[JT23456]

Do you suppose it's 8/10 or 9/10 or more who would almost never underlead an ace in a suit contract?

[Tramticket]

JT23456, on 2017-November-29, 09:41, said:

Do you suppose it's 8/10 or 9/10 or more who would almost never underlead an ace in a suit contract?

There are two categories of people who will under-lead an ace:
- beginners - the percentage obviously depends upon the company that you keep.
- players who know what they are doing and knowingly choose to under-lead the ace on the right occasion based on listening to the auction - again the percentage depends upon the company that you keep!

[manudude03]

If you are playing people who never learnt that rule, then most of them will. If you are playing experienced players, then in my experience, it would be very rare at trick 1, but somewhat more common later in the hand.

[steve2005]

The problem with underleading ace at trick 1 partner may make a "correct" play and duck hoping declarer has singleton or doubleton Ace.

[Zelandakh]

JT23456, on 2017-November-29, 09:41, said:

Do you suppose it's 8/10 or 9/10 or more who would almost never underlead an ace in a suit contract?

Almost never would be practically everyone as there is usually a better lead. But say you found yourself on lead against 6♠ holding ♠xxx ♥Axxxx ♦xxxxx ♣- after an auction in which declarer made a singleton heart splinter and dummy denied a heart control. Would you not even consider underleading the ace?

[rmnka447]

There are some almost obligatory times one should under lead an A against a suit contract. They are more applicable at IMPs or rubber bridge where defeating the contract is paramount.

One is where you can see that the contract will only be beat if you can give partner a ruff in a suit but you have no other entry to your hand except the A in the suit.

Another is where dummy has KJx in a suit and you hold Axx in front of dummy. If it appears declarer must guess the right play from the tenace to make the contract, then underleading the A, especially early in the hand before declarer has complete information, makes declarer guess and often works. Part of what helps a misguess is declarer being aware that people rarely underlead As.

[Ishudav]

JT23456, on 2017-November-29, 09:41, said:

Do you suppose it's 8/10 or 9/10 or more who would almost never underlead an ace in a suit contract?

Underlead from Axxxx at trick 1. Dummy has Kxx, declarer Jxx.
Declarer thinks "There is no point in playing the K." 3rd hand wins with the Q, sends one back and then gets a ruff. Was it a cunning plan or was it a beginner? I'm stll fuming 50 years later!

[GrahamJson]

Mike Lawrence in “Tips on Play” listed the conditions needed for an ace underlead to be right. He concluded that if you play regularly it would be the correct thing to do maybe once a year. Or was it once every ten years?

[RD350LC]

manudude03, on 2017-November-29, 12:49, said:

If you are playing people who never learnt that rule, then most of them will. If you are playing experienced players, then in my experience, it would be very rare at trick 1, but somewhat more common later in the hand.

I would underlead an ace in a suit contract-but it would be in trumps. That would allow me to keep control of the trump suit.
But, I do agree with the above statement. I almost never lead an ace empty suit, and were I to do so, it would be the ace.
There have been many times playing a hand where I take a singleton king as declairer, and then ruff the opponents ace.

[PhilG007]

JT23456, on 2017-November-29, 09:41, said:

Do you suppose it's 8/10 or 9/10 or more who would almost never underlead an ace in a suit contract?

I,personally,would never touch a suit headed by the ace alone in a trump contract Not even if it was the
ace of trumps. The objective of aces is to capture kings and queens.

[mikeh]

I have underled an Ace, on opening lead, against suit contracts twice, in 40+ years, if memory serves me. Both times were against slams, and in both cases dummy had indicated a control in the suit and was known not to have shortness. Once it worked, when declarer had a losing option because he held the Jack in his hand, with King in dummy, and once it cost an overtrick when declarer had no losing option and had 13 winners, but since this is an imp play (it is virtually never right to do this at mps), neither I nor my teammates cared.

FWIW, an excellent player (you'd all recognize the name) underled an Ace against me in the Spingold this past summer, in a partscore. It didn't affect the end result, but I confess to misreading the like of the missing hcp until it became obvious what he had done. Not my style at all.

As for frequency, my guess is that if Lawrence suggested once a year, it was at a time when he played a lot of bridge

[helene_t]

Yesterday my partner underlead Axx of a sidesuit after the auction

2♦(multi)-pass-2♥-a.p.

Declarer held Tx and dummy KJx. I played the 9 with Q9 since I thought the only chance of getting a trick would be if declarer would later finese against the queen.

I don't know my partner's reason for underleading the ace, she might have had a good reason but obviously it illustrates that it can fool partner as well as declarer.

Another time I underlead AKQxxx, partner looked confused when her jack held but then it dawned on her that I must have a void to justify that lead.

[miamijd]

I assume you mean on opening lead. Later in the hand, of course, it's often right to do so.

For experienced players, 10/10 for "almost never." Didn't say never; said "almost never" (i.e., very rarely). I think I do it about once a year.

Cheers,
mike

[redtop]

I remember about 25 years ago, I was teaching my then-girlfriend to play bridge on The Sierra Network, and the one thing I said most was "Don't underlead Aces against a suit contract!"

I can't remember the last time I led one on opening lead. I'm not that good!

[GrahamJson]

[quote name='mikeh' timestamp='1512083646' post='939240'

As for frequency, my guess is that if Lawrence suggested once a year, it was at a time when he played a lot of bridge
[/quote]

I’ve just reread what he said. It was along the lines of “If you play a lot of Bridge, say six to ten thousand hands a year, an ace underlead might be suggested four or five times.” Notice he only said “suggested”, nothing stronger such as “indicated”. Of course he did not include underleads of the trump ace in this, as this is quite often a good lead.

[msjennifer]

Deleted

[msjennifer]

I was passed a story of a genuine expert who In a national event led the small card from A10 doubleton,dummy came down with KJx and declarer played the Jack from it.The masters partner had the Queen and horror of horrors DID NOT play it.It was the only lead which could have defeated the small slam as declarer had xx.in the suit one of which he could have discarded on dummy’s long suit on any but this lead..The expert died 57 years ago and I am allowed only to divulge
His initials which were RG and his partner who died 14 years ago was MK

[fitjump]

The underlead of an ace vs suit contract is usually not good Thee are sometimes that it is good based on listening carefully to the auction. However, the underlead of an ace on opening lead, ranks up there with leading a singleton trump and leading an unprotected ace, as bad leads