% PBN 2.1
% EXPORT
%Content-type: text/x-pbn; charset=ISO-8859-1
%Creator: BridgeComposer Version 5.45.1
%Created: 09/25/15 22:39:30 Eastern Daylight Time
%BCOptions Center STBorder STShade
%BidAndCardSpacing Thin
%BoardsPerPage 1
%CardTableColors #e1e1e1,#ffffff,#aaaaaa
%EventSpacing 0
%Font:CardTable "Arial",11,400,0
%Font:Commentary "Times New Roman",12,400,0
%Font:Diagram "Times New Roman",12,400,0
%Font:Event "Times New Roman",12,400,0
%Font:FixedPitch "Courier New",10,400,0
%Font:HandRecord "Arial",11,400,0
%GutterSize 500,500
%HRTitleDate 2015.09.24
%HRTitleEvent ""
%HRTitleSetID ""
%HRTitleSetIDPrefix ""
%HRTitleSite ""
%HtmlClubs entity,"http://bridgecomposer.com/suitimg/c.gif"
%HtmlDiamonds entity,"http://bridgecomposer.com/suitimg/d.gif"
%HtmlHearts entity,"http://bridgecomposer.com/suitimg/h.gif"
%HtmlNavBar 0.75,#cfe2f3
%HtmlSpades entity,"http://bridgecomposer.com/suitimg/s.gif"
%Margins 500,500,500,500
%PaperSize 1,0,0
%ParaIndent 0
%PipColors #000000,#ff0000,#ff0000,#000000
%PipFont "Symbol","Symbol",2,0xAA,0xA9,0xA8,0xA7
%ScoreTableColors #e6e6e6,#000000
%ShowBoardLabels 2
%ShowCardTable 2
[Event "Low from a Doubleton -- Westwood DBC Thu AM, Sep 24, 2015"]
[Site ""]
[Date "2015.09.24"]
[Board "2"]
[West "Pat"]
[North "Andrew"]
[East "Sheila"]
[South "Pete"]
[Dealer "E"]
[Vulnerable "NS"]
[Deal "E:Q8.T764.AQJ64.K2 T32.Q5.T97532.83 J95.AJ2.K.AJT765 AK764.K983.8.Q94"]
[Scoring ""]
[Declarer "E"]
[Contract "3NT"]
[Result ""]
{

Sheila made a great tactical bid of 2NT, intentionally putting me on lead.  A
spade lead would have forced declarer to guess clubs, but I chose \H5.  (I do
tend to go for the heroic play.)  This is close to the deal in the <i>BOLS Bridge</i>
<i>Tip</i> "Low from a Doubleton" by Rixi Marcus.  With no side entries, I may have
needed to use the power of my lead to help partner.  To see this possibility,
switch the \H10 and \H8 in the diagram above:  if declarer ducks the lead of
the \H5 in dummy, partner's 9 wins, and he safely returns the \H3.  (After the
\HQ lead, dummy's \HJ would be unassailable.)

To see what I really should have led, I used Dealmaster Pro to generate 500
deals with the South hand shown, and random hands in the other positions,
subject to constraints:  North with 4-5 cards in each major, 11+ HCP, and 13
points including distribution; East and West both with 4+ cards in their bid
suit, and 12+ HCP.  

After editing the deal files, I used Bridge Composer and GiB to play all 500
deals with each of four leads.  A Perl program tallied the percentage of
defeating the contract, and the average number of defensive tricks taken:

    \H5    28.0%    3.75\n
    \HQ   26.0%    3.68\n
    \S2    30.8%    3.91\n
    \S10   29.6%    3.84

Next, I deleted all deals in which North was only 4-4, almost a third of them. 
Few of those were suitable for a double into a 2/1 auction.  I did not delete
any other deals, suitable or not, with these results:

    \H5    32.8%    3.87\n
    \S2    35.1%    4.01

Clearly, I should have led the \S2.  A five-card suit in the North hand
improves the chances, and narrows the difference between suits slightly.  In
either suit, it is important to retain the honor, so partner can lead back to
it.

- Pete Matthews, Jr.}
[BCFlags "1f"]
[DoubleDummyTricks "2645326452a798aa798a"]
[OptimumScore "EW 430"]
[Score ""]
[Auction "E"]
1D {Minor suit opening -- 3+ D; 11-21 HCP; 12-22 total points}
Pass {No suitable call -- 16- total points}
2C {10+ HCP; biddable C; 11+ total points}
X {Takeout double -- 5- C; 5- D; 4+ H; 4+ S; 14+ total points}
2NT {4+ C; 4+ D; 3-card D; 13 total points}
Pass {No suitable call -- 6- total points}
3NT {5- H; 5- S; 14-19 HCP; biddable C; likely stop in H; likely stop in S}
AP
[OptimumResultTable "Declarer;Denomination\2R;Result\2R"]
N NT  2
N  S  6
N  H  4
N  D  5
N  C  3
S NT  2
S  S  6
S  H  4
S  D  5
S  C  2
E NT 10
E  S  7
E  H  9
E  D  8
E  C 10
W NT 10
W  S  7
W  H  9
W  D  8
W  C 10