- “shall I cash my Ace, or keep it to make use of its killing power and tempo value ? “
- “shall I lead a trump, seeing that dummy’s raise in the suit suggested ruffing values ? “
- “shall I lead the unbid suit as the most likely chance of finding my partner at home?”
The Opening Lead against a Slam Contract
Source: Contract Bridge: Bidding Principles By Col. G. G. j. Walshe
A POOR opening lead too often gives the declarer that one extra trick which he requires for his contract. In a fair proportion of ordinary hands he is dependent on faulty defensive plav in the end-game for this extra trick, but in slam hands the damage is usually done at the start.
The opening leader finds it too difficult to draw the necessary inferences from the bidding, and, even if he knows all the book leads by heart, these will be of little help in a situation where camouflage is of such vital importance.
In ordinary situations orthodox leads such as the top of touching cards from K Q 10 4, Q J 9 4, or even J 10 8 4, pay best, but in defence against a slam contract it may be best to lead the Queen or Jack or Ten respectively from the above holdings.
Camouflage can do no harm where the partner is unlikely to take a trick. A fourth-best lead from a holding such as K 9 7 2 or Q 9 7 2 or even J 9 7 2 is definitely dangerous, but if the leader has a sure entry card he must take a risk and try to establish another winner elsewhere.
No hard and fast rule can be laid down for so plastic a situation. It is common knowledge that if the six top cards in a suit are gappily divided between the two sides, an extra trick in the suit is sure to be lost by the side which first attacks that suit. The moral, then, is to avoid leading from a gappy suit.
The leader should ask himself