[jillybean]

I've never played them, doubt I ever will. I would like to understand a little more on how they are played.

This is the BridgeHands description.

Will players lead coded 9'sand10's against suit contracts in both indicated and blind leads?



J 10 8 2
Jack - Jack denies (normally top of sequence, maybe broken)

Q J 9 2
Q - lead the top of broken sequence (not the 9, which could lose to opponents 10)

A J 10 4
10 - shows two higher

K 10 9 3
9 - shows two higher, one of which must be the 10

Q 10 9 7
9 - shows two higher, one of which must be the 10

[mikeh]

Coded 9s and 10s were quite popular a few decades ago. One very real problem was the ‘Jack denies’ part. Say you have Qxx in dummy and Ax hand, playing 3N….you get the Jack lead. Is this from KJ10xxx or J109xxx? Assume an auction in which KJ10xx(x) wouldn’t be bidding…maybe you opened 2N.

Or Qxx in dummy, Ax(x) in hand and you can arrange to keep LHO off lead. Wouldn’t it be nice to know where the King is?

Well, if Jack denies a higher honour….you do!

No less a player than Hamman,the universally accepted GOAT, disparaged this lead convention as one of the worst gadgets ever invented. You don’t see many top players using this these days.

[jillybean]

Yes, thanks but for those old goats who still do play it,
Will players lead coded 9'sand10's against suit contracts in both indicated and blind leads?

[akwoo]

If I were playing in the Gold Rush and trying to win (and I am eligible for another couple of weeks), I would absolutely play coded 9's and 10's - it would help us on defense, and declarer will be too oblivious to take advantage.

Yes - I believe they are played on both indicated and blind leads.

[jillybean]

akwoo, on 2025-July-16, 09:01, said:

If I were playing in the Gold Rush and trying to win (and I am eligible for another couple of weeks), I would absolutely play coded 9's and 10's - it would help us on defense, and declarer will be too oblivious to take advantage.

Yes - I believe they are played on both indicated and blind leads.

Thanks.
Please don’t play in the GR! It will drive you crazy

[bluenikki]

jillybean, on 2025-July-16, 07:43, said:

I've never played them, doubt I ever will. I would like to understand a little more on how they are played.

This is the BridgeHands description.

Will players lead coded 9'sand10's against suit contracts in both indicated and blind leads?



J 10 8 2
Jack - Jack denies (normally top of sequence, maybe broken)

Q J 9 2
Q - lead the top of broken sequence (not the 9, which could lose to opponents 10)

A J 10 4
10 - shows two higher

K 10 9 3
9 - shows two higher, one of which must be the 10

Q 10 9 7
9 - shows two higher, one of which must be the 10

In the book by "Journalist," the authors say: Regardless of your agreements about leading from interior sequences, you must frequently violate them.

[awm]

We played these leads for a while; they do have the problem that MikeH mentions (at least against declarers who pay attention to the lead agreements) but they also solve some problems that are otherwise difficult. There's an example below:

---

Partner leads the ♠J. Do you win the ace and return spades? If partner's suit was headed by the jack, it's easy to imagine that declarer reels off nine or ten tricks on this defense, whereas it's quite possible that partner had ♥A and a switch would've beaten the hand. Okay, win the ace and switch to hearts? Too bad if partner lead from ♠KJTxx and not much outside; again declarer might roll nine tricks on a hand where simply returning partner's suit takes the first five. Coded 9s and Ts solve this problem (since the jack lead would deny a higher honor, and if partner has KJTxx they would lead the ten).

It's not clear to me that the losing position given by MikeH is more common than positions like the one above (where you need to figure out whether to return partner's suit or switch), although it's also true that playing a method like reverse smith helps here if it's not a trick two decision.

Anyway, the coded 9s and 10s can apply at both suits and notrump, although I tend not to underlead kings a lot against suit contracts (which means whether I play these leads against suits or not matters relatively little). Another note is that a number of pairs do not play these leads at trick one (due to the issue MikeH points out), but do play them later in the defense when leading through declarer in a suit where dummy has only small cards.

[Flem72]

Very much dislike them on opening lead b/c it tells declarer too much; middle of the hand OK.