General chart for deffence

[olegru]

Yesterday my teammates were told by director on ACBL section tournaments what in the general chart ACBL games they permited to use odd-even discards on the first discard only (starting the second discard they can use standard or upside-down methods only). It sounds extremely strange for me.

Could you somehow comment it.

Is it true? If yes which law of bridge is based on? Where can I find it?

Are we still permitted to make finesses in ACBL general chart game or starting mid-chart only?

[inquiry]

Here is a link to the rule the director quoted for you....

 

http://www.acbl.org/documentLibrary/units/convChart12_03.pdf search down to carding (no specific rule for odd/even).. here is what it says if you don't want to go to that website....

 

A discard (a card played while not following suit) can convey a message to partner. The message can pertain to the length of the suit of the card discarded, to the attitude toward that suit (desire to have partner lead that suit) or to another suit (no information about the suit of the card discarded). A pair may decide to attribute the attitude message (good-bad) to the cards on either a higher-to-lower basis (a higher card is more positive than a lower card) or a lower-to-higher basis (a low card is more positive than a higher card).

 

A discard may carry more than one message, but only at each defender's first discard of the deal. Dual-message discards are not permitted as second or subsequent discards.

 

As far as I know, you are still allowed to take finessees.

[Finch]

It's based on the Law which says sponsoring organisations can regulate conventions. (part of Law 40, can't remember which part).

 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'odd-even' discards. You can play odd = encouraging, even = discouraging (or the reverse) if you want. You can't play dual meaning (e.g. even = discouraging and suit preference).

 

The EBU has a different rule with the same motivation: you aren't allowed to play dual meaning signals but you can play such discards.

 

There is no theoretical justification for this regulation. The reason it exists is that playing dual meaning signals or discards, the cards you play become 'overloaded' and it's common not to have a card in your hand to play that gives you message you want to give. Defenders tended to made it obvious through tempo whether their card could be believed or not. Rather than try and regulate this through the UI laws, more than one organisation has simply decided to ban this type of signal or discard in the first place.

 

(There was a similar position with a convention called Roche in England: people wanted to play a 2C overcall of 1NT as showing a weak NT. It eventually got banned at level 3 because the 2C bidder always made it clear with his table action what his club length was.)

[olegru]

Thanks for you reply.

Odd-even is not dual-message discard - it carry just one meaning "I like particular suit."

But you right, I do find on your link:

Except for the first discard only right-side-up or upside-down card ordering strategies are approved

Happy to know finesses still approved even for general chart. I believe it will be the next step for acbl.

What could I say - Harold S. Vanderbilt was a genius man if acbl so far can't kill the game in America.

[hrothgar]

Thanks for you reply.

Odd-even is not dual-message discard - it carry just one meaning "I like particular suit."

Lets review odd-even discards:

 

If the defender discards an odd card, he encourages that suit. This is a single message. If, however, the defender throws an even card, he discourages that suit and expresses preference for one of the two remaining suits. A high card (typically) expresses preference for the higher of the two remaining suits. A low card asks for the lower. This is very much a dual message discard.

[pigpenz]

I seem to remeber Herman (Alan Stout) saying he didnt really want to know what the opps played hell figure it out himself when playing the hands.

[olegru]

If the defender discards an odd card, he encourages that suit. This is a single message.

If, however, the defender throws an even card, he discourages that suit and expresses preference for one of the two remaining suits. A high card (typically) expresses preference for the higher of the two remaining suits. A low card asks for the lower. This is very much a dual message discard.

In this case standard discard is a dual message too.

If I discard 10 of diamonds (for example) using standard signals I encourage to play diamonds and discourage to play remaning suits ;) What is difference?

If I discard 2 of spades using odd-even signals it doesn't mean I have nothing in spades - it just mean I would like my partner to play clubs.

[Robert]

hello everyone

 

The same problems that the ACBL sees with odd-even are present when a normal discard of a small card is played 'very slowly' and with 'obvious distaste.' A player might also smile warmly and nod knowingly while playing a 'deuce' on partners' lead.

 

Many club players will never fail to 'get' the correct message. The suit will be continued or a 'switch' made no matter what card is played 'if' the body language is allowed.

 

If I understand this correctly, the ACBL in their great wisdom believe that odd even signals are legal at the first trick. The use of the 'same exact method' is 'magically' somehow different at tricks 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12?

 

What changed? If there are any legal 'problems' at the 2nd trick, those same exact 'problems' existed at trick one!

 

Using the exact same method of carding from the 2nd trick onwards would somehow 'not have' the same exact problems' that the ACBL 'ruled' were legal to use at trick one.

 

Is the ACBL going to rule that odd even carding is legal on tricks 1,3,5,7,9,11 and illegal on 2,4,6,8,10 and 12? That ruling would make just as must sense(just as much nonsense!)

 

To be legally consistent the ACBL should force 'high encourages and low discourages' players to play another carding method at trick two.

 

Regards,

Robert

[Rebound]

I may be wrong, but I believe the rules are intended to prevent coded signals of a "non-disclosed partnership agreement" nature. Mind you, having grown up in ACBL land, I have been long familiar with the rule which states that after the first, a discard may carry only one message. I have never found this to be onerous but then I suppose my knowledge of defense could be considered crude at best.

[candybar]

If I understand this correctly, the ACBL in their great wisdom believe that odd even signals are legal at the first trick. The use of the 'same exact method' is 'magically' somehow different at tricks 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12?

I believe it's the first DISCARD, not the first trick.

[barmar]

If I understand this correctly, the ACBL in their great wisdom believe that odd even signals are legal at the first trick. The use of the 'same exact method' is 'magically' somehow different at tricks 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12?

 

What changed? If there are any legal 'problems' at the 2nd trick, those same exact 'problems' existed at trick one!

It's not illegal after the first trick, it's illegal after the first discard.

 

I'm not sure what the justification is for this. My guess is that it was a compromise between banning odd-even discards completely and leaving them unregulated. Or maybe there were some other dual-message discard systems that they were trying to control.

[barmar]

In this case standard discard is a dual message too.

If I discard 10 of diamonds (for example) using standard signals I encourage to play diamonds and discourage to play remaning suits :P What is difference?

That's a ridiculous analogy. That second message is simply a logical consequence of the first one, it's not a separate message.

 

But when you use odd-even or Lavinthal discards, you're able to send two, logically independent messages with one card (assuming you have the appropriate cards in your hand, which is true of all carding systems): I don't like suit X, and I prefer suit Y.

[sdoty]

If I understand this correctly, the ACBL in their great wisdom believe that odd even signals are legal at the first trick.  The use of the 'same exact method' is 'magically' somehow different at tricks 2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12? 

 

What changed?  If there are any legal 'problems' at the 2nd trick, those same exact 'problems' existed at trick one!

 

Using the exact same method of carding from the 2nd trick onwards would somehow 'not have' the same exact problems' that the ACBL 'ruled' were legal to use at trick one. 

One significant difference between the first discard and subsequent discards is simply that as the play progresses, you have fewer choices of cards to throw.

 

This can create a problem for 'single message discards' as well, but from my (albeit limited) experience playing against them, the problem is dramatically more pronounced when dual-message discards are used throughout the hand. Tempo was frequently an issue from both opponents; one as he tried to decide which flawed discard would do the least damage, and the other as he tried to decipher what message partner was really trying to send.... since it was blatantly obvious that partner'd had a problem when selecting a card.

 

You're more likely to have a suitable card available if it only has to convey one message rather than two.

 

Susan

[Walddk]

You're more likely to have a suitable card available if it only has to convey one message rather than two.

 

Susan

I never understood why yet another restriction was imposed in ACBL-land. Why is it that the ACBL thinks that they know better than the rest of the world? We don't have a problem on the right side of the pond.

 

Right, sometimes you don't have an odd card when you want to encourage, and sometimes you don't have an even card if you want to discourage. So what? You have exactly the same problem if you play standard or upside-down signals.

 

Let's proceed to trick 2 and onwards. Your agreement is to play reverse (upside-down) attitude, and your partner leads the king (promising the queen). Your holding is J98. So you want to encourage. Unfortunately you are not dealt a "low" card, so the 8 is the best you can provide.

 

Maybe partner can't see that you like the suit, but that's not your problem. You must hope that he can figure it out. Next time you have 832 and want to discourage. Again you must follow with the 8, and now all of a sudden partner is supposed to see that he must switch.

 

During the recent World Championships East had an insoluable problem against a 3♠ contract. Partner led the ♦A, dummy came down with 9xx, and you had J104. Playing uda you know that any card will mislead partner. You don't want to encourage (the 4), and you know that you can't afford to discourage because the 9 is in dummy.

 

With this particular holding you wish that you had played standard attitude, but that can't be helped, and whether you like it or not, you must follow with the 4 and hope that partner can read it. He didn't when the hand came up on BBO vugraph. He continued with the king, and the contract made.

 

The same would have applied if you had J103 and your agreement was odd/even. Again any card would cost a trick. Partner will continue the suit if you play the 3, and you throw away a trick if you follow with the jack or 10.

 

Odd/even is as good or bad as any other method, but there is absolutely no reason to bar it. Trick 1, 2, 9, 11, whatever; it doesn't matter.

 

Roland

[Robert]

hello everyone

 

My thanks to everyone that pointed out my 'overlooking' the meaning of 'discard.'

:)

 

This appears to be a much worse ruling than I earlier believed was possible.

 

I reread the post and 'saw' what was defined as a 'discard.' They are talking about 'not following suit' when they call the card a 'discard.'

 

You are not limited to from just one suit when 'using' that meaning. If you choose not to discard trumps, you normally have at least two side suits to choose a card from. You may play any low card from a suit that you 'want to have led' or you 'again have' at least two suits to select an even card from(that has the proper size spot to convey your desired message)

 

I guessed that 'throwing away' a card when it was my turn to play was 'discarding.'

Apparently, I was simply following suit and the ACBL rules lawyers decided to fancy up the wording.

 

One slur was directed against a well known Italian pair some years ago. They were accused of playing their cards slowly during one hand. The punch line is that the 'slowly played card' called for partner to play a given suit and his partner 'did lead' the suit indicated by the 'slowly' played card.

 

They defended as if the played card called for a certain suit and their partner had the 'daring' to actually play the suit that his partners' signal suggested.

 

If following your own carding methods is wrong, my partnerships struggle to be 'wrong' as often as possible.

 

Regards,

Robert