Does it make sense for a defender to lead a short major when opponents fail to find a fit using Stayman?

Question

Both vulnerable, at rubber, South dealt and bid 1NT, North 2 clubs, South 2 hearts, North 3NT.

You, West, have (s) 64 (h) AJ7 (d)J8752 (c) Q84.

North clearly has four spades, but not hearts. Any spade strength on your side is with East, behind North. You like the strength you have behind South's hearts. Apparently, the bulk of North-South strength is in the minors.

The actual West led the 5 of diamonds. It was a "friendly" lead from a weak suit that gave North and South all the time in the world. Reasoning from the previous paragraph, I would have lead a small spade (and hoped for a heart return).

This is a bit unconventional but does this make sense? If declarer thought that I had length and strength in spades, could that cause a misplay? (In the example, East actually had five to the king, but of course, I wouldn't know this until later.)

Put another way, how much weaker could the diamond suit be, before it is not worth leading?

Answer 1

If opponents have only 24-25 points the auction would likely have involved acceptance of a game invitation. Instead there was a jump to game by responder without a slam try, each opponent having 4 cards in a different major; opponents rate to have 29 points +- 3. You have 8 points in hand, giving partner 3 points +- 3. The likelihood of being able to set up and run a suit in partner's hand is extremely remote.

However if partner has QTx in diamonds and an entry you might be able to win a race against Declarer in that suit. Lead your fourth best diamond as was actually done at the table. This also gives partner a clear signal as to what to lead back to you when he gets in the (probably) one only time that happens.

On this particular hand I see no reason for method of scoring to matter, but as a matter of good form it should be specified.

It is important to note also that partner is going to be squeezed in both Majors. Clubs are splitting 3-3 for Declarer. Combined with the fact that opponents jumped to game rather than accepting an invitation, at Matchpoints I am going to be happy to get four defensive tricks for Average plus against all those who make an overly aggressive, and desperate, attempt to find unavailable tricks in partners hand. Even sitting patiently for my third defensive trick will often be a good Matchpoint result on this hand.

In short, to answer your specific question: No, it is pointless to search for major suit tricks on this auction. Partner has neither the suit strength nor the entry to make searching for his suit profitable. The only chance to set this hand is a miracle of clashing honours for opponents, and even then you will have to have set up cashing tricks in your hand to collect on the good fortune.

---

Revisiting this, the biggest problem with a Spade lead are that these three scenarios are most likely:

1. Partner wins the Spade lead and returns it, setting up his Spade winners. You now have no more entries to partner's tricks, and have lost two tempos for setting up Diamonds.

2. Partner wins the Spade lead but sees no future in the suit, and makes a random guess as to which minor to return guessing wrong 50% of the time. Either one or two tempos for setting up diamonds have been lost.

3. Partner has Qxxx or Jxxx unsupported in Spades and you have just guaranteed Declarer four Spade tricks and the contract.

Potentially settable Notrump contracts are a race between Declarer and Defense, and the loss of even a single tempo nearly always guarantees losing that race. It is imperative for the Defense to chase long-suit tricks in the hand with entries. Here, it is very unlikely that Partner can have enough points both to make Spades worth setting up and have an entry making them cashable.

Form of Scoring:

• In Rubber (as here) of IMPS one always makes an extreme effort to set the contract, as overtricks are very rarely of import. Lead a diamond.

• In Matchpoints, one is looking to not get a bottom on the opening lead. Experience has taught me that leading from jack empty fourth is a nearly guaranteed bottom - but leading from jack empty fifth or longer is often a winning play. The decision is now more complex. It is possible that Partner's Spade trick is dead unless you lead the suit now, so that lead might be right. I am personally an aggressive defender, so would usually lead a Diamond, but would accept a Spade lead from partner as reasonable.

Answer 2

I did a double dummy simulation using the hand and auction you gave. The results were:

1. The 5 of diamonds lead has an 8.8% chance to defeat the contract (playing double dummy).

2. The 6 of spades lead has a 6.6% chance to defeat the contract (playing double dummy).

I used 1,000 hands for the simulation, so statistically both of the figures above should be accurate to within about 1%. In particular, the higher chance of setting the contract from a diamond lead is statistically significant.

Here were the parameters for the simulation:

1. South has a balanced hand (no singletons, at most one doubleton) with 15-17 HCP, three or fewer spades, and four or five hearts.

2. North has 10-15 HCP, exactly four spades, three or fewer hearts, five or fewer of each minor suit, and no voids.

Of course, real players don't play double dummy, so we should take these results with a grain of salt. In particular, it seems to me that if you lead a spade your partner might not figure out that you have a five-card diamond suit, making him less likely to switch to diamonds on trick two than he would in double dummy. So if anything we would expect the results from real play to lean even more heavily towards the diamond lead.

Decreasing the quality of the diamond suit doesn't help the spade lead much. If we change the J8752 to a 65432, the diamond lead is still the favorite by about the same margin.

Answer 3

Opening leads are difficult! Either a spade or a diamond could be right. Neither is likely to set the contract often, so it can be difficult to develop a good intuitive feel for which is best.

I'd lead a diamond, since diamond strength with partner seems our most likely road to five tricks. It's also the lead least likely to blow a trick.

For an empirical analysis of NT leads using double-dummy software see:

http://www.amazon.com/Winning-Notrump-Leads-Taf-Anthias/dp/1554947596

Answer 4

Not in the example you gave. Because the disparity in lengths between the spade and diamond suits is too great.

After removing your cards from the deck, "average expectations" for your partner is something like (s) Kxxx (h) Qxx (d) Kxx pr QTx (c) Kxx. Note that s/he will actually have less than that because the bidding has further capped partner's hand to about eight HCP. So let us say that one of the kings is removed from the hypothetical hand.

Partner needs to have only Kxx or QTx of diamonds, plus one side honor, that is adjusted "average expectations," to make your hand good. In order to defeat the contract using spades, opposite your xx, partner would need an ideal holding, something like KQxxxx, or KJTxxx, much more than adjusted "average expectations," plus a side honor. A partner that had such a hand might have overcalled two spades. Absent such an overcall, you have no right to think that a spade lead will defeat the contract.

Your question would have been more topical if you had xxx in spades, and Jxxx in diamonds. The third spade would count for something, and more to the point, the missing fifth diamond counts are a lot.

Answer 5

Jim Belk gave perfect answer!

I mean, may be his analysis was not perfect, may be he should enter another conditions (like 14 balanced with 5332), or 9-13 Hcp opposite instead of 10-15, or make it 100000 hands instead of 1000...

But the way he solves the problem is the only correct way.

Let me clear this: everyone who plays bridge more than 1 year met this position at least 2 times :), so we discuss what could we do, if your choice was unsuccessful. The problem is really common!

But

careful! here is some esoterics

As in life we sometimes think, that we know something (basing on our experience). But Life in wide meaning (you can say G-d or Buddha or Nature or whatever) knows much more than we.

And one(or ten or even 1000) board means nothing. It's like grain of sand opposite Jupiter (or may be 1000 Jupiters).

esoteric ends here

To be honest, computer modeling gives correct % very soon , after 10000 boards matching your conditions, next 100000 boards will not change %.

Don't forget one thing - computer gives you correct %, but it can not give you the correct answer!
Feel the difference?