from both a AK (or AKQ) and also a KQ.
Why an ambiguous lead like this? Why not A from AK and K from KQ?
Consider a trump contract. Partner leads K from a non-trump suit. I have a void in that suit. Do I ruff assuming it's from a KQ or do I discard assuming it's from a AK?
The reason that K is traditionally lead from AK is because there are two important circumstances where a different signal is requested from partner (rather than attitude). The Ace lead is reserved for these particular circumstances because it is very important that there be no ambiguity in these circumstances:
Notrump:
The Ace lead against notrump signals a nearly running suit headed by at least AK, such as AKJT53, and requests partner to unblock an honour if he has one, else to give count.
Suit:
The Ace lead indicates a desire to ruff, either in own hand or partner's, and requests a partner with length to show attitude and a partner with shortness to show count. This lead might be made from singleton A or doubleton Ace small, or from A empty fifth or sixth.
In the former case it should only be made by a defender without entries, because it is partner who must get in to generate the ruffing leads. In the latter case it must be made only by a partner with entries who can get in to eliminate declarer's tricks in the suit.
As partner of K opening lead in a suit contract:
When partner leads the King against a suit contract, the guideline is to show attitude unless you have two or more touching honours, in which case you play the highest of the touching honours. For example:
Thus the play of an honour from third hand in this situation always denies the next higher honour, and shows either shortness or the next lower card (and possibly another).
Partner will almost always be able to read your card in order to play sensibly at the second trick.
As partner of A opening lead in a suit contract:
Only encourage holding length with either the K or a quick trump winner with which to provide partner with his ruff. Otherwise discourage so that partner will switch to another suit before declarer's tricks get established.
There are other Signalling agreements besides these standard ones, but if these suffice for repeat World Champion Bob Hamman they are certainly sufficient for casual partnerships and beginning players.
One reason to lead K from AK is that it's actually less ambiguous. Sometimes it is sensible to lead an unsupported ace to see dummy and partner's signal before deciding how to proceed with the defense. For instance, opening leader may have Ax in a side suit, trying to get a ruff if partner encourages to show the king. It's almost never right to lead from Kx when partner hasn't bid that suit since it it's much more likely to blow a trick.
Moreover, partner rarely has a void when you lead from KQxxx, and even if partner does have a void, it's almost never best defense for partner to ruff the K when it hasn't been covered by the A -- ruffing the K causes declarer to play low, so the Q hasn't been established as a winner.
less ambiguous? You will always lead K from both AK & KQ. But leading an unsupported A is less common. Also, this is not from KQxxx, more like KQJxxxx in a minislam contract by the opposition. You aren't worried about establishing the Q. You are more worried about making 2 tricks to defeat the contract - and the ruff might be one of them.
Aug 10, 2015 at 3:08
K in AK incorrectly implies that there are three cards in that suit (AKx). And I've also heard that, in general, leading an Ace is bad unless it's from AK.
My preference is to lead a K from a "truncated" or "weaker" suit (as defined below) if I can, and an A from a stronger suit.
A suit without an A is a "truncated suit, by definition. So if I have KQJ or KQT, I will lead the king.
I will also lead the K from AK blank because the suit is "truncated" by having no lower cards. I don't fear your ruff in this instance, because if I have AK and you have a void, the opponents would have 11 cards in this suit, which would be their trump suit, instead of their actual one.
Unlike Goren, I would lead an A with AKx, and certainly with AKQ, because that's a nice strong suit. Here, I feel there's a chance of a ruff, but if you can ruff my x on the third round, that's what I want you to do. At times, you might even want to ruff my queen if you can, to gain the lead for e.g. a finesse through declarer.
Another answerer pointed out that some people reserve the ace leads for only the strongest holdings, either a long one, like AKJT etc. or a "ruffing" one like Ax, or Axxxx. Depending on what else I held, I might lead the A, then the x from Ax, but I want to differentiate AK (lead the king) from AKx (lead the A).
