BBO Discussion Forums: 3rd hand play from QJx - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

3rd hand play from QJx Honor play on defense

#1 User is offline   jerryblu 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 2009-March-05

Posted 2009-March-05, 18:48

Your partner leads A of a suit, and you have QJx. Dummy has 4 small. You can assume partner is playing A from AK. Which card do you play to tell him what?

Does the Q guarantee the J?

Or does it deny the J?

Also- what would you have played from Qx?

And lastly- do you know of any book or literature of any sort that discusses this? Not in Watson, Lawrence, or Kantar so far as I can tell.
0

#2 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,155
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2009-March-05, 18:55

This is very basic signalling, wrong forum really.

Q guarantees J or stiff Q, giving partner potentially the option to underlead to put you on play. You play small from Qx.

This should be mentioned in the all the standard recommended basic defensive texts, of which I consider the best to be:
Root - How to Defend a Bridge Hand
Kantar - Modern Bridge Defense and Advanced Bridge Defense. Or his older classic "big red book", I think the title was Defensive Play Complete.
0

#3 User is offline   Echognome 

  • Deipnosophist
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,386
  • Joined: 2005-March-22

Posted 2009-March-05, 18:56

Queen shows the Jack or is a singleton (either way you can win the next trick if partner underleads).

From Qx play your x. When partner next plays the K, your Q will fall and he will know you started with Qx.

With Jx (or xx) you have to make a decision on whether you want a ruff or if partner may interpret and try to underlead. It's a good area to discuss with your partner as it's an area where you don't want to hesitate.
"Half the people you know are below average." - Steven Wright
0

#4 User is offline   mtvesuvius 

  • Vesuvius the Violent Volcano
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,216
  • Joined: 2008-December-04
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa-Area, Florida
  • Interests:SLEEPING

Posted 2009-March-05, 18:56

1. The play of the Queen guarantees the Jack, unless you have a stiff Queen.
2. Low from Qx, even playing standard... Because of the above reason.
I don't know of any books that talk about this, but I would imagine that Kantar probably mentions it...

Edit: BTW, sorry for repeating the ideas above, when I replied there were no replies yet... Stephen and Gnome hit "Submit Post" faster than I did B)
Yay for the "Ignored Users" feature!
0

#5 User is offline   Lobowolf 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,030
  • Joined: 2008-August-08
  • Interests:Attorney, writer, entertainer.<br><br>Great close-up magicians we have known: Shoot Ogawa, Whit Haydn, Bill Malone, David Williamson, Dai Vernon, Michael Skinner, Jay Sankey, Brian Gillis, Eddie Fechter, Simon Lovell, Carl Andrews.

Posted 2009-March-05, 19:06

I'm sure it would be in Kantar's big red book.
1. LSAT tutor for rent.

Call me Desdinova...Eternal Light

C. It's the nexus of the crisis and the origin of storms.

IV: ace 333: pot should be game, idk

e: "Maybe God remembered how cute you were as a carrot."
0

#6 User is offline   jerryblu 

  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15
  • Joined: 2009-March-05

Posted 2009-March-05, 19:52

Thank you all. I guess I'm just a little bit insecure. When my very expert partner insisted that I should play J from QJx, and disagreed with everything I (and you) said to the contrary, and then told me that my ideas were non-standard, I found myself doubting myself. You've confirmed my thoughts on the matter, and I wont defer to my partner's judgment again if I believe as strongly as I did this time.
0

#7 User is offline   Stephen Tu 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 4,155
  • Joined: 2003-May-14

Posted 2009-March-05, 20:10

That's evidence enough to cross off the "very expert" descriptor of your partner.
0

#8 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,094
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2009-March-05, 21:33

jerryblu, on Mar 5 2009, 08:52 PM, said:

Thank you all. I guess I'm just a little bit insecure. When my very expert partner insisted that I should play J from QJx, and disagreed with everything I (and you) said to the contrary, and then told me that my ideas were non-standard, I found myself doubting myself. You've confirmed my thoughts on the matter, and I wont defer to my partner's judgment again if I believe as strongly as I did this time.

Steer him to this thread please.

We love to fustigate ill-informed experts.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#9 User is offline   TimG 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,972
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maine, USA

Posted 2009-March-05, 22:29

Marshall Miles wrote a book called "Defensive Signals" that I am 100% sure discusses this very topic. I think this is a direct quote: "Any honor you play when not necessary to win or promote a trick guarantees the honor below it and denies the honor immediately above it." I've found the book very useful for summarizing these basic carding situations and discussing some lesser known "rules" that may be common amongst experts.

Tim
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users