A signal interpretation

[cnszsun]

Opps are in 4S, sry, I can't recall the auction.

 

dummy: Axx AK10x xx AJxx

yours: Kxx J QJxxxx Kxx

 

Parter led diamond A, (from AK, we lead A).

If we can get 2 diamonds, I'm pretty sure the heart shift will beat the contract, so I played diamond J, would you take it as a preference for heart assuming you are opening leader?

[aguahombre]

Not for me. But, if you make the assumption two diamonds are cashing, you probably don't care what he shifts to unless you are sure partner has 6 clubs.

 

Just discourage for a shift.

[cnszsun]

Not for me. But, if you make the assumption two diamonds are cashing, you probably don't care what he shifts to unless you are sure partner has 6 clubs.

 

Just discourage for a shift.

Yeah, you are right. The club shift will also beat it most likely. Because I'm interested in how experts interpret the signal under such circumstances, let's just suppose we don't hold club king to make a heart shift necessary.

[aguahombre]

I can't pretend to use a suit preference signal in this situation.

[Codo]

I would take the Jack as showing the ten and showing that we do not hold the queen. Partner will happily try to cas a second diamond..

 

If you play obvious shift however, you can signal for a heart return with the jack.

But do I really want a heart return? If we have two cashing diamonds, I can see 4 tricks anyway after he switches to a club. So I would simply discourage.

[Codo]

I would take the Jack as showing the ten and showing that we do not hold the queen. Partner will happily try to cas a second diamond..

 

If you play obvious shift however, you can signal for a heart return with the jack.

But do I really want a heart return? If we have two cashing diamonds, I can see 4 tricks anyway after he switches to a club. So I would simply discourage.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

If there were 3 cards ♦ in dummy and A is definitely from AK, then you would show Attitude ( high, since you have the Q ... forget for the moment you have the J also ).

 

But with 2 cards ♦ in dummy, then Attitude is by-passed... so Count is next... and a high card would show an EVEN number.

Then, on partner's play of the K, you would play a LOW card showing disinterest in ♥, which by implication would show interest in ♣ .

 

[ Surely you want a ♣ switch and not ♥ ... don't you ? ].

[cnszsun]

If there were 3 cards ♦ in dummy and A is definitely from AK, then you would show Attitude ( high, since you have the Q ... forget for the moment you have the J also ).

 

But with 2 cards ♦ in dummy, then Attitude is by-passed... so Count is next... and a high card would show an EVEN number.

Then, on partner's play of the K, you would play a LOW card showing disinterest in ♥, which by implication would show interest in ♣ .

 

[ Surely you want a ♣ switch and not ♥ ... don't you ? ].

Thanks, I agree with all your points. Just one thought, usually we don't play honour cards to show even count except doubleton, so Jack could be assigned special meaning. Sure, maybe I overthink here.

[Stephen Tu]

If there were 3 cards ♦ in dummy and A is definitely from AK, then you would show Attitude ( high, since you have the Q ... forget for the moment you have the J also ).

 

But with 2 cards ♦ in dummy, then Attitude is by-passed... so Count is next... and a high card would show an EVEN number.

 

WTF? I've never heard of "attitude if it's 3cds in dummy, but count if 2 cds in dummy". Surely there are hands where third hand has say 4cds and wants a continuation, and also hands where third hand has 4 cds but wants a switch? I can't believe that giving count automatically is right.

 

What if dummy has xx in suit lead and Ax in another side suit. Without Q of suit lead and holding K in the side suit, surely you want the switch? If partner cashes and sets up declarer's Q, now that loser in the side suit might get pitched. But on a different hand, same # of cards in the suit, perhaps you *want* partner to cash, maybe you have trump tricks, and if he doesn't cash declarer has KQx of the side suit and discards from the xx suit. How is count right just because dummy has a doubleton?

 

I think this is simply attitude situation and partner has to work out whether club or heart shift is more likely to work.

[TWO4BRIDGE]

WTF? I've never heard of "attitude if it's 3cds in dummy, but count if 2 cds in dummy". Surely there are hands where third hand has say 4cds and wants a continuation, and also hands where third hand has 4 cds but wants a switch? I can't believe that giving count automatically is right.

 

What if dummy has xx in suit lead and Ax in another side suit. Without Q of suit lead and holding K in the side suit, surely you want the switch? If partner cashes and sets up declarer's Q, now that loser in the side suit might gets pitched. But on a different hand, same # of cards in the suit, perhaps you *want* partner to cash, maybe you have trump tricks, and if he doesn't cash declarer has KQx of the side suit and discards from the xx suit. How is count right just because dummy has a doubleton?

 

I think this is simply attitude situation and partner has to work out whether club or heart shift is more likely to work.

 

Order of priority when pard leads and Ace :

 

Attitude 1st >> Count 2nd >> Suit Preference 3rd

 

When there is a low doubleton in dummy, and partner is known to lead A from AK , isn't Attitude deemed useless ? Therefore, we skip to next >> Count 1st . ( Showing suit preference will be next on the subsequent play of the K ) .

 

With a low tripleton in dummy, Attitude remains useful and necessary ... hence you show that 1st .

 

You make a good case about A x in another suit and the possibility of setting up the Q in the 1st suit for an eventual discard of x in the 2nd suit. I guess that is a risk when neither you or pard holds the Q .

[PhilKing]

When there is a low doubleton in dummy, and partner is known to lead A from AK , isn't Attitude deemed useless ? Therefore, we skip to next >> Count 1st . ( Showing suit preference will be next on the play of the K ) .

 

 

It just ain't so.

 

You may be able to overruff dummy or partner may need to underlead to get you in with the queen to switch through dummy's weakness. And playing obvious shift, you sometimes have to encourage (or play an unreadable card) when you can't stand the switch.

 

Partner may have difficulty divining what to do next, but straight SP is not the answer, and count is even worse.

[Stephen Tu]

When there is a low doubleton in dummy, and partner is known to lead A from AK , isn't Attitude deemed useless ?

In my strong opinion, NO. There are times where you want partner to cash out, there are times when you want a switch, independent of the number of cards you happen to hold in the suit. Like this hand, if the CK wasn't held, and you wanted a heart ruff, you'd want partner not to cash diamond right away, so that you can get back to him in diamonds after getting in with the trump K. Now who knows if the heart shift can be found, but partner might be able to work it out from the auction.

 

You make a good case about A x in another suit and the possibility of setting up the Q in the 1st suit for an eventual discard of x in the 2nd suit. I guess that is a risk when neither you or pard holds the Q .

 

When not playing Rusinow, I like to play Eddie Kantar's suggestion of leading Q from AKQ, so when dummy has xx, and partner lead A denying Q, it's a very frequent risk that declarer has the Q!

[TWO4BRIDGE]

Partner leads the A from AK and what if dummy holds a singleton .

 

Would you agree that Suit Preference is the first priority ?

[PhilKing]

Partner leads the a from AK and what if dummy holds a singleton .

 

Would you agree that Suit Preference is the first priority ?

 

Yes (as a default), but only because you underlined it. There is also a big, grey elephant in the room - just because you play A from AK does not mean you always have the king.

[cnszsun]

Let's change your hand to Kxx J QJxxxx xxx, now, partner must shift to a heart at the 2nd trick. What I want to know is whether the Jack from you implies the suit preference for heart. Our discussions up to now seem a little bit off the topic.

[PhilKing]

Let's change your hand to Kxx J QJxxxx xxx, now, partner must shift to a heart at the 2nd trick. What I want to know is whether the Jack from you implies the suit preference for heart. Our discussions up to now seem a little bit of the topic.

 

It's off topic, because we do not have the faintest idea what the auction was, so the problem is meaningless. The discussion only got going because of some bizarre suggestions regarding how to signal. How on earth do you expect us to discuss the defence with no relevant infomation? But, given that you know the hand, give us a plausible auction and you never know - rational analysis may ensue.

[cnszsun]

It's off topic, because we do not have the faintest idea what the auction was, so the problem is meaningless. The discussion only got going because of some bizarre suggestions regarding how to signal. How on earth do you expect us to discuss the defence with no relevant infomation? But, given that you know the hand, give us a plausible auction and you never know - rational analysis may ensue.

I didn't realize the acution is so important for this problem. Anyway, it's like this:

1C 1D

1N 2C

2H 2S

3S 4S

1C:precision, 16+;

2C then 2S: an invite hand with 5+ spade suit.

[aguahombre]

You were right. We didn't need that auction :rolleyes:

 

The rest of the world would have had their shot to lead a heart at trick one or two from that hand.