spaderaise Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 A good example of a variety of ways encryption can be used in bridge can be found here. It includes encrypted bidding as well as encrypted signals.If you enjoyed this, you should definitely get hold of the book written last year by the same author: Bridge at the Enigma Club. Highly recommended! By the way, the article above is not representative of Peter Winkler's style of writing - it is an English translation of a Dutch translation of his original article.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted January 16, 2012 Report Share Posted January 16, 2012 In the example I gave, partner knows my exact heart holding, and so knows whether the H6 is high or low. Declarer does not know my holding and does not know whether the H6 is high or low. The meaning of this signal depends completely on the information of my heart holding, which is known to partner and not to declarer. In what way does this not fall under the definition of "encrypted"? OK then, so are methods 2(a) and 2(b) that I described in my post encrypted or not? (In each case the entire agreement is disclosed to declarer, just as written).You are misunderstanding I think. Say that you might hold heart spots of 7652 or 762. You could play that if you hold the ♥5 you play normal suit preference, so 7 for diamonds, 2 for clubs, 6 for no preference, but if you do not hold this card you play revolving, 7 for clubs, 2 for no preference, 6 for diamonds. This would be an encrypted signal since the coding is different depending on a key (who holds the 5). But if you play that a middle high card is diamonds and a low card is clubs (always) but make these cards difficult to read that is ok, so 6 for diamonds, 5 for clubs. Declarer may not be able to immediately tell if the card is high or low but (s)he knows what the coding is. The coding is not dependant on something extraneous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finch Posted January 17, 2012 Report Share Posted January 17, 2012 In the example I gave, partner knows my exact heart holding, and so knows whether the H6 is high or low. Declarer does not know my holding and does not know whether the H6 is high or low. The meaning of this signal depends completely on the information of my heart holding, which is known to partner and not to declarer. In what way does this not fall under the definition of "encrypted"?. You are misunderstanding I think. Say that you might hold heart spots of 7652 or 762. You could play that if you hold the ♥5 you play normal suit preference, so 7 for diamonds, 2 for clubs, 6 for no preference, but if you do not hold this card you play revolving, 7 for clubs, 2 for no preference, 6 for diamonds. This would be an encrypted signal since the coding is different depending on a key (who holds the 5). But if you play that a middle high card is diamonds and a low card is clubs (always) but make these cards difficult to read that is ok, so 6 for diamonds, 5 for clubs. Declarer may not be able to immediately tell if the card is high or low but (s)he knows what the coding is. The coding is not dependant on something extraneous. I agree that the definition is extremely fuzzy.I think the important part in the definition is that it's encrypted if the key is 'in principle' not available to declarer. So to take Zelandakh's signalling method, that is not encrypted, because it's quite possible that declarer holds the ♥5 and knows what your suit preference signal means but that your partner doesn't. To take spaderaise's example above: if I have a general agreement that 'high' means one thing and 'low' means another, then it's possible that declarer may have more information about the suit than the defence; in the case when declarer is void in the suit he doesn't, but that's an attribute of that specific hand, not about the signal as a matter of principle. If you extend this example then any meaning given to 'high' or 'low' when declarer is short in the suit is encrypted and now I can't play normal attitude signals if declarer can't read them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricK Posted January 18, 2012 Report Share Posted January 18, 2012 What about the method given by Cthulhu D where your signal shows the combined count of two suits? eg On partner's opening lead, your initial count signal is high if you have an even number of "that suit plus trumps", low if odd. The signal is always entirely dependant on just the hand you hold, but partner has a much better chance of reading it than declarer - and it is in practice equivalent to an encrypted signal if declarer's exact trump length is known at outset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.