Signalling Woes

[Winstonm]

[hv=e=sq943hkj94dk4c1032&s=s1085h832dqj10c8764]266|200|Partner leads the diamond ace against 4S.[/hv]

 

 

Partner and I have a running debate going about signalling - he likes to rely (imo) excessively on SP while I have more standard tastes. The above deal occurred in a matchpoint event where cashing your tricks is imperative. On the ace lead, I played the Q to mark declarer's high cards but partner took this as SP and switched to a heart from the Q. In my views, this is over-reliance on SP as a defensive tool and leads to lazy defense - instead of trying to work out declarer's holdings and find an answer you just have to watch for partner's signals.

 

What are your views? When should SP apply?

[mike777]

In "Obvious Shift" "OS" we use alot of suit preference but even there Q of d just shows the jack...not sp. :).

[Free]

I like count signals, but in some cases it's just useful to have suit preference available, just like here. However, on this hand you don't have a suit you really want, so you just make a negative signal. If partner is too lazy to figure this out, he shouldn't play SP, or he should accept that the method doesn't always ask for a suit.

 

You signalled correct: your partner should think "why would a ♥ shift ever be successful??" He has the Q himself, no good can come from switching ♥... It's more like a "don't lead ♣"-signal. The only useful card you can have in ♥ is the Ace, which won't run away. And I even think that with counting standard HCP your partner can even figure out you can't have ♥A. :P

[luke warm]

i agree with mike.. on first lead, signal attitude.. if i hate the lead, obvious shift applies.. and on this hand, your queen guarantees either a stiff or the jack

[000002]

anyone can explain what is "SP" means?

 

thanks

 

regards

[pclayton]

SP = suit preference.

 

I think all serious partnerships should adopt Obvious Shift. OS helps clear up situations like the one given.

 

If you have to rely on SP - theres a few times where it should apply. 1) When Dummy has a stiff and tapping the board isn't necessary. 2 ) When 3rd hand has a known long suit, and has the choice of many cards to play .

 

Would you mind posting the entire hand? Its doubtful that a heart shift can ever be needed.

Edited July 2, 2006 by pclayton

[000002]

thank u

 

i appreciate this ♦ queen pitched,it prevent a ♣ shift and encourage ♥ switch.

In this case, according dummy's hand ,it seems clear to proceed ♦.

[barmar]

I'd like to see partner's whole hand. Did he need to get to your hand quickly for a ♣ lead?

[han]

I think that the usual signal in this situation should be suit preference, clearly there is no future in diamonds. However, I almost always play the queen to show the QJ(10), and I think that I would interpret it as such here. I have never discussed this issue though, I'm afraid I can't be of much help here Winston, either approach seems reasonable and it seems best to make a clear agreement about this kind of situations. If partner really likes to play SP as much as possible then perhaps you should go along.

[whereagles]

This seems more like common-sense than conventional. First of all, pard is probably able to figure out from the bidding that you have no more hcp, making a heart switch risky. Second, pard doesn't have AK of clubs, and if he has them, he'll cash them out before making any switch. Third, even if he has a club holding like AQJ, he can't get through to you, so anything he plays is irrelevant.

[joshs]

[hv=e=sq943hkj94dk4c1032&s=s1085h832dqj10c8764]266|200|Partner leads the diamond ace against 4S.[/hv]

 

 

Partner and I have a running debate going about signalling - he likes to rely (imo) excessively on SP while I have more standard tastes. The above deal occurred in a matchpoint event where cashing your tricks is imperative. On the ace lead, I played the Q to mark declarer's high cards but partner took this as SP and switched to a heart from the Q. In my views, this is over-reliance on SP as a defensive tool and leads to lazy defense - instead of trying to work out declarer's holdings and find an answer you just have to watch for partner's signals.

 

What are your views? When should SP apply?

There are two different standard agreements for 3'rd hand when its not possible to take anymore tricks (near term) in the suit in a suit contract. (e.g. singleton in dummy, or the situation you describe):

 

Method 1: (the more common) 3'rd hand gives suit preference, a middle card requests a continuation

 

Method 2: (Obvious Shift) 3'rd hand encourages or discourages based on if they have a high honor in the obvious shift suit (there are rules to determine what that suit is). In this case its clubs.

 

Further Unusually high Honor cards in other situations would be informative (showing a sequence) but when you can't take any more tricks in the suit they would be suit preference is method 1, or alarm cards (asking for an unusual shift) in method 2.

 

Of course, if your partnerships gives no suit preference ever then they would be just informative, but I think most pairs play the Q in described sequence as showing a exceptionally strong heart holding.

 

I had one partner who made the alarm clock signal as a generic do something unusual signal, so in a similar situation to this he has a stiff club. I was suppossed to work out that the signal didn't show heart values...

 

Note: If partner on this hand signaled for hearts I would just continue diamonds...

[keylime]

I like O/S carding at trick 1 with some modifications:

 

1. When there is a void/stiff, discuss if pard and you are going to use O/S or just old-fashioned s/p carding.

 

2. At 5 and 6 level contracts I like using the lead of a K as a power card.

 

3. When a long suit is in the dummy, I play hi-lo as lower suit entry, lo-hi as upper suit entry.

[Winstonm]

Sorry, but I don't remember the entire hand, only the fact that it should have been fairly obvious from the auction that third seat couldn't have much.

 

Han, I am wondering again about over-reliance on SP - when you say it can't be right to continue diamonds might not it be important to tell partner that it is at least safe to continue diamonds, even on other hands where it is obvious that no diamond tricks are coming? There are times when it is as important to avoid a disatrous shift as to signal a switch don't you think?

 

Winston

[awm]

In general there are as many as five possible signals you could want to make on any given trick, as well as additional nuances:

 

(1) Please continue the suit lead.

(2) I have nothing, do whatever you think is best.

(3-5) Please switch to any of three other suits (even trumps).

 

Of course, you often don't have five different cards you can reasonably play to the trick. Even if you do, partner won't necessarily be able to read all of these; a good declarer can make even binary signals (encourage/discourage) hard to interpret at times with a falsecard.

 

So we need to combine some of these meanings and create a bit of ambiguity. The obvious shift principle does this in a very explicit way, but pretty much every good pair has some agreements to this effect. As a set of general rules:

 

(1) Most people don't play any signal for a trump switch. You just have to work this out using bridge logic. Occasionally this gets people into trouble, but most often you can tell when a trump switch is needed by looking at dummy.

 

(2) Most people don't play any signal for "I have nothing." Often this should be worked out by partner based on the dummy and auction. If not, you can often signal encouragement under the belief that continuing an already-played suit is less likely to give a trick than opening up a new suit for declarer.

 

So you're left with two possible plays to signal one of three things. Most of the time one of these things will be "obviously wrong" when looking at dummy. For example, continuing dummy's singleton suit against a suit contract where dummy can ruff is usually wrong. Switching to dummy's solid or near-solid suit is often wrong. By eliminating one of the possibilities this way you're left with a fairly manageable situation. Of course, occasionally the "weird play" is right (for example partner has a void in dummy's solid suit, or declarer has only a singleton and no other dummy entry, or dummy is the long trumps hand and a forcing defense is necessary).

 

Anyways, on this hand I'd argue that switching to hearts can simply never be right, especially looking at the ♥Q. And continuing diamonds also seems non-useful (although also non-costly). So I'd take third hand's signal as primarily advice on "should I switch to clubs." The standard agreement is attitude so I'd take "encouraging" as "please don't switch to clubs" and "discouraging" as "please switch to clubs." Of course you could play suit preference in this (or any) situation as well, but then I'd take a low card (assuming standard suit preference and not UDSP) as "please switch to clubs" and a high card as "please don't switch to clubs."

 

Switching to hearts seems like basically a non-bridge play regardless of whether you play attitude, suit preference, or obvious shift signalling.

[Winstonm]

I have tried OS signals and find them beneficial on some hands, the maximum effect when dummy has a clearly weak side suit such as xxx or xxxx. After all, OS are nothing more than attitude for a suit not led.

 

Other leading methods are not so clear.

 

1) If partner leads the K (denying the Ace), and dummy holds xx, xxx, xxxx in the suit it looks to me as if this should be an equal honor situation, signalling encouragement with the J but not otherwise.

 

2) Partner leads the K and dummy wins the trick with the A from Ax, Axx, Axxx. Is this a count play or still equal honor? Or is it SP if dummy has Ax?

 

I admit, though, that my basic preference for signalling goes all the way back to Eddie Kantar's book from the 70's, Kantar for the Defense. In that he stated the first signal is the equal honor signal, an attitude type signal. The signal next in importance was count. The last and rarely used was SP.

 

My problem with OS and SP is that it is too easy to fall back on signal reliance instead of counting the hand and defending accordingly. In the example hand, IMO it is silly to use SP on the Ace lead when dummy has the Kx. If you play the Q from QJx, partner now knows 10 HCP that are not in declarer's hand. In contrast, if you discourage parnter knows declarer has the Q, and if you encourage without playing the Q declarer is marked with the J. By looking at dummy, his own hand, and reviewing the bidding he ought to be able to get close to what you may or may not hold with only 30 HCP unaccounted.

 

It is a complex issue, but IMO the signal system that forces counting declarer's hand and using deductive reasoning is the best way to keep you and your partner's head in the game at all times. Otherwise, the temptation is to fall back on rote play that is as often as not wrong.

 

Winston

[han]

Sorry, but I don't remember the entire hand, only the fact that it should have been fairly obvious from the auction that third seat couldn't have much.

 

Well, if it is obvious from the auction that you can't have more HCP (for instance if declarer has opened or rebid NT) then your diamond queen should do the job. If that's the case then partner made a blooper no matter what your agreements are.

 

Some more quotes, not necessarily in chronological order:

 

Han, I am wondering again about over-reliance on SP.

 

My problem with OS and SP is that it is too easy to fall back on signal reliance instead of counting the hand and defending accordingly.

 

I don't agree with you that suit preference necessarily makes people neglect counting. However, if that's the case for you or your partner then it would be wise to play fewer SP signals. You should play the signals that work best for you and your partner, and if you used one style for several decades then it is normal that you play best using that style.

 

When you say it can't be right to continue diamonds might not it be important to tell partner that it is at least safe to continue diamonds, even on other hands where it is obvious that no diamond tricks are coming?

 

Ho ho, I didn't mean to say that it can't be right to continue diamonds, I only meant that it is unlikely that we will get more tricks in diamonds. Obviously it may be right to continue diamonds here.

 

After all, OS are nothing more than attitude for a suit not led.

 

I don't think that's quite true. Playing obvious shift, wouldn't we give positive attitude when we like the suit lead, even if we can stand a shift?

 

By the way, I believe that the Grannovetters say (in "switch in time") that a queen should never be an OS signal, but should always show the jack. I don't have the book, can anybody confirm this?

 

There are times when it is as important to avoid a disatrous shift as to signal a switch don't you think?

 

Absolutely! I can even imagine that it is possible that count may be the most important signal on some hands. However, we should try to agree on a signal that will help us most often. I think that when partner leads the ace and there is Kx in dummy, the signal that will most often be most important is SP.

 

But as I said before, perhaps the queen should never have a SP meaning.

[Apollo81]

[hv=e=sq943hkj94dk4c1032&s=s1085h832dqj10c8764]266|200|Partner leads the diamond ace against 4S.[/hv]

 

 

Partner and I have a running debate going about signalling - he likes to rely (imo) excessively on SP while I have more standard tastes. The above deal occurred in a matchpoint event where cashing your tricks is imperative. On the ace lead, I played the Q to mark declarer's high cards but partner took this as SP and switched to a heart from the Q. In my views, this is over-reliance on SP as a defensive tool and leads to lazy defense - instead of trying to work out declarer's holdings and find an answer you just have to watch for partner's signals.

 

What are your views? When should SP apply?

Adam's post sums this up pretty well. Switching to hearts is ridiculous so the question of interest is "should I switch to clubs?"

 

If youre playing standard here then you should play the ♦Q showing the ♦J and encouraging a continuation (please don't make the obvious looking shift) If you play SP then you should also play the ♦Q (please dont shift to ♣) If you are playing upside down SP then play low (please don't shift to ♣)

 

In your case you should assume partner will take things as SP when in doubt until such time as the two of you form more solid agreements. What you think a card means is irrelevant at the table if partner will think it means something else.

 

-Noble