[Phil]

I played against a Swedish pair yesterday who announced their carding as "2nd and 4th".

Without stating what the confusion was, how do you interpret this statement?

[manudude03]

Normal around here is 2nd without an honour, 4th with.

[JLOGIC]

Since I know there might be confusion I would ask for clarification? The "listen if their accent is polish or english" trick does not work here lol.

[Phil]

 JLOGIC, on 2012-July-03, 10:10, said:

Since I know there might be confusion I would ask for clarification? The "listen if their accent is polish or english" trick does not work here lol.

The confusion happened after I assumed something that turned out to be incorrect.

[Cyberyeti]

2nd from 3 or 4 small, 4th from 4+ to an honour, if you think they have 5 or 6 small, ask, could be either.

[JLOGIC]

 Phil, on 2012-July-03, 10:15, said:

The confusion happened after I assumed something that turned out to be incorrect.

When you assume you make an ass out of u and me

[Phil]

 JLOGIC, on 2012-July-03, 10:16, said:

When you assume you make an ass out of u and me

Thanks, Dad.

I still don't know what you think it means.

[gwnn]

2/4 can mean either:

-Polish: high from Jx+, low from doubleton, 2nd from any 3, 4th from 4+ with an honour, 2nd from 4+ without.
-'4th best': high from doubleton, 3rd from Hxx, 4th from Hxxx+, as high as you can afford if you have no honour (typically it means top from touching small cards or 2nd from non-touching).

Minor points:
-sometimes people lead 4th best from 5+ if they think partner should know about length more than about strength.
-is the T an honour?

Unfortunately 2/4 is an ambiguous label so you should always ask for clarification.

[Fluffy]

I always ask what do they lead from doubleton except for people from my country whom I know for sure what they mean.

[dburn]

This is a well-known trap for the unwary. The method usually described as "2/4" or "2nd/4th" means second highest from two or three cards, fourth highest from four or more cards. This is more widely practised in Poland (where it is the standard leading method) than in Sweden, but it is not uncommon in the Scandinavian countries.

To "standard" southern European players the method is somewhat disconcerting when encountered for the first time. Since from, say, 82 doubleton a "2/4" player will lead the two, declarer will plough on without fear of losing a third-round ruff, and be sadly disappointed. The lead of the 8 from, say, Q82 seems downright perverted, but is merely the normal card from that holding. But well it was said by the bard:

For the world is wondrous large - seven seas from marge to marge -
And it holds a vast and various kind of man;
And the wildest dreams of Kew are the facts of Kathmandu
And the crimes of Clapham chaste in Martaban.

If you play "standard southern European" - fourth best from suits headed by at least one honour, second best from three or more small cards, top of doubletons - you should not describe this as "2/4" but as "4th (2nd from bad suits)". Unless of course you want to confuse the foreigners, which should be the aim of every true-born Briton.

[bluecalm]

Quote

-sometimes people lead 4th best from 5+ if they think partner should know about length more than about strength.
-is the T an honour?

As far as Polish 2/4 goes systemic lead from Hxxxxx+ is 4th and systemic lead from Tx is a T.
Txxx+ is a bit problematic, most people automatically lead 2nd but you are not 100% safe here as some consider 4th as standard lead, especially vs NT.

[Phil]

I understand the "low from doubleton", and the "middle from three" idea, which is what I assume when someone says, "2nd and 4th". The specific question I asked was "leads / carding"?

Here, "2nd" meant Rusinow. This player thought that Rusinow was part-and-parcel of 2nd/4th and apparently didn't require any additional explanation.

I mean, if someone says they lead 3rd and 5th best, this doesn't mean they start leading the Jack from KQJ...

[bluecalm]

In Poland at least when you say "2/4" (or polish word for those leads) you are expected to lead 9 from T9x+ and high from JTx+ and higher.
When we say "rusinov" (or polish word for those leads) we mean T from JTx etc.

[mgoetze]

 Phil, on 2012-July-03, 12:02, said:

I understand the "low from doubleton", and the "middle from three" idea, which is what I assume when someone says, "2nd and 4th". The specific question I asked was "leads / carding"?

Here, "2nd" meant Rusinow. This player thought that Rusinow was part-and-parcel of 2nd/4th and apparently didn't require any additional explanation.

I mean, if someone says they lead 3rd and 5th best, this doesn't mean they start leading the Jack from KQJ...

If god had meant you to know what your opponents lead, he would have given us convention cards.

[blackshoe]

He didn't - convention cards are the Devil's invention.

[mr1303]

My partner always leads the J from an AKQJ combination. He feels that it's entirely accurate to describe this as a 4th highest lead.

[mfa1010]

I would assume top of sequence, top of internal sequence (J from KJT etc.), low from 2, middle from 3, fourth from 4 to an honour. From four small it might mean second highest or fourth - I would ask.

If they play Rusinow from honours (J from QJ etc.) then "2nd/4th" and nothing more is misleading imo to the extend that redress from TL is in the picture.

[nige1]

When we played 2/4, we were.fairly consistent e.g.

• Low form small doubletons.
• 2nd from honour sequences and interior sequences e.g. J from QJTx, QJ9x, and KJTx.
• 2nd from three cards. including three to an honour e.g. 8 form K8x or 98x.
• 2nd from poor 4+ suits e.g. 8 from 98xx.

But we disclosed all this on our card

[ulven]

 Phil, on 2012-July-03, 12:02, said:

I understand the "low from doubleton", and the "middle from three" idea, which is what I assume when someone says, "2nd and 4th". The specific question I asked was "leads / carding"?

Here, "2nd" meant Rusinow. This player thought that Rusinow was part-and-parcel of 2nd/4th and apparently didn't require any additional explanation.

I mean, if someone says they lead 3rd and 5th best, this doesn't mean they start leading the Jack from KQJ...

As a Swede I can say that in Sweden the default meaning here, stating 2nd and 4th, actually is Schneider/Rusinow (i.e always 2nd/4th, also from honor sequences).
That's probably an incorrect use of the term, but one that 99+% of those who declare that method is unaware of. Actually here you would fool people if you stated 2nd/4th and led the Q from QJxx...

Crossing to Denmark, stating 2nd/4th correctly refers only to non-honor cards.

[JLOGIC]

This is why asking for clarification on their leads when you are unsure, and are dealing with people from different countries from you, and are dealing with a term that is already known to have several different meanings, is a good idea.

Quote

If god had meant you to know what your opponents lead, he would have given us convention cards.

I have noticed that it seems 100 % standard for non north americans that I have played against to always use the CC. This is fine too, but asking should also be fine if you don't assume you know what 2nd and 4th means. I almost always ask and prefer to ask, my father is a very visual person and always prefers a CC, maybe it's a function of how bad the CC is in USA but I just feel it's a matter of preference.