[Shugart23]

Assume bidding has gone something like 1H by partner -(1S) -2H by you -2S by Opponent -all pass and you have decided to lead partner's suit.

When you have supported your partner's suit, we are playing that with 3 or cards headed by the 9 or better, lead 3rd down and partner will apply Rule of 12. But with touching Honors, lead the top one. With the Ace and no King, lead the Ace, and the lead of the King promises Ace or Queen

With this is mind, what does the lead of a 9, 10, or Jack suggest ?

Holding a KJ9(x), the lead of the 9 is apparent.......But what about K,10,9,(x) or K,J,10,(x) or Q,10,9,(x)...Am I leading the top card of the interior sequence ( i.e. I need to add a 4th rule) or am I sticking with leading 3rd down with the interior sequence? I'm sort of thinking that sticking with 3rd down isn't going to be harmful.....

It would then seem that the lead of a Jack would have to promise J,10,x,(x)
The lead of a 10 shows K,J,10,(x)
The lead of the 9 shows K,J,9,(x) or K,10,9(x) or Q,10,9(x)

If I add a 4th rule that says lead the top card in an interior sequence, I just move some of the holding s around, but nothing really is gained, but you lose the Rule of 12 info

Comments are abundantly welcome. Thanks much

[paulg]

My simple starting place is that I make the same opening leads in partner's suit as I would for any other suit, except that from three small I lead the highest to show that I don't have a honour (it is not confusing as I cannot have a doubleton).

[Shugart23]

 paulg, on 2022-March-07, 11:15, said:

My simple starting place is that I make the same opening leads in partner's suit as I would for any other suit, except that from three small I lead the highest to show that I don't have a honour (it is not confusing as I cannot have a doubleton).

Thanks..I guess I should be more explicit with my question. Is there any harm in leading 2nd from touching honors in an interior sequence ? What is lost if you do ?

[paulg]

What I implied, but left unsaid, was that I don't think it will make any significant difference what you play as there will always be ambiguous holdings. So you might as well play the same as normal.

For example, if you lead the lower of an interior sequence, such as the 9 from K109, then how do you differentiate it from a holding of 974?

As it happens, I do play these leads in partner's suit but I play them in all the other suits too, so I don't think there is anything wrong with them. I just don't think it is worth the memory load if you play too many different leads.

[Shugart23]

 paulg, on 2022-March-07, 17:01, said:

What I implied, but left unsaid, was that I don't think it will make any significant difference what you play as there will always be ambiguous holdings. So you might as well play the same as normal.

For example, if you lead the lower of an interior sequence, such as the 9 from K109, then how do you differentiate it from a holding of 974?

As it happens, I do play these leads in partner's suit but I play them in all the other suits too, so I don't think there is anything wrong with them. I just don't think it is worth the memory load if you play too many different leads.

with a 3+ card suit, headed by a '9' or higher, we lead 3rd down, so in the case of 974, the 4 would be led....we use Rusinow leads for the other suits.. Thanks !

[paulg]

 Shugart23, on 2022-March-08, 06:03, said:

with a 3+ card suit, headed by a '9' or higher, we lead 3rd down, so in the case of 974, the 4 would be led....we use Rusinow leads for the other suits.. Thanks !

As I said, it is all about compromise.

So you cannot distinguish between honour to three and three small in partner's suit. My preference is to lose the count and (normally) know the honour position, which I think is pretty standard but by no means universal.

[Shugart23]

Do you know (or does anybody know) why rusinow leads are different when partner has bid the suit ( against a suit contract) s a suit that partner did not bid?