If I feel the hand is too good for 2♠ but not good enough for 1♠, why do you want me to bid 7NT? Why can't I just answer what I would bid?

I see no reason to overtake. (Partner can't have a club void –see comment above.) So I encourage to stop a diamond shift. I have no idea what our best defense is, but partner should be able to work out I have the moderate hand with long clubs, so perhaps he can figure it out.

Partner wouldn't lead the heart king with a club void. If he chose to lead an honor, he would lead the queen.

The old-fashioned way to play after an overcall of 1NT was that non-jumps in new suits (except for 3♥) were non-forcing (being able to compete is more important than having a delicate forcing auction). 2NT was natural but only mildly invitational–it could be competitive with a hand where you would have passed had RHO passed. Thus you just bid game with a good invitation and opener took this into account. Doubles were for penalty.

I don't recognize the quote, but I know who it is, since the style in unmistakable. I think there are only two books in the series I haven't read. This is obviously from one of them.

I'm not defending anything. I'm just pointing out that this is, in fact, a single question, consisting of a disjunction of two conjunctions.

He is asking one compound question. To reword his question to make it clearer: “Is it true either that A) leading the 8 spot from J8xx is both suggested widely when playing attitude leads and can be costly for the leader or that B) leading the 8 spot from 108xx is both suggested widely when playing attitude leads and can be costly for the leader?”

So if, as Karen says below, you want to answer ‘no’ to the first part and ‘yes’ to the second part, your correct answer is ‘yes.’

Yes, your line works. Mine doesn't, since it gives South other winning options.

How about this line? Declarer wins the spade, plays a heart to the ace. He plays a diamond from dummy. North must play low, else declarer can take three diamond tricks. Declarer inserts the jack, cashes all his red cards, and plays a low club. South inserts the 10. Declarer must duck, else North will have a club entry with his nine. South plays ace and queen of clubs and a club to dummy's jack. Declarer is now down to xx – x – in dummy and A95 – – – in his hand, needing two of the last three tricks. He leads a spade from dummy and must cover North's 8 with his 9. South wins and leads a low spade. If dummy's last spade is the 7 or 6, declarer is locked in dummy with a diamond loser. The play in the club suit seems to be critical. Unless declarer is forced to win the fourth round of clubs with dummy's jack, I don't believe the spade blockage is fatal. But I'm not entirely sure about that.

Since you bring it up, Debbie, I’ll clarify. I initially assumed that the hand couldn’t be made. When a non-human advised me it could, I looked harder and found the winning line. So I did find the line myself, but I wouldn’t have without the additional push. I think that’s how computers should be used. Having them find the line of play for you seems pointless.

It may be an inferior lead. Still, “That's more or less what happens on the actual hand” isn't exactly accurate. Perhaps that's what should happen on the actual hand. But so far no one has found the winning line.

4♠ can't deny a heart control. Partner is limited and I'm captain. Any information I offer is on a need-to-know basis.

Give it a try before you reject it. My experience has been that passing with these hands is a big winner: https://sites.google.com/site/psmartinsite/Home/bridge-articles/the-cooperative-pass

Passing rates to get +200 if partner has club length. And the fifth spade makes it easy to catch up if he doesn't: If partner doubles, I can bid 3♠.

With some partners, I would open 1♦ with the black suits reversed, since passing with this much playing strength doesn't appeal and pre-empting risks missing a spade fit. I don't see much point in 1♦ with this hand.

If we assume, as Kit did, that our best chance is to hope the lead was a singleton and that West has ♣AK, you can play West to be 1-2-7-3 with ♥Jx. Win the ♠A, ruff a diamond, then draw only two rounds of trump and play a club. When you get to dummy in clubs, play ace and queen of diamonds, pitching two spades. West must give you a ruff-sluff.

Loser-on-loser plays can be easy to overlook. This one is particularly easy to overlook because you must combine it with a partial trump elimination.

As for the “weirdness” of the opening lead, I was West and it was the opening lead I chose. While I would probably lead from AK and length in preference to a stiff spade, I'm not a fan of leading from AK-third. My experience has been that, since this is often a suit declarer needs to attack himself, the lead helps him more often than not.

Sorry. Fourth best leads.

I recently played an event with Woolsey after about 30 seconds of discussion, which included agreeing to play upside down count and attitude. We had an accident when I misread his present count card. (He intended it as rightside up.) “John and I always played present count as upside down also,” I said. “In fact, I wasn't even aware that anyone played differently until I read the discussion on BridgeWinners.” “If you read the discussion on BridgeWinners,” Kit said, “then you should know I played rightside up present count. That makes the accident your fault.”

My calculation implicitly assumes he will randomize with two “honors” in clubs. As some have pointed out above, it is unlikely he will randomize with J9, so we should reduce the number of cases the finesse is right by 3 (taking away half of the 6 cases of J9 doubleton). That makes it 15 to 13, closer to your answer. But that's still an underestimate, because it assumes North has only 10 cards in his suits. Your 11 to 10 result seems suspect to me.