[peachy]

My question is out of interest in how common one or the other is. This is yet another thing where I thought I knew what the standard is...

If you care to provide reasons why your chosen method is superior, please do!

[1eyedjack]

I play Ace shows K but denies Q or J. Partner's signal depends on dummy.
I lead K from other strong combinations. Partner gives attitude with fewer than 3 in dummy, but with 3 in dummy would unblock or give count (with nothing to unblock).

I don't claim that it is the best method out there. But I do find it hard to understand the "Ace for attitude, King for count" school, or the other way round for that matter. Too often whether you want attitude, count or unblock is unknown until dummy is tabled.

That means that the partnership is likely to have an agreement about what sort of hands, blind to dummy, are likely to want attititude v count signal, but will generally not divulge that information to declarer on enquiry, limiting their explanation of the lead to the type of signal that instructs, and relying on the fact that it should be general bridge knowledge what sort of hands would want what signal, and I think that this is bordering on unethical.

[aguahombre]

I think most common is Ace or Queen for unblock or count. Obviously, Elianna's opposite methods are consistent with her "upside down" other carding and seem just as good (other thread).

Edit: I should have said, "...common for those who have an agreement at all..."

This post has been edited by aguahombre: 2010-September-12, 11:22

[Stephen Tu]

Your poll question is unclear. Are you trying to determine what is "standard", or what is currently most popular? Like standard vs. udca, among good players udca is more common by a lot, but they still consider high = encourage to be "standard".


"Standard" is ace asks for count/unblock, king asks for attitude. That's what I'd assume if partner said "standard carding". I don't know if this is the most common among experts though.

[peachy]

Stephen Tu, on Sep 12 2010, 12:36 PM, said:

Your poll question is unclear. Are you trying to determine what is "standard", or what is currently most popular? Like standard vs. udca, among good players udca is more common by a lot, but they still consider high = encourage to be "standard".


"Standard" is ace asks for count/unblock, king asks for attitude. That's what I'd assume if partner said "standard carding". I don't know if this is the most common among experts though.

What is unclear about it? I am asking what "you" and other forum readers do and for those who care to answer, to vote.

[gordontd]

Stephen Tu, on Sep 12 2010, 06:36 PM, said:

"Standard" is ace asks for count/unblock, king asks for attitude.

That's standard in America. Not everywhere.

[gwnn]

Ace asks for attitude, looking around, K asks for unblock or count. I don't understand A+Q asks for unblock, what holding is there where you can't do it with the king? I thought the relevant ones are AKJT and KQT9 ?

[jdonn]

peachy, on Sep 12 2010, 12:48 PM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Sep 12 2010, 12:36 PM, said:

Your poll question is unclear.  Are you trying to determine what is "standard", or what is currently most popular?  Like standard vs. udca, among good players udca is more common by a lot, but they still consider high = encourage to be "standard".


"Standard" is ace asks for count/unblock, king asks for attitude.  That's what I'd assume if partner said "standard carding".  I don't know if this is the most common among experts though.

What is unclear about it? I am asking what "you" and other forum readers do and for those who care to answer, to vote.

It is unclear because you has more than one definition. Definition 1 would mean you are asking what I do in my partnerships, definition 2 could be taken as either asking what is standard or what people think is best.

[aguahombre]

"If you care to provide reasons why your chosen method is superior, please do." (OP)

I don't. But, would be willing to see what others think. Seems to be a simple matter of preference to me, until I see something really compelling.

[Stephen Tu]

Quote

What is unclear about it? I am asking what "you" and other forum readers do and for those who care to answer, to vote.

Because your initial post makes it quite unclear what you wish us to vote on. You mention that you want to know "how common" treatments are, that you thought you knew "what the standard was", but you ask "what do you do". These are separate questions with possibly different answers:
1. What do you do in most of your partnerships. (measure popularity of usage among forum participants)
2. What do you think is "most common"? (popularity of treatment among general bridge population)
3. What do you think is most common among the best players?
4. What is considered "standard"?
5. What do you think is the best treatment?

Which of these would you have us vote for in your poll? If you aren't specific, people will pick different questions and your results will be contaminated.

As for why a method is superior, the reason people are switching to K for count/unblock is to avoid ambiguity from leading from something like AKTx(x) vs. KQTx(x), where it's unclear whether one wants to encourage with Jxx.

[peachy]

jdonn, on Sep 12 2010, 02:04 PM, said:

peachy, on Sep 12 2010, 12:48 PM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Sep 12 2010, 12:36 PM, said:

Your poll question is unclear.  Are you trying to determine what is "standard", or what is currently most popular?  Like standard vs. udca, among good players udca is more common by a lot, but they still consider high = encourage to be "standard".


"Standard" is ace asks for count/unblock, king asks for attitude.  That's what I'd assume if partner said "standard carding".  I don't know if this is the most common among experts though.

What is unclear about it? I am asking what "you" and other forum readers do and for those who care to answer, to vote.

It is unclear because you has more than one definition. Definition 1 would mean you are asking what I do in my partnerships, definition 2 could be taken as either asking what is standard or what people think is best.

If I wanted to know "what is standard" or "what do you think is standard", I might have asked that question. Then again, some folks play different things with different partners so they could feel unable to answer the simple question I asked.

Then again, if folks want to answer a different question than what I asked, go right ahead. Or if you want to argue about semantics, fine too I still find my question easy to understand even if it had been composed by someone other than me!

[aguahombre]

Yep, seems clear to me. Peachy asks one question: When you lead one of those two cards, what are you asking for?

He says he thought he knew what Standard was (but doesn't say and doesn't ask).

Then, he welcomes reasoning behind choices, for anyone willing to volunteer that.

[Roupoil]

Standard in France is Ace for attitude and King for unblock/count. And I play Standard in this area. No good reason to it, just used to it and I don't remember having problems with it.

[rogerclee]

Just as an example, consider these three holdings: AKxx, AKJx, and KQ9x. You are on lead against some number of NT and decide that leading an honor would be wise.

If you are playing A asks for count/unblock and K asks for attitude, you would lead the king from the first two holdings (don't want unblock) as well as the third one (systemic lead). As a consequence the lead is ambiguous, and so partner does not know how he should signal with something like JTxx or just the jack, since he doesn't know if you have AK or KQ.

If you are playing A asks for attitude and K asks for count/unblock, you would lead the ace from the first two holdings (curious about the queen), and the queen from the third holding (curious about the jack). Now partner knows to discourage holding the jack from the first holding and encourage holding the jack from the third. It's true you could get in trouble when partner has the ten in the last case, but that is less frequent/important.

So it is better to play K = power, A/Q = attitude.

[cherdanno]

rogerclee, on Sep 12 2010, 03:34 PM, said:

Just as an example, consider these three holdings: AKxx, AKJx, and KQ9x. You are on lead against some number of NT and decide that leading an honor would be wise.

If you are playing A asks for count/unblock and K asks for attitude, you would lead the king from the first two holdings (don't want unblock) as well as the third one (systemic lead). As a consequence the lead is ambiguous, and so partner does not know how he should signal with something like JTxx or just the jack, since he doesn't know if you have AK or KQ.

If you are playing A asks for attitude and K asks for count/unblock, you would lead the ace from the first two holdings (curious about the queen), and the queen from the third holding (curious about the jack). Now partner knows to discourage holding the jack from the first holding and encourage holding the jack from the third. It's true you could get in trouble when partner has the ten in the last case, but that is less frequent/important.

So it is better to play K = power, A/Q = attitude.

I completely agree with all of the above, but I never understand why the logic stops with K/Q. Assuming the agreements above, the queen lead becomes ambiguous, as partner won't know what to signal when holding the ten. Well, there is an easy solution to that - lead the J whenever you are leading an honor from QJ... (e.g. QJ9x). In other words, lead Rusinow.
So given that Q from KQ... is now pretty much the standard lead (if you are going to lead an honor), I don't understand why Rusinow against NT isn't more popular.

[JLOGIC]

Yeah Rusinow is obv better than both standard and K is the power lead and Q is ambiguous.

I consider A/Q for unblock, K for attitude to be both standard (in america) and expert standard (barely? Maybe because K is power lead is split up between rusinow and non rusinow players. Or maybe I'm just wrong).

I don't really think it matters though, if I agreed standard leads with an american partner I would assume A/Q for unblock K for attitude, if I had no agreement I would assume that, and I would always just make an agreement about something like this.

[benlessard]

Quote

Yeah Rusinow is obv better than both standard and K is the power lead and Q is ambiguous.

IMO its best to have strong lead and not so strong leads. The best is to play both.

A= not great
K = strong
Q =show the K
J= show the Q or nothing above
T= Strong like coded T

With AQJ9 you lead the Q

You ll have to work pretty hard to find where this setup can blow a trick or put you in misdefense.

[Siegmund]

I stick to old standard, and actively dislike A-attitude K-count. That's probably partly because of several disasters when I've been talked into trying it (partners just obeying orders, instead of actually thinking about giving a sensible signal), and partly from not having explored rearranging the Q-and-lower leads much.

[Free]

Weird, here the standard is A-att K-count. I haven't had any problems with it as far as I remember. No idea what's better, and why. We also use combine leads, which work well with this approach.

[bluecalm]

Who cares about standard let's just think what is the best.
I don't have strong opinion. I play natural leads all my life (Ace from AK, King from KQ, Queen from QJ etc. give attitude and if it doesn't matter then count) and I haven't noticed many problems.
With one partner we agreed to play Ace = unblock/count , rest = natural.

I have two questions for "unblock/count to A/Q" users:
a)what do you lead from QJ9x(x)/QJ8x(x) ?
b)what do you discard from Txx and from xxx ?