I am retired both from full-time work and from tournament bridge. My main bridge interest is researching the history of the tournament game in England: the first (and possibly only) instalment, covering the period up to the end of WW2, was published on the EBU website in December 2016.
My first serious bridge partner was Richard Granville and he suggested that I sign up to this site.
Read more »A couple of weeks ago, a lead problem was posed:
Love All, IMP with 20 VP scale. N/S are playing strong NT, 5-card majors, 1♣ can be as short as one.
64% voted for a diamond, 25% for a spade and 11% for a heart.
I am not proposing to discuss the merits of the various leads. Those interested can refer to the link below. However, we have now been told that a spade was the winner: partner had AQJx sitting over dummy's King and the 3NT bid was apparently based on 10xx Kxxx AQ 10xxx.
I cannot see the point of submitting problems where the opposing bidding bears so little relation to reality. It might be bridge, but it's not bridge as we know it.
http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/lead-problem-2-rnjlgyd8ws/?cj=662519#c662519
