[Tomi2]

Scoring: IMP

---

You (north) and your partner pass all the way,

West, the later declarer opens a strong 1♣, alerted
East bids 1♦ (negative), alerted
West 1♥ not alerted
East 1♠ alerted as a relay
West 2♣ not alerted
East 4♥

1♣-1♦
1♥-1♠
2♣-4♥

now its your lead... pls comment on several possible leads...

now you get to know that clubs might be longer than hearts in declarers hand!
what leads are more attractive now, what leads are less attractive? Does this extra information change your choice of opening lead or at least your prefferences?

[bluejak]

It may not help your case, but once I hear that 1♠ is a relay I would always ask the meaning of 2♣ before considering my lead.

[hrothgar]

Short form: I'm leading the King of Spades period

Long form...

Comment 1: West has shown a two suited hand with hearts and clubs.

Leading a "round" suit seems contraindicated regardless of whether has 5+ hearts and 4 clubs or 5+ clubs and 4 hearts or any other ♥/♣ two suiter.

Comment 2: Hard to know what to lead without a better understanding about the negative inferences available from

1. The 1♠ relay
2. The blast to 4♥ following the 2♣ response

In particular, did East have either a fit jump or a minim splinter available over 1♥?

Moreover, North could have blasted to 4♥ immediately over 1♥. He chose to relay and then got discouraged when North showed clubs. I'm guessing that East has a

A heart fit
Some fillers in either Spades or Diamonds that would have been useful if opener had shown that suit.

I'd consider the following prototypical

♠ xxxx
♥ KTxxx
♦ KTx
♣ x

[paulg]

bluejak, on May 19 2010, 02:58 PM, said:

It may not help your case, but once I hear that 1♠ is a relay I would always ask the meaning of 2♣ before considering my lead.

I would also what to know what hand relays and then jumps to 4♥ especially if 1♥ can be a 4-card suit. This probably doesn't help you either!

I expect that I will be considering leading either the ♠K or a trump.

[Tomi2]

cardsharp, on May 19 2010, 09:16 AM, said:

bluejak, on May 19 2010, 02:58 PM, said:

It may not help your case, but once I hear that 1♠ is a relay I would always ask the meaning of 2♣ before considering my lead.

I would also what to know what hand relays and then jumps to 4♥ especially if 1♥ can be a 4-card suit. This probably doesn't help you either!

I expect that I will be considering leading either the ♠K or a trump.

when you ask, you geht the answer "opener showed hearts and clubs"

does your choice "spade or trump" change when you know it can be canape? are you more like leading spade or trump if it can be 4 hearts - 5 clubs compared to 5 hearts 4 clubs?

[jeremy69]

I'm going to lead the SK whatever way round the suits are likely to be. I'm going to need a bit of persuading that there is damage here unless one or other of us might have come into the auction if we had known waht was going on but that seems unlikely.
However I think any director who ends up at the table might enquire as to why a pair playing a system such as this seem so blissfully unaware that they should alert at some point if this is a canape sequence and assuming they should in their jursidiction then the choice (perhaps depending on their answer) is between a wagging finger and a PP.

[Tomi2]

jeremy69, on May 19 2010, 11:40 AM, said:

I'm going to lead the SK whatever way round the suits are likely to be. I'm going to need a bit of persuading that there is damage here unless one or other of us might have come into the auction if we had known waht was going on but that seems unlikely.
However I think any director who ends up at the table might enquire as to why a pair playing a system such as this seem so blissfully unaware that they should alert at some point if this is a canape sequence and assuming they should in their jursidiction then the choice (perhaps depending on their answer) is between a wagging finger and a PP.

the reason might have been, that the four involved players know each other for decades and basicly play the same system (at least until 1♥ the player on lead would have bid the same, even with only 4 hearts - but i don't know HIS follw ups)

[nige1]

Tomi2, on May 19 2010, 04:51 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1♣-1♦
1♥-1♠
2♣-4♥
strong 1♣ alerted;  negative 1♦ alerted; 1♠ alerted as a relay. Now you get to know that clubs might be longer than hearts in declarers hand! now its your lead... pls comment on several possible leads...What leads are more attractive now, what leads are less attractive? Does this extra information change your choice of opening lead or at least your prefferences?

---

IMO, the new information doesn't make a lot of difference. Perhaps...

• After the auction, ♠K = 10, ♦Q = 8, ♥ = 6.
  
• After learning about possible Canapé, ♦Q = 10, ♠K = 8, ♥ = 4.

[dburn]

nige1, on May 22 2010, 02:35 PM, said:

Tomi2, on May 19 2010, 04:51 AM, said:

Scoring: IMP

1♣-1♦
1♥-1♠
2♣-4♥
strong 1♣ alerted;  negative 1♦ alerted; 1♠ alerted as a relay. Now you get to know that clubs might be longer than hearts in declarers hand! now its your lead... pls comment on several possible leads...What leads are more attractive now, what leads are less attractive? Does this extra information change your choice of opening lead or at least your prefferences?

---

IMO, the new information doesn't make a lot of difference. Perhaps...

• After the auction, ♠K = 10, ♦Q = 8, ♥ = 6.
  
  
• After learning about possible Canapé, ♦Q = 10, ♠K = 8, ♥ = 4.

That doesn't seem right. If declarer is certain to have five hearts and may only have four clubs, so that the heart fit is likely to be 5-3, there is less urgency to set up fast winners; if declarer is certain to have at least five clubs and may only have four hearts, so that the heart fit is likely to be 4-4, there is more urgency to set up fast winners.

Thus, I would be more inclined to lead a diamond against the auction "without canapé" and a spade against the auction "with canapé". I might lead a trump against the "without canapé" auction, while I would never do so against the "with canapé" auction (that lead would seem to me bizarre, since it is the lead most likely to allow a 4-3 fit to make).

Probably, though, I would lead a spade against either auction. It isn't clear to me at the moment how we're going to beat this contract anyway, but I know how we're going to let it make: by leading a diamond and finding declarer with ♦Ax, dummy with ♦K10 and others, and our side with two fast spade tricks that have just become one slow spade trick to go with our heart trick and our club trick.

Of course, declarer could have ♠Ax and dummy ♠Jxx(+), while declarer also has ♦Ax facing a bunch of low ones and we have enough control to prevent declarer establishing his clubs to pitch dummy's spade losers in time (now do you see why it matters how many clubs declarer surely has?) But that's life.

[cherdanno]

I would always lead a spade but I can see that a diamond and a trump are more attractive against the non-canape auction (i.e. so far I agree with David). I could also see a logic (trying to force declarer) where a diamond is more attractive against the canape auction - i.e. it wouldn't be my logic but I wouldn't dismiss it when that is what opening leader claimed.

[Tomi2]

dburn, on May 22 2010, 03:46 PM, said:

I might lead a trump against the "without canapé" auction, while I would never do so against the "with canapé" auction (that lead would seem to me bizarre, since it is the lead most likely to allow a 4-3 fit to make).

player lead chose a trump lead, that allowed to make directky - it loses tempo and partners j of hearts wonts score

AC decided he was more likely to lead a spade after knowing about possible canape and gave some weighted score, and so some IMPs to the player on lead.

This has decided this years German League, everything was close between the two teams involved and a third one

Scoring: IMP

---

[mgoetze]

Tomi2, on May 25 2010, 10:09 PM, said:

AC decided he was more likely to lead a spade after knowing about possible canape and gave some weighted score, and so some IMPs to the player on lead.

More precisely the AC assigned 75% 4♥-1 and 25% 4♥=, overruling the TD who had let 4♥= stand. Many more details are available in German at:
http://www.bridge-verband.de/regelseite/do...:sg_tsg_2010_51

[VixTD]

I have some comments on the full report:

The TD cites a clause from the conditions of contest that states, effectively, that questions and explanations of calls will be made in writing, and that no score adjustment will be given on the basis of misexplanations in absence of such a written record unless both sides are in full agreement about what explanations were given.

These explanations were not written, and the TD seems to have judged that the facts were not agreed, and this is one reason why he allowed the score to stand. This seems quite reasonable to me. I presume the AC decided there was sufficient agreement about what was said before overruling him.

The EW team captain initially declined to appeal because he was ashamed to admit that anyone on his team would consider leading a trump, and only changed his mind the following day.

I would also be interested to know whether East's comments on the form were considered acceptable. I can well believe that there are players who behave as he says North did, but I don't think I'd give my opinion of them so freely in writing on an official form to the governing national body. Was East censured in any way?

[mgoetze]

VixTD, on May 27 2010, 03:32 PM, said:

I would also be interested to know whether East's comments on the form were considered acceptable. I can well believe that there are players who behave as he says North did, but I don't think I'd give my opinion of them so freely in writing on an official form to the governing national body. Was East censured in any way?

My understanding is that East is in a large majority with regard to his opinion of North.

[nige1]

hrothgar, on May 19 2010, 09:15 AM, said:

I'm guessing that East has a A heart fit. Some fillers in either Spades or Diamonds that would have been useful if opener had shown that suit.  I'd consider the following prototypical
♠ xxxx ♥ KTxxx ♦ KTx ♣ x

cardsharp, on May 19 2010, 09:16 AM, said:

I would also what to know what hand relays and then jumps to 4♥ especially if 1♥ can be a 4-card suit.

Why did the relayer delay his 4♥ pre-empt? Perhaps the relayer has only 3♥; but opener's ♣ bid revealed a double fit that improved the relayer's hand
e.g. ♠ Jxx ♥ Axx ♦ xxx ♣ Kxxx
If the opening leader is aware that opener's ♥ may be 4 cards, then he may decide that a forcing game (♦ or ♠ lead) is indicated. He may judge a ♦ lead to be safer than a ♠.

[nige1]

VixTD, on May 27 2010, 09:32 AM, said:

The TD cites a clause from the conditions of contest that states, effectively, that questions and explanations of calls will be made in writing, anThese explanations were not written, and the TD seems to have judged that the facts were not agreed, and this is one reason why he allowed the score to stand. This seems quite reasonable to me. I presume the AC decided there was sufficient agreement about what was said before overruling him.

I can't see why questions need to be in writing. IMO, your explanation should include the salient facts about relevant understandings, no matter how badly the question is worded.

[PeterE]

nige1, on May 28 2010, 07:34 AM, said:

cardsharp, on May 19 2010, 09:16 AM, said:

I would also what to know what hand relays and then jumps to 4♥ especially if 1♥ can be a 4-card suit.

Why did the relayer delay his 4♥ pre-empt? Perhaps the relayer has only 3♥; but opener's ♣ bid revealed a double fit that improved the relayer's hand [...]

No, the OP forgot one crucial fact to mention:
1♥ was indeed alerted, because it has the special meaning of being two-way. Either strong NT or natural (and then possibly canapé). Therefore East had some automatic 1♠ relay to learn about West's hand.

One further remark about NS playing the same system as EW. This is true only to the fact that both are playing Precision. But the crucial bid here (1♥) is always natural in NS' system (although it can also be a four card suit) and two-way in EW's system.

[aguahombre]

Ok, I will bite. How does proper disclosure of their agreements before the opening lead is made ---coupled with the fact that opener has one of the two possible rounded suit mixes described ---even merit a director call, let alone an AC?