[bab9]

Up until recently I have been playing McKenny with low encourage, however, my current partner wants to use high encourage. I have only come across one book that describes briefly the advantages of using high encourage.

Does anyone know of any books / authors / websites that may go into high encourage advantages in detail?

I am aware that there are several methods of signaling: McKenny, odds and evens, high and low encourage. Does anyone know if there has been a comparison of the different signals methods, and which one works best?

[jjbrr]

No method is always superior to any other method. Just be on the same page with your partner and you will be fine.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

I am aware that there are several methods of signaling: McKenny, odds and evens, high and low encourage. Does anyone know if there has been a comparison of the different signals methods, and which one works best?

McKenney and odd/even are "discard" strategies (first time cannot follow suit to declarer), that should be considered a separate decision from "signaling strategy" (following suit to partner's lead, when you don't have to play a particular card for trick taking purposes). It's an independent choice, you can choose either or neither discard method with either high or low encourage.

There are plenty of books covering defensive signaling, the ones I like best are by Woolsey and Miles, though Miles is out of print.

As for high encourage vs. low encourage, the main situations where high is better are:
(1) vs. notrump, you might have say 3 cards to an honor, but the middle card is large enough that you have to unblock it. suit layout might be say something like:

---

Partner leads low, if he gets in you want him to lead to your Q and run the suit, but this is only possible if you unblock the T. If you are playing high discourages though, partner may misread the situation, it would be nice if the T was encouraging.


(2) vs. suit contracts, situations like

---

Partner leads an honor, if low encourages, partner may continue playing you for Q or doubleton, but if you play high, this gives declarer a trick by force.

OTOH, low encouraging is better in situations where one needs to save spot cards, to say maintain a tenace over dummy, low encouraging allows you to give clearer signals in some situations, where playing high encouraging would require playing an ambiguous middling card due to the need to preserve higher spots.

In any case, the differences between methods are relatively small, it rarely makes a difference; most experts play low encourages since it is slightly better in more situations. A microscopic sliver of players switch between high or low encouraging depending on dummy's holding in the suit led (and the auction) in an attempt to optimize.

[rogerclee]

Stephen Tu, on Feb 7 2010, 09:12 PM, said:

A microscopic sliver of players switch between high or low encouraging depending on dummy's holding in the suit led (and the auction) in an attempt to optimize.

Which top pairs do this? What are their agreements like? It seems impractical to me, but if it's actually a pretty common agreement among world class pairs from a certain country or something, that would be interesting.

[Stephen Tu]

rogerclee, on Feb 8 2010, 02:04 AM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Feb 7 2010, 09:12 PM, said:

A microscopic sliver of players switch between high or low encouraging depending on dummy's holding in the suit led (and the auction) in an attempt to optimize.

Which top pairs do this? What are their agreements like? It seems impractical to me, but if it's actually a pretty common agreement among world class pairs from a certain country or something, that would be interesting.

I don't know the identity of top pairs doing this, but there was an article "Scanian signals" by Wirgren (Swedish international, won Cavendish once) in July 1991 Bridge World that describes this in all the gritty detail, he may have also put it in book form at one point.

The rules are mainly based on whether there is a finesseable honor left in dummy, and whether the presumed long hand is on lead or if 3rd hand is presumed long (e.g. 3rd hand bid the suit).

I don't think it's really all that impractical as long as you agree on the exact groundrules, and what sort of situations you are catering to. I played this with one partner years ago, and have run into one other pair ever in my area that also does this. It's sound in theory, it's just something where a clear gain comes up very rarely, so hardly anyone bothers.

[hanp]

A friend of mine plays standard carding on the lead of an ace or king, otherwise upside carding. She's weird.

[helene_t]

I think standard (high encourages) is a little easier for beginners/intermediates because:
- a high card draws more attention
- sometimes the clearest signal is to play a high card in order to show that you have it (discard the ace to tell p that his king is high), or that you can afford it (for example when you throw a queen under p's ace to tell him that you have the jack).
- when p leads an ace or king against a suit contract and it isn't clear whether it's a count or an attitude situation, you want to encourage with the same as you play to show a doubleton. Now you could play reverse count also, but that feels less natural as your spot card leads resemble standard count. Also I think current count is easier than original count but most reverse-count players play original count.

[andy_h]

I think one the typical examples that you'd switch to low discouraging is when partner leads an Ace and dummy tracks with xxx(x) and you can't afford an honour from J10x.

Anyway back to the topic. I agree with helene about standard being a little easier for B/I as a high card usually draws attention - that's how I can think of the reason of why I was also taught high encourage at first. Some people might disagree if their country has only 1 'standard' form of carding and that becomes more intuitive for them.

[babalu1997]

I have played with 3 people who play what they call oe count attitude and discard.

Well, when they said oe i assumed discards only, and, needless to say, i read some bewildering attitude signals, and the partners misread what i signaled with.

they were nice people and actually tried to teach these signals to me, but i have searched in books and the net and do not find it anywhere.

does anyone here know?

[helene_t]

Italian carding is quite popular in Italy (!) and also Bergen recommends them.

FWIW I think they are good for people who are able to memorize all exact spots that have been played. Say partner plays the 7. If you know that he doesn't have the 5 or the 3, then the 7 is likely meant as an odd card. If he probably has either the 5 or the 3 but no even card that he could afford, then the 7 is meant as an even card. This is because the ranking of the spot cards is 35798642.

If you find it easier to remember only the high spots (which may become valuable) plus the number of small spots (total spots minus high spots), but find it difficult to remember the parity of the low spots, then you shouldn't be playing Italian carding. Certainly not when following suit, because then you will often not have the right parity and will have to rely on partner figuring out that a high card doesn't mean the parity it has but means "I only have the wrong parity".

[hanp]

helene_t, on Feb 8 2010, 08:36 AM, said:

I think standard (high encourages) is a little easier for beginners/intermediates because:

Most Dutch beginners learn to lead "kleintje plaatje", which means, low shows an honor. It is easy to extend this on partner's lead: kleintje plaatje throughout.

[jjbrr]

Han, teach me Dutch. Kleintje seems to me to be the diminutive form of a word that already means small. Is this correct? Why is it like that?

[peachy]

Any method of carding is fine, as long as both you and your partner use the same method and observe which card was played. What you should be certain of:
to know when to give an attitude signal, when to give a count signal, when to give suit preference signal, and what to discard when not following suit. All carding methods work, just learn to use them properly. Choose the method that is common where you play, mainly because it is easier to get partners to play with.

[nigel_k]

I agree with Peachy. The best signalling method is the one that partner is least likely to forget. Everything else is insignificant compared to that.

[hanp]

jjbrr, on Feb 8 2010, 10:25 AM, said:

Han, teach me Dutch. Kleintje seems to me to be the diminutive form of a word that already means small. Is this correct? Why is it like that?

We use "tje" a lot. Here kleintje has the same meaning as "small", as in "play small".

[PhantomSac]

hanp, on Feb 8 2010, 08:21 AM, said:

A friend of mine plays standard carding on the lead of an ace or king, otherwise upside carding. She's weird.

This is a common convention in USA also, meckwell play this for instance.

[Jeroen71]

hanp, on Feb 9 2010, 12:45 AM, said:

We use "tje" a lot. Here kleintje has the same meaning as "small", as in "play small".

Ordering a beer in a bar is almost universally done as "een biertje" (a small beer). Of course, the beers in NL are indeed very small compared to our neighbour countries where you normally get at least 0.5L or a pint.

[jjbrr]

Jeroen71, on Feb 10 2010, 09:43 AM, said:

hanp, on Feb 9 2010, 12:45 AM, said:

We use "tje" a lot. Here kleintje has the same meaning as "small", as in "play small".

Ordering a beer in a bar is almost universally done as "een biertje" (a small beer). Of course, the beers in NL are indeed very small compared to our neighbour countries where you normally get at least 0.5L or a pint.

But the women at the bar are hotter than in most countries, so you don't need lots of beer, am I right?