Which card to play?

[twcho]

Dummy has a suit with xx, you hold J109 in this suit. If declarer leads a card from dummy, which card should you play, assuming udca carding method?

 

If instead, dummy has Axxx in one suit and declarer leads from his hand a small card, what shall one follow with J109?

 

Any rule for following with touching honors?

[barmar]

You play 9 in both cases. In general, defenders play the lowest card in a sequence when trying to force declarer/dummy to beat it. Whatever card you play essentially denies the card below it.

 

You only give count when you're playing a card that isn't expected to be able to win. For instance, if declarer leads dummy's Ace, you would play the Jack in UDCA, the 9 in rightside-up count.

[Guest Jlall]

If your agreement is to split low then I think you should play the ten so partner knows you have JT, if your agreement is to split high then split with the jack.

[twcho]

If your agreement is to split low then I think you should play the ten so partner knows you have JT, if your agreement is to split high then split with the jack.

Why shouldn't one follow with 9 but rather the 10?

 

What is the pros and cons for following high or low?

[BillHiggin]

If your agreement is to split low then I think you should play the ten so partner knows you have JT, if your agreement is to split high then split with the jack.

Why shouldn't one follow with 9 but rather the 10?

 

What is the pros and cons for following high or low?

It is all to easy for responses here to forget that this is B/I discussion

 

The default agreement is to follow suit with the lowest card in a sequence but to lead the highest card.

 

Fancy agreements should wait for a time when you are absolutely certain that B/I no longer applies (and then only in an established partnership).

[jtfanclub]

Why shouldn't one follow with 9 but rather the 10?

 

The 10 promises the J, the 9 promises the 10. If you think that partner will figure out you have the jack if you play the 9, then play the 9. But if you think your partner won't be able to figure it out, partner's knowing about the jack is more important than his knowing about the 9.

 

What is the pros and cons for following high or low?

 

As far as I know (which isn't much), there isn't any. It's just whatever you're used to playing.

[pclayton]

We've covered 'splitting honors' before. I come from the 'split with the card you lead' school. although I frequently find myself splitting 2nd highest for some reason.

[Guest Jlall]

The default agreement is to follow suit with the lowest card in a sequence but to lead the highest card.

If splitting low from a sequence is standard, fine, I don't think low from a 3 card sequence is standard because it is so clearly inferior. If I was playing with someone new and the default was to split low from a sequence I would split with the ten to show JT. This is not an agreement I have with anyone, let alone a fancy one (the only people I have splitting agreements with I agree to play high from 3, low from 2), this is just a bridge logic thing. I would never teach anyone to play the 9 from JT9 unless it was for deceptive reasons.

[whereagles]

I learned to split low in 3rd seat and split high in 2nd seat.

[easy]

First of all ,in general splitting from JTx can easily be the losing play.

?[hv=n=skq9hdc&w=sjtxhdc&e=saxxhdc&s=sxxxxhdc]399|300|[/hv]

 

surely splitting in any form is nuts whether the dummy is to the left or rite of west.

 

But ok lets assume a holding where its reasonable to split. Wouldnt it be nice for pard to know what our holding is. If playing the J promises a 3 card sequence headed by the J and the T denies a 3 card sequence headed by the jack pard will know what to do with regard to that suit so much more often. I dont see that happening when we split low from JT9.

 

In fact isnt this the same method we use when discarding, a discard of hign honor promises the next 2/3 lower

[kenrexford]

I learned to split low in 3rd seat and split high in 2nd seat.

Same here.

 

If I remember why:

 

In second seat, you will not split unless you are forced to play the card (stiff) or have at least two touching. If you forget J109 and focus on 2-card holdings, you will see that J from J10, 10 from 109 and 9 from J9 leaves partner better able to read the cards than J from 10 from J10 or 9 from J9 or 109.

 

In third seat, you may have to play "third hand high" even without two touching, so your best best is for partner to perhaps read from Declarer's carding which you have.

 

I think that's right.

[y66]

How To Defend A Bridge Hand by William S. Root (1994)

 

When second hand decides to split his honors, it is debatable whether he should play the high card or the low card from a sequence headed by the king, queen, jack or ten. My recommendation is that you play the top card of a sequence (as if leading the suit); however, there is no universal agreement. Some authorities recommend the low card of the sequence, and others recommend the high card. This is a good point to discuss with your regular partners.

 

Eddie Kantar Teaches Modern Bridge Defense (1999)

 

When splitting ... standard second-seat dogma is to split honors by playing the lower equal. However, splitting with the higher equal, the one you would have led had you been on lead, makes it a whole lot easier to read the position. Splitting with the highest is favored by the expert community.

 

See brief discussion at http://books.google.com/books?id=r0dtP5H3N...XPI9g#PPA185,M1

 

Washington Standard, Second Edition by Steve Robinson (1996)

 

When splitting … if you are second to play, and you have touching honors, play the lower honor from two touching honors, and play the highest honor from three or more touching honors. If you are third to play, and you have touching honors, always play your lowest honor.

[skjaeran]

Washington Standard, Second Edition by Steve Robinson (1996)

 

When splitting … if you are second to play, and you have touching honors, play the lower honor from two touching honors, and play the highest honor from three or more touching honors. If you are third to play, and you have touching honors, always play your lowest honor.

I played like this with a previous partner. Made it much easier to find the correct defence on several hands when splitting high/low in 2nd hand.

[MFA]

Washington Standard, Second Edition by Steve Robinson (1996)

 

When splitting … if you are second to play, and you have touching honors, play the lower honor from two touching honors, and play the highest honor from three or more touching honors. If you are third to play, and you have touching honors, always play your lowest honor.

I played like this with a previous partner. Made it much easier to find the correct defence on several hands when splitting high/low in 2nd hand.

This is what I play.

[johnallen]

To return to the original question:

 

Is the consensus that (since) '9' is not an honor, it therefore is not part of the consideration of what card to play?

 

For example, would those who play highest of 3 or more touching honors and the lower of touching honors play '10' from 'J.10.9'? What about '10.9.8'?

[johnallen]

Eddie Kantar's "Modern Bridge Defense" treats this topic fully. However, his "Bridge for Dummies (2nd. Ed)" provides simpler rules that I suggest are more appropriate for Beginner/Intermediate.

 

He states (for second hand play):

 

"... if you have a sequence of three or more equal cards headed by an honor, such as Q.J.10.4 or J.10.9.8...play your highest equal, the same card you would have led had you been on lead."

 

I suggest the phrase "equal cards headed by an honor" answers the question about J.10.9.