[kenrexford]

You play standard count and attitude, plus Reverse Smith Echo against NT contracts.

So, here's a situation. Against a trump suit contract, you lead the Ace or King from AK-fifth and catch dummy with Qxxx, partner giving count as 1 or 3 (likely 3). So, you switch to the stiff King of trumps at the Ace in dummy, obviously to be viewed by partner as a means of getting off the lead.

In any event, Declarer wins the Ace and then plays another spade to partner, who wins the Queen. You now have an opportunity to give partner info as to what to do next.

You are unable to afford any pitches except in your long suit, which was your opening lead suit.

For theory purposes, assume that partner will have a clear option to switch to one of the two remaining untouched suits. Partner will also have a general option to continue trumps (if he has another), to continue your long suit, or perhaps even to make a strange switch to the remaining suit, although that would be odd.

So, assume that you need to pitch a pip from your long suit that gives partner a message.

How would you interpret pips here?

Option #1 seems to be suit preference (switch to the higher or lower other suit), with a "preference" for the odd suit merely being an indication that the obvious switch seems bad.

Option #2 seems to be simply attitude, with a negative attitude for your long suit being an "obvious switch" encouragement for the suit where the obvious switch would occur.

Maybe there's another option?

The problem was that the obvious switch suit was the higher of the remaining suits, such that a high card in your opening lead suit could encourage the obvious switch as a suit preference signal or could discourage the obvious switch and an encouragement for the original suit.

[bluecalm]

In those situations I play:

Suit preference to obvious switch suit = can stand switch (top honor, depending on situation; Should be A/K/Q if dummy has xxx).
Suit preference to not obvious switch = can't stand obvious switch.

If it's known from the bidding that I have a lot of pips then middle pips don't carry strong message. S/P to obvious switch is still the same. And S/P to other suit ask for switch to this suit (if it makes sense).

Quote

The problem was that the obvious switch suit was the higher of the remaining suits, such that a high card in your opening lead suit could encourage the obvious switch as a suit preference signal or could discourage the obvious switch and an encouragement for the original suit.

I don't get the problem. Partner is supposed to know if our pitch is S/P or enc/disc for original suit based on overall situation. It's clear from A lead that we have a K, so what's the point of encouraging ?

[kenrexford]

The problem seems to be that a simple attitude signal (versus suit preference) discouraging the original lead operates as an inferential encouragement for the obvious switch suit, necessary when you cannot afford to play a card in the obvious switch suit.

Thus, the question seems to be whether you would default to encourage the non-obvious switch to send the message against the obvious switch or to sending a positive attitude for the original suit as the message against the obvious switch, a question best answered by what pips in the original suit show -- attitude or suit preference.

[MFA]

Our general approach is to stick with the default meaning and do as well as possible with that. We don't like a free wheeling style, where a card means what we would like it to mean in the situation. So we would discourage if we wanted a shift.

But pls play lav discards, so superior!

[lilboyman]

Since your scenario has you protecting 3 suits, an additional thought would be to have one of your long suits discards to tell partner what suit you want partner to protect.

[Apollo81]

Option 2. It's possible you want neither switch.

[kfay]

kenrexford, on Jan 11 2010, 12:14 PM, said:

For theory purposes, assume that partner will have a clear option to switch to one of the two remaining untouched suits. Partner will also have a general option to continue trumps (if he has another), to continue your long suit, or perhaps even to make a strange switch to the remaining suit, although that would be odd.

The magical 5th suit?

[kenrexford]

kfay, on Jan 13 2010, 03:42 PM, said:

kenrexford, on Jan 11 2010, 12:14 PM, said:

For theory purposes, assume that partner will have a clear option to switch to one of the two remaining untouched suits.  Partner will also have a general option to continue trumps (if he has another), to continue your long suit, or perhaps even to make a strange switch to the remaining suit, although that would be odd.

The magical 5th suit?

This is what I usually opt for.

[PrecisionL]

And a middle card (6 usually +/-1) would be neutral and encourage the suit led and show no preference for the other two suits.

[ONEferBRID]

MFA, on Jan 11 2010, 07:55 PM, said:

But pls play lav discards, so superior!

Lavinthal is best against NT contracts, but this problem is a suit contract.

I play Odd/Even against suit contracts. That would give you 3 options ( hopefully ) in the "opening lead suit" discard:
High-Even
Low-Even
Odd -any

[Fluffy]

you don't have more options than the cards you have, as said before, you can play high/middle/low, odd-high even-high even-low odd-low or whatever.

Some even suggested fibonacci carding where 2,3,5,8,K where the most encouraging in that order.

[gnasher]

I think it's a matter of agreement.

If your agreement is to play Obvious Shift in other situations, it applies here too. If you don't generally play Obvious Shift, give suit preference. If you didn't have time to discuss it, think about all that time you wasted on discussing obscure two-over one sequences, Last Train, Pathetic Splinters, etc.

[barryallen]

kenrexford, on Jan 11 2010, 06:02 PM, said:

The problem seems to be that a simple attitude signal (versus suit preference) discouraging the original lead operates as an inferential encouragement for the obvious switch suit, necessary when you cannot afford to play a card in the obvious switch suit.

Thus, the question seems to be whether you would default to encourage the non-obvious switch to send the message against the obvious switch or to sending a positive attitude for the original suit as the message against the obvious switch, a question best answered by what pips in the original suit show -- attitude or suit preference.

Unless I have got hold of completely the wrong end of the tree, if you look at this from partners perspective rather than yours, it is relatively straightforward.

Partner can see dummy and be aware of the potential problem. magnified by your lead of the trump K. Any subsequent discard I would assume would be lead directing for the remaining two suits and I would take it as given that you hold the remaining top honour. Wanting your original suit returned gives the opposition the possibility of gaining a discard in a weak suit headed by the A for example?
And if partner wanted a ruff there is nothing he can do about it now but to find a entry and lead accordingly.