ACES ON BRIDGE

DEAR MR. WOLFF: My partner has criticized me in the past for leading away from a king. Do you have any cast-iron rules on what combinations you should or shouldn’t lead from? — First Footer,

Raleigh, N.C. DEAR READER: Never, ever listen to anyone who advises you not to lead from certain honors. Leading or underleading unsupported aces against suits is very dangerous, but I have published deals where I thought it was right. Meanwhile, leading from kings is right as often as it is wrong. I’d say beware of it only when leading into a very strong hand. It is simplest to listen to the bidding and lead what feels right. The question of when to be passive or strident is such a hard one that no simple piece of advice will be a panacea.

DEAR MR. WOLFF: My regular partnership mostly plays pairs scoring, and some Board-a-Match. It seems to me that part-score hands outnumber games and slams. If so, maybe competing accurately for part-scores should be our top priority. Would it therefore make sense to build our system and agreements around a weak no-trump? Would that require major alterations to the rest of our framework?

— Entry-Level, Jackson, Tenn. DEAR READER: I’m not convinced that the weak no-trump would significantly improve your ability to get in first. You lose some accuracy for the benefit of pushing the opponents to the two-level. Having said that, the structural changes you need to make to the rest of your system would not be dramatic. Bear in mind you will be playing different methods than the field.

DEAR MR. WOLFF: I recently held ♠ K-Q-10-4, ♥ Q-7, ♦—-, ♣ A-Q-10-7-54-2 and opened one club. When my LHO overcalled one diamond, my partner bid one heart. The next hand bid two diamonds, and I tried two spades, planning a rebid in clubs. My partner passed, with three trumps to the jack and the club king plus the heart ace, so five clubs was cold, while two spades was a struggle. Who goofed? — Stopgap, Penzance, England DEAR READER: With your distribution, it would be hard to believe the auction could end so abruptly. Had you bid anything else, you would have run a different kind of risk, one of not finding the best possible trump suit. Your partner should have played you for real extras in shape or high cards and gone back to three clubs.

DEAR MR. WOLFF: Please tell me why five-card majors are more in vogue than four-card majors. Under what circumstances would you introduce a fourcard major as opener in first or second seat?

— Litterbug, Augusta, Maine DEAR READER: Those who scoff at five-card majors tend to regard them as a security blanket. When you have one, it gives you a warm feeling, and your auction becomes more defined. Conversely, opening a minor without length is bad for constructive bidding. Bidding four-card majors first may be ugly, but it lets you get your blow in first. With four, I tend to open one in first or second seat only with a very good suit in a balanced minimum opener. I’d plan to rebid at no-trump or pass a one-notrump response.

DEAR MR. WOLFF: We missed our best spot yesterday and are trying to decide who underbid more. Opener held ♠ J-6, ♥ A-K-J-7-5-3, ♦ A-K-J-7-3, ♣ —-, and after opening one heart and hearing a response of one spade, contented himself with two diamonds. Responder had a 4-2-3-4 shape with the spade ace, diamond queen and club jack, plus the doubleton heart 10, and passed. How do you evaluate what happened?

— Petrified Forest,

Wausau, Wis. DEAR READER: A more logical auction is for opener to jump in diamonds, then rebid the second suit over false preference to hearts. If responder bids four hearts, the auction will be over. If he cue-bids four spades, you should reach the diamond slam. This looks like a good spot; it requires 3-2 hearts or a singleton heart queen.