Suit preference when giving a ruff

[jdeegan]

:P One of the original suit preference signals in bridge was that when one returns a card for partner to ruff - a big card asks for a return of the higher ranking suit, a low card for the return of the lower ranking suit, and a middle card for no preference. This was one of the first things I was taught back in the day, even before I graduated university.

 

Recently, I have enjoyed playing in the BBO one dollar individual tournaments. They offer good rough and tumble bridge games where everybody plays SAYC. You do have to have a standard way to play in such a situation. About 10% of the players have BBO stars. The rest of the players are either already good or are else striving to get better.

 

My question is why when I return a high/low card for a ruff I almost never seem to get the return I asked for? Has the old standard convention changed? Is it no longer taught? It keeps happening to me. WTF is going on?

[StevenG]

Is it no longer taught?

Are people taught bridge any more?

[amre_man]

I have 4 regular partners at my Monday club game. 1st Monday I play the way you describe above, 2nd and 4th I play odd/even, 3rd Monday is a more complicated convention requiring hi/lo discard of a color asking or denying the other suit of that color. The latter can be rather confusing when you have insufficient cards to appropriately follow conventional rules.

 

#1 Rule - Talk to your partner

[aguahombre]

As I am sure you know ---but for those who might not --- there are complications. Firstly, we have to know we are giving a ruff, and that partner knows we know that. Second, there will be times when a high card must be led through second hand even though partner can ruff.

 

These situations are not always readable to the ruffer.

[jdeegan]

I have 4 regular partners at my Monday club game. 1st Monday I play the way you describe above, 2nd and 4th I play odd/even, 3rd Monday is a more complicated convention requiring hi/lo discard of a color asking or denying the other suit of that color. The latter can be rather confusing when you have insufficient cards to appropriately follow conventional rules.

 

#1 Rule - Talk to your partner

:P Alas, no time to talk in a timed one board partnership typical of indies.

[johnu]

The rest of the players are either already good or are else striving to get better.

 

A dubious assumption at best :huh:

[mycroft]

Suit preference signals (in particular, suit preference *leads*) are the last "normal" signal that players tend to learn; and many don't (because *their* partners don't play it either).

 

As far as an indy player not getting it, I point you to Jeff Goldsmith: "If you have not been passed in blackwood, you cannot win an individual."

[barmar]

The problem with indies is that your partner doesn't know you. You may be a good player, and know about suit preference signals, but even if your partner also knows about them, he doesn't know that you do. Indies are missing an important part of bridge: partnership trust; instead, many players assume the worst of their partners (and their assumption is right often enough that they keep doing it). Don't use behavior in an indy as an indication of how "real bridge" is played.

[blackshoe]

Heh. I'm reminded of a story about, I think, Eddie Kantar's nephew. At age eight or so he was playing with his uncle, and a bidding situation came up. Something like the kid could have made a negative double, but didn't. Asked later why he didn't, he said "I knew it, but I didn't know if Uncle Eddie knew it." Smart kid. B-)

[barmar]

If I were playing with Kantar, my thinking would be "I presume Eddie knows it, but I don't know if he knows that I know it."

 

Which is, of course, a concern in an indy, too.