Strange Signal Issue

[kenrexford]

We got this one right, but I'm curious what others would think of this.

 

The basic scenario is that the opponents are in a notrump contract. You lead the systemic Ace from AK10x in the unbid suit and see a stiff in dummy. You switch to a second suit in dummy, with partner's Queen pushing out the Ace.

 

Now, if you play reverse Smith (low means like the lead, small means dislike the lead), a few questions:

 

1. Would you agree that the (Reverse) Smith Echo is for the opening lead suit unless something about the layout screams to focus on the second suit?

2. When does the Smith switch to the second-suit? Or, does a negative Smith for the first suit operate as a positive Smith for the second?

3. If partner wins the Ace in the opponents suit (in the context of no tactical reason to duck) on the first round, is that a "negative Smith," and is a duck then a win of the Ace a "positive Smith?"

 

Next Question set. Partner leads the Ace in the unbid suit, and dummy hits with a stiff pip. His Ace asks attitude; King would be honor-or-count. You hold J9732.

 

4. On the first club, would you play the 7?

5. Would you positive signal this suit using a "duck the Ace or do not duck the Ace" reverse smith signal?

6. What pip do you return? Clarify this last Question with a "seven then deuce" or "nine then seven" or whatever.

[benlessard]

First of all Smith is mainly useful when there is no signal or when there is ambiguity about the signal. Ex You lead low from J9xx and partner put the Q and declarer win with the A. Partner didnt have the chance to make a signal. So there its a smith echo. If my holding is K97 and we play UDCA i know my 7 can be misread so its SE. But if my holding is K975 in not afraid my 5 will be misread. Echo there should show ruffing potential or 2nd suit pref.

 

But if you lead A and dummy hit with a stiff. Then partner is surely able to signal so its surely not an echo smith per se. It should serve for something else. In your example the echo should be for the 2nd suit or for something else but its surely not for the suit lead.

 

The 2nd problem need the full hand+ bidding judgement. Partner lead is either AKx or AKTx+, with anything else he will probably lead low. So playing UDCA with a side entry ill play the 9. With no entry ill play low unless i feel the Qx might give the contract. An echo after that is suit pref or vinje or count in the suit lead or count in an entryless dummy dangerous suit.

[brianshark]

I don't play much smith echos so I'm no expert, but here's my opinion on your questions:

 

1. Without agreement, play it safe and assume that the smith always applies to the opening suit. If the first suit doesn't matter any more because the layout of it is known then you shouldn't play smith, play count or suit pref or something.

2. Disliking the led suit must imply you like the obvious switch. If the obvious switch is more detrimental than a continuation, maybe you're better encouraging in the led suit?

3. If both leader and partner of leader can smith then maybe p will duck to give you a chance to make opening lead. Maybe he ducks just to keep opponent guessing about location of values in case a second round of suit is dangerous. Maybe there are tactical reasons you aren't aware of. Either way, I wouldn't put much significance into it. Definitely don't agree a meaning about winning 1st vs 2nd because that may hamper partner's ability to defend correctly.

 

4. It depends on the entire hand, but if you want partner to continue the suit even if it gives up a trick to declarer's queen, then encourage in the suit. If you don't want partner to continue because you want the next lead from your side to finesse declarer then discourage on opening lead but give a positive smith signal to tell him to keep his suit and look for your entry. Or perhaps if you get to discourage in the suit (because you didn't need to play 3rd hand high), then you shouldn't play smith anymore and should instead suit pref or count or something.

5. I don't understand this question.

6. If I want switch and then I lead this suit, then I'll discourage with 2 (or 7) and then make my normal 4th highest (or 3rd/5th) return unless I must return a big card for want of outside entries to repeat the finesse.

[mike777]

I was taught that when partner leads an ace vs nt it means he has a very good suit and his only concern is whether or not he can run it himself or should he switch at trick two. Therefore, it demands that partner play an honor if he holds one, othewise he gives count.

 

I was told this was standard even if you play Smith.

 

Common holdings include AKJT(xx) or AKQT(xx)

 

With AKTx(x) standard lead is the King. You just give attitude at trick one.

 

If you reverse these leads, no problem but that is not clear from your post.

[dake50]

Thanks kenrexford. I had not considered duck-win/win imm to signal Smith.

 

Question: does reverse Smith get in the way of unblocks? Often enough to lose the immediate low = clearly like? And match UDCA? Exactly the second set problem. I like 2/5 here, so 2. J then 7 so partner gets 10 out of way. Hope 9 overtakes 8.

 

Is signal on 1st round forced --demand count eg.? If not, that acts as Smith there. So 2nd suit is focus later.

 

Who needs this Smith?

3-seat getting in will know which combos A/switch from, so at worst SWAG.

So I think 3-seat signals for switched suit when opening leader gets in. Ie. his Smith IS 2nd suit. How else to 'your switch is right' ?

3- seat's Smith for 1st is effective only if last chance hope =this suit. That situation may be diagnosed without signal.

[skjaeran]

1. Yes.

2. Never. A negative Smith for the 1st suit operates as a positive for the 2nd suit.

3. No. It would be to make sure he could read your signal or see your discard if suspecting a singleton in the suit.

4. Yes, I'd play the 7.

5. Yes.

6. I'd return the 3 to give correct count. (UDCA, original count for me.)

[kenrexford]

I played the seven on the first round. I then ducked once before winning the Ace, hoping thaqt pard would read this as a Reverse Smith positive for the first suit. Then, playing standard present count (his preference), I returned the 9, which I figured readable anyway. Sure enough, partner got this right and continued from AK10x to get all of our clubs.

 

I thought that this was an interesting situation for two reasons. First, the "win immediately or duck once Smith echo" was a strange beast. Second, you usually have attitude on switches, but this seemed to not be a switch situation but a count situation.

[mikeh]

I'm not going to address all the questions, but:

 

1. Smith does not switch from suit to suit: it is always re the initial lead. I can understand that playing that it can switch may be theoretically playable and superior, but the possibility of confusion and the mental energy to avoid confusion by establishing and remembering rules is too costly for me.

 

2. I would play a negative smith as applying to the initial suit and thus, almost certainly altho I suppose it is possible to construct other scenarios, as being implicitly positive for the second suit. This approach, incidentally, makes the need to switch the smith suit superfluous, in most cases and perhaps all.

 

If I held J9732, and the lead asked attitude, with a stiff in dummy, I would discourage IF I could stand a switch and encourage otherwise... especially if partner might hold AKxxx (often we would know this to be impossible if I had no entry since often partner would have been able to bid, but by no means always).

 

Having discouraged, I'd lead back my original 4th best. Leading back the 9 seems to me to be consistent with 972, especially if partner might think that you think he could have 5 cards: AK108x.... if you hold the remaining defensive entry, he has to duck declarer's Q.... which, after all, is what declarer might well play from an original QJxx. Or am I getting too complex?

[gnasher]

1/2) I think that without agreement Smith always relates to the suit led.

 

I sometimes play that when we both know that there is no future in a suit, Smith relates to the switch suit. This wouldn't apply in the example you give, where all we know is that fourth hand doesn't have the queen.

 

3) Ducking an ace and then winning is often necessary in order to see the second half of partner's Smith signal, his subsequent suit-preference signal, or his discard. I don't think you can do this and also use the duck as a signal.

 

With Axx you may be able to duck once or twice, making a Smith signal in the process.

 

4) It depends on who I think is going to get in. With a side ace, I'd probably encourage.

 

I assume that means I won't have to address questions 5 and 6.

[pclayton]

a few questions:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I've had similar discussions with my regular pard. We play Reverse Smith and Obvious Shift. Because of OS, the inferences are much different, but I would answer your questions the way we would interpret the signals. *Remember*, we've already given a signal at T1 about the OS suit (for discussion, lets say the suit you shifted to was the OS suit).

 

1. Would you agree that the (Reverse) Smith Echo is for the opening lead suit unless something about the layout screams to focus on the second suit?

 

2. When does the Smith switch to the second-suit?  Or, does a negative Smith for the first suit operate as a positive Smith for the second? 

 

The Smith by third hand is for the suit led. This is critical to us, since we haven't indicated any preference for the opening leader's suit. The Smith by opening leader tends to be a negative inference for the 2nd suit. Why? Unless its an unusual auction, like declarer advertising a running suit, we aren't leading an Ace from a weak holding. So opening leader's attitude is already known. Opening leader's spot card is a big indicator of attitude for the 2nd suit as well.

 

3. If partner wins the Ace in the opponents suit (in the context of no tactical reason to duck) on the first round, is that a "negative Smith," and is a duck then a win of the Ace a "positive Smith?"

 

I have never heard of ducking an Ace as conveying any message in a NT contract. In a suit contract, this can send a message about the timing of a ruff. I think its a very good idea, however, but I don't know what that message would be.

 

Next Question set.  Partner leads the Ace in the unbid suit, and dummy hits with a stiff pip.  His Ace asks attitude; King would be honor-or-count.  You hold J9732.

 

4. On the first club, would you play the 7?

 

5. Would you positive signal this suit using a "duck the Ace or do not duck the Ace" reverse smith signal?

 

I get to be systemically evasive here ;) . It depends on our holding in the OS suit.

 

6. What pip do you return?  Clarify this last Question with a "seven then deuce" or "nine then seven" or whatever.

 

The 3. I would have already signalled with the 9, the 7 or the 2.

[kenrexford]

One concern that I had seems not to be directly addressed.

 

It seems that partner could easily be leading from AK10. If so, it seems that I want that suit continued, as I have a critical entry. However, playign standard signals (his idea), I cannot afford the play of the 9 to encourage. Otherwise, Opener's Q8xx becomes two tricks and two stoppers. The play of the encouraging 7, if it is correct to encourage, saves ability to overtake the 10 and eventually thereby establish the setting trick.

 

I cannot imagine playing 7, then 9, from 972 using standard signals. 2 then 9 maybe. With what possible holding, then, would you play 7-9? A doubleton 97?

 

From J972, you may need to cater to AK104 with partner, but then you can lead the Jack, as you do not need (or want) to win that Jack later.

 

So, it seems to me that the play of the 7 and then the 9 screamed J97xx. Am I missing something?

[mike777]

Ken...this is very confusing...why is partner leading A from these holding in a nt contract. I was taught this is incorrect and very nonstandard.

[kenrexford]

Ken...this is very confusing...why is partner leading A from these holding in a nt contract. I was taught this is incorrect and very nonstandard.

As I mentioned, our agreements are King as a power lead (asks for Honor or Count), Ace for Attitude.