[bluecalm]

---

You lead J♣ (good/bad ?).
Declarer plays the A, partner plays:
a)7 of clubs
b)3 of clubs

Declarer plays a 2♣ in both cases.

Now declarer plays J♠, partner plays the 5 declarer plays the Q and you win it (let's say, even if it's not the best).
What should partner's club signal mean ?
What do you play now ?

(it's matchpoints and random opps, but please comment if it changes at imps and/or vs good opps)

[CSGibson]

This is impossible to answer without knowing what you and your partner have discussed in terms of defensive signals. If you are asking about what it means in my methods (I use obvious shift attitude signals in conjunction with R Smith echo), a high club would indicate that partner had a good card in hearts that he wanted to show me, so I'd switch to a heart. If you are asking what a high card means playing standard carding, I'd say that it is encouraging a club continuation. If you ask what a high card means playing UDCA, I'd say that it is discouraging a club continuation.

There is really no way that a competent player like yourself would know less well what your defensive carding should mean than random players on BBO with no knowledge of your prior agreements and history.

[bluecalm]

I am sorry for unclear question. I mean: "what is the best agreement here?"

Quote

a high club would indicate that partner had a good card in hearts that he wanted to show me

I am interested in details. What is "good card" is it A or K ? or could be Q ?
What would small club show ? Just lack of good heart card ? Why hearts and not diamonds ? etc.

[CSGibson]

bluecalm, on 2012-February-21, 17:29, said:

I am sorry for unclear question. I mean: "what is the best agreement here?"



I am interested in details. What is "good card" is it A or K ? or could be Q ?
What would small club show ? Just lack of good heart card ? Why hearts and not diamonds ? etc.

generally it would be an A or K, but sometimes a Q in context (like if A or K is in dummy)

Our rule for determining the obvious shift suit in an auction where we haven't bid is that when 3 small hits in dummy, that's the obvious shift suit (if two suits of 3 small hit, then the lower ranking of the two is the obvious shift suit), so that's why hearts & not diamonds. If the hearts were Qxx, though, the diamond would be the obvious shift suit. There are more rules, but if you are really interested in obvious shift carding, you should get the Granovetter's book "A Switch in Time"

A small card would indicate no desire to shift to the obvious shift suit, either because partner wants clubs continued, or just because he can't stand that shift. Attitude towards clubs is clarified with the reverse smith echo at trick 2 or 3.

I find the declarer's play of overtaking the spade interesting - he appears to want to be in his hand for some reason, and I can't figure out what that would be other than to finesse in clubs, but based on that alone I'd be inclined to switch to a heart now.

[bluecalm]

Quote

There are more rules, but if you are really interested in obvious shift carding, you should get the Granovetter's book "A Switch in Time"

I've read it but I saw many pairs playing different rules.
For example Zia-Rosenberg play: "2-3-4 card suit with least amount of A's/K's/Q's otherwise back to suit preference".
I just wonder what people play here. I gave simple attitude when playing that hand but it was without much agreements. My instinct is that count is "standard" but I prefer to ask just ask people

ALso I suspect this is not obvious shift situation for everybody, even for pairs sometimes employing the signal.
I mean, AKQ would be obvious OS situation but AK ?

[CSGibson]

bluecalm, on 2012-February-21, 17:46, said:

ALso I suspect this is not obvious shift situation for everybody, even for pairs sometimes employing the signal.
I mean, AKQ would be obvious OS situation but AK ?

This is how our partnership determines whether it is an obvious shift situation: Partner has faced his lead, and 3rd hand's card isn't forced. In other words, if you play obvious shift, this is clearly an obvious shift situation. If you don't, this isn't.

[Fluffy]

I´m pretty sure I would take the signal as encouraging with ♣Q

[gnasher]

Fluffy, on 2012-February-21, 18:20, said:

I´m pretty sure I would take the signal as encouraging with ♣Q

Me too. I think partner might also encourage if he had nothing in either red suit.

[FrancesHinden]

Fluffy, on 2012-February-21, 18:20, said:

I´m pretty sure I would take the signal as encouraging with ♣Q

Me too. Or at least not suggesting a switch.

[TimG]

gnasher, on 2012-February-22, 03:29, said:

Me too. I think partner might also encourage if he had nothing in either red suit.

I think this is right: you don't need to be playing Obvious Shift to consider a shift when signalling attitude.

[FrancesHinden]

p.s. whatever club partner plays at trick 1, I'm tempted by a second trump having won the king anyway.

[bluecalm]

Ok, I played a 3 as attitude and partner read it as such and continued clubs.
Declarer had: AQxxx Ax x 87xxx and hearts needed to be opened to prevent -620.
I had: x Qxxx AKxxx Q73

I think his play was good and there wasn't much we could do. I am guess I am just result oriented after letting this ridiculous game make

[gnasher]

Quote

there wasn't much we could do

There's a lot to be said for leading a long suit.

[ahydra]

It's hard to see how continuing clubs would gain here given dummy's K. The C3 is fair enough but why not switch at trick 3 to a diamond in the hope partner has the A and can play a heart through, or that partner has the K to establish a trick.

How did you and declarer both have the C7?

ahydra

[bluecalm]

Quote

There's a lot to be said for leading a long suit.

I think club lead is the best. In general leading short suits is better than leading long suits against suit contracts. One of the thing "experts" got wrong for a long time.

Quote

It's hard to see how continuing clubs would gain here given dummy's K. The C3 is fair enough but why not switch at trick 3 to a diamond in the hope partner has the A and can play a heart through

I am not saying switch is bad but it could definitely lose. For one thing declarer could have AKx. Afterall he bid 4S, it seems partner doesn't have that many points.

Quote

How did you and declarer both have the C7?

The chances are I mistyped the spots

[gnasher]

bluecalm, on 2012-February-23, 06:26, said:

In general leading short suits is better than leading long suits against suit contracts.

That's an interesting assertion. What evidence do you have for this?

[bluecalm]

I can't offer you anything specific. I spent some time analyzing this (doing simuls and observing how the best players play).
I feel quite strongly about it but I can't see how I could "prove" it.

[dake50]

I can't offer you anything specific. I spent some time analyzing this (doing simuls and observing how the best players play).
I feel quite strongly about it but I can't see how I could "prove" it. bluecalm
***
Agree gnasher. My aspect is more generally when
to diverge from a NT lead against this suit contract.

[akhare]

I am late to the thread, but my preferred signalling methods are similar to CSGibson's. In this case, the tie for the OS goes to the lower of the two red suit and so pard's discouraging signal would strongly encourage a switch to ♦.

In this case, setting requires partner to accurately know the ♦ count when we switch to that suit after winning K♠ (because trying to cash in the second ♦ gives up the tempo). Alternatively, we can play DQ from hand with pard presumably giving count, but it seems like an improbable defence and besides declarer might very well hold the DA and duck the trick.

It seems that the above is a much more difficult problem to solve since the third best ♦8 doesn't convey the length in time and besides, the ♦8 could very well be from 8XX.

[JLOGIC]

I think a club lead is automatic fwiw. I do not know about the whole "short suit > long suit" thing as a blanket rule but I do think that when we have very horrible red suit holdings to lead from into a strong hand, a lot of points, an attractive club holding (a sequence), and a likely trump entry where we can get a ruff later on a good day, it is unfathomable to me to not lead a club.

I am also in the "partner will give attitude on the first trick" camp.

Quote

Now declarer plays J♠, partner plays the 5 declarer plays the Q and you win it (let's say, even if it's not the best).

Quote

I think his play was good and there wasn't much we could do.

Huh? Your partner could not get the information needed in 1 signal, but you do not even consider that he might have made an error by failing to get a second? It may seem that it is not definitely right to duck on this hand since you open yourself up to the possibility of spade to the ace, club to the king, spade and an endplay. But even then, I think declarer would need AQxxx AQ AKx xxx. If he has that, you are getting endplayed anyways in diamonds. The other reason to not duck would be if the loss of tempo was critical, but if you are going to win the trump and play a club anyways, then the loss of tempo cannot be relevant since you're already giving up the tempo. For instance, if declarer has AQxxx Axx A 8xxx somehow (lol), yes you would have had to win the spade and play a heart, and now after ducking they can pitch a heart and ruff a heart, but that is irrelevant since you are not comparing ducking to winning and shifting to a heart.

I contend that winning the spade and playing a club is a huge error compared to ducking the spade. Look what happens on this hand, you duck the spade, declarer plays another spade and partner encourages diamonds. Now if declarer wins and drive the club, you signal for hearts. Your partner either cashes a high diamond or plays a heart immediately, either way the count in the red suit is clarified and you can ruff in on the club and cash your heart.

Alternatively, declarer runs the spade around to you. You shift to a diamond. Partner shifts to a heart. Declarer pulls trumps and drives the club, you pitch some kind of diamond count, etc, you should have no problems cashing out correctly. Maybe partner would have to use his brain a little to shift to a heart, but luckily you played the S8 for him in case he didnt wanna think

I do not think this is a resulting analysis, I'm not saying you get every hand right this way, and I would guess that obvious shift is better than attitude on this specific deal even though I would play attitude, but I do think that ducking the spade follows general bridge principles "if you don't know what to play when you win the trick, consider ducking it and getting a signal from partner." Even if it wasn't a situation where partner was discarding, you would get to see whether he low highed or high lowed in trumps. Sometimes you're at a guess after 1 signal, but you rarely are after 2. There are legit reasons for not ducking tricks but if you're going to play a club anyways it seems like ducking will not cost.