Sanity Check

[Lobowolf]

I agree with MFA. When I give attitude signals, it normally means I don't have certain card(s) in this suit that you asked for rather than I really don't like this suit and I have something else better so please please switch. It can mean that in different situations and of course all of this would also be based on judgement on what cards can be seen in dummy. For example in this one like MFA said, my signal now here and encourage partner to underlead the club to get a heart through to his king based on this dummy.

So what do you play with the 7-2 doubleton?

[andy_h]

I agree with MFA. When I give attitude signals, it normally means I don't have certain card(s) in this suit that you asked for rather than I really don't like this suit and I have something else better so please please switch. It can mean that in different situations and of course all of this would also be based on judgement on what cards can be seen in dummy. For example in this one like MFA said, my signal now here and encourage partner to underlead the club to get a heart through to his king based on this dummy.

So what do you play with the 7-2 doubleton?

What's my whole hand if I have 72 doubleton?

And isn't partner also aware that in attitude situations (in general), we would encourage with the Q and also a doubleton if we want a ruff?

[MFA]

So I'm coming back to the first question is, does a low card suggest an underlead (or that an underlead is ok)?  If so, we can't encourage with a small doubleton.  If a low card doesn't suggest an underlead, then presumably nothing does, so we can never help partner out on the underlead decision, but we can encourage with a doubleton.

You are surely asking the right question, how to distinguish between a doubleton and the ♣Q.

 

There is no easy answer. We need to estimate what partner will think is the most likely set, based on our cards, dummy and the bidding. It's a very tough judgement call. We usually have to play low and hope partner works it out if either kind of defense is needed.

 

So it's tempting to try to reduce the problem and give up on, say, the underlead option, and let a small card show a doubleton:

 

It seems like we should encourage with a small doubleton, which in turn implies that the encouraging card shouldn't have implications re: underleading.  So I'll go back to the 4, followed by the 2.

But that is fooling oneself, because how does partner know which option you just gave up? If dummy had ♠KQJT9 and ♣xx, surely a small club should now show ♣Q, etc.

It is the exact same judgement call that I have, just neatly disguised as the premises of the problem.

 

By playing 4-2 you are betting big on partner is agreeing with your premises (that small would be doubleton, not ♣Q) in a very tough situation. If he doesn't, he might underlead.

I'm more lucky, since I discourage and thus avoid the judgement call when it is irrelevant. Partner knows now that I can't stand a club operation.

 

Had it been a situation where it were critical to decieve partner initially, your plan would have been much better. But it's not. Partner is fine on his own here with my honest signal.

[brianshark]

If partner was looking to give you a ruff, he might have led the K asking for count. Leading the ace suggests to me he is particularly interested if you have an honour in the suit, either because he led a lone ace, or because he wants to get to your hand for you to lead through declarer.

 

I think this is a situation where you should tell him what you have, not how to defend.