Lavinthal Discards
#1
Posted 2004-October-29, 19:27
What do you think of them?
Peter
#2
Posted 2004-October-29, 21:34
i think it's still a very good defensive treatment and i certainly think it will improve your defense
#3
Posted 2004-October-29, 23:35
i play both lavintal and italian, both have the hands that fit them better, i also played italian vs trump and lav vs NT like luke , which make some sense.
In both system you will somtimes prefer or have to discard differently then what the system says, i think the way to mesure between these system effectivness is both to count how many times you wont have an easy signaling card, but also and not less importent, is how easy it is for you to escape safly when that hapend.
The hard case for lavintal is when you got a long suit, you want this suit, but you dont mind throwing some of its cards, the hard case of italian either same as before but you have no odd cards of that long suit, or you dont have an even card to discard which suits ur signaling, usually this mean you ur small cards in the suit you dont want are odds numbers.
The resson to choose different system vs NT/suit is in suit you will many times be able to discard from your long and good suit, sicne you cant expect to make all the suit (it will eventually be ruffed) , while in NT it wont be ruffed and any low card can be another trick.
#4
Posted 2004-October-30, 01:59
My quick survey suggests you should play what you feel most comfortable playing, there is no method that is intrinsically better.
Of course, most of the players on these teams know where all the cards are at trick 2 anyhow so signalling is less important for them
I used to play Lavinthal (aka McKenny) but switched to odd/even as it's easier to understand the signal.
As Ron Klinger (Australia) said, there is a lot of value in not wasting brain cells understanding your partner's discards so you can spend your energy in other areas.
p
#5
Posted 2004-October-30, 02:36
First discard only - odd encourages, even is McKenney. Otherwise udca
Also suggest you look at Slawinski's "Combine Leads"
Apart from that best way to improve defence is to count and more count
#6
Posted 2004-October-30, 05:27
The_Hog, on Oct 30 2004, 09:36 PM, said:
First discard only - odd encourages, even is McKenney. Otherwise udca
Also suggest you look at Slawinski's "Combine Leads"
Apart from that best way to improve defence is to count and more count
I agree with your
"Apart from that best way to improve defence is to count and more count" comment Ron - and I can play standard upsidedown revolving AND Lavinthal discards BUT my "senior" brain seems unable to understand o/e discards
Playing against systems which do NOT rate red or yellow dots on ABF system cards in OZ ( which is what we mainly play against) and using a combination of count signals and revolving discards we find we defend reasonably well - BUT against EXPERT and WORLD CLASS players I am sure we would NEVER be in the race
#7
Posted 2004-October-30, 12:12
luke warm, on Oct 29 2004, 09:34 PM, said:
i think it's still a very good defensive treatment and i certainly think it will improve your defense
try combining the two.
odd discard = encourage
even discard = lavinthal
#8
Posted 2004-October-30, 12:59
scoob, on Oct 30 2004, 01:12 PM, said:
luke warm, on Oct 29 2004, 09:34 PM, said:
i think it's still a very good defensive treatment and i certainly think it will improve your defense
try combining the two.
odd discard = encourage
even discard = lavinthal
what you call combining the two is called italian first discard. (some call it roman discards)
#9
Posted 2004-October-30, 17:18
- easy in the sense that I don't find myself having to ponder over partner's or my own discards.
This post has been edited by Rebound: 2004-October-30, 17:20
#10
Posted 2004-October-31, 08:09
#11
Posted 2004-October-31, 08:51
I guess it's just my own inability, but I can communicate more nuances with udca.
#12
Posted 2004-October-31, 09:05
cherdano, on Oct 31 2004, 09:51 AM, said:
I guess it's just my own inability, but I can communicate more nuances with udca.
Its not enough to know the systems ,you need to learn how to use them, for example if you dont care about the suit, you can signal you want the suit which you oviously dont, also there could be acase for intermidiate cards.
#13
Posted 2004-November-01, 14:13
I think Lavithal discards are great. I'll even claim they are the best of the three most common in my area, standard, odd/even, & lavithal. I'll give a VERY simplified waterdown reason for why.
With standard I don't think you can paint enough of a picture for partner on the defense. Your one card usually ends up saying don't lead this suit, which means partner needs to figure out which suit to lead. I actually don't think this is a huge problem.
Odd/even is way to clear to everyone at the table. Not just your partner, but declarer as well.
Lavithal, like Goldie Locks said, is just right. It has the clarity of Odd/even and less guess work for partner then standard. The key reasoning is you get to discard in a suit you don't want, which usually means partner is protecting it. If partner is potecting the suit, it usually means they have longer then then declarer, which means it is easier for partner to read then declarer.
I have one additional reason for liking lavithal, which is you use the same philosophy in many other carding situations. Like when you give partner a ruff, to indicate which suit you want to return to your hand.
I second the thoughts of those that say put your energy into counting.
Brian
#14
Posted 2004-November-01, 14:23
Flame, on Oct 30 2004, 05:35 AM, said:
i play both lavintal and italian, both have the hands that fit them better, i also played italian vs trump and lav vs NT like luke , which make some sense.
In both system you will somtimes prefer or have to discard differently then what the system says, i think the way to mesure between these system effectivness is both to count how many times you wont have an easy signaling card, but also and not less importent, is how easy it is for you to escape safly when that hapend.
The hard case for lavintal is when you got a long suit, you want this suit, but you dont mind throwing some of its cards, the hard case of italian either same as before but you have no odd cards of that long suit, or you dont have an even card to discard which suits ur signaling, usually this mean you ur small cards in the suit you dont want are odds numbers.
The resson to choose different system vs NT/suit is in suit you will many times be able to discard from your long and good suit, sicne you cant expect to make all the suit (it will eventually be ruffed) , while in NT it wont be ruffed and any low card can be another trick.
I am not sure this is the case. With odd/even discard, there are lots of ethical problems.
On the other hand, nothign can replace counting, counting and logical analysis.
#15
Posted 2004-November-01, 14:47
BrianEDuran, on Nov 1 2004, 09:13 PM, said:
So? In defense, I don't think you can't get enough precise information... Declarer may know what suit my partner can play, it doesn't change a thing. Just use your discards wisely and you don't have problems with accuracy. If dummy has nothing in a suit, and you have Kxx, you just signal this suit OFF.
If you discard smart enough, declarer doesn't have any advantages. Say there a AQx in dummy and I have nothing in that suit, my partner may always play that suit. So I'll probably signal for that suit. If my partner leads that suit, he won't give anything away.
That's probably the problem of most players I know: they just show values in a suit. I noticed that this is a wrong treatment. If you discard, just show a suit your partner MAY play, and nothing awful will happen. Every partner I had, I thought them this, and it lead to better results!
#16
Posted 2004-November-01, 14:59
I can't count the number of times a partner has made a disastrous and obviously wrong play late in the hand and claimed, "But your lavinthal (roman) signal asked for that suit."
"The Hog" had it right. Make sure you understand good defense first. Make sure you are counting suits and points. Then the addition of Lavinthal or roman discards can only improve your play.
Lavinthal, Roman and UDCA solve an occassional problem in getting information that standard signals sometimes cannot give.
But the Smith Echo against NT solves a problem that no other signal solves. It tells the partner how the player feels about the suit of the opening lead. When following to the offense's first lead, and only not when count is obviously needed, a high card indicates favor to the opening lead suit, and low indicates non-favor.
#17
Posted 2004-November-01, 15:27
flytoox, on Nov 1 2004, 03:23 PM, said:
What do you mean ? can you give an example ?
#18
Posted 2004-November-01, 15:44
cherdano, on Oct 31 2004, 06:51 AM, said:
I guess it's just my own inability, but I can communicate more nuances with udca.
Yeah I echo this. I 'get' the concept of never pitching from a suit you want led, but declarer is aware of these signals too. I've played touching suit, roman / o/e and just plain udca. I like the latter - I'm not saying that technically its the best, but as far as I'm concerned, suit preference is woven into udca with two intelligent defenders anyway.
By the way, I've never seen a thread about it, but I love the idea of encrypted signals. Amazes me that sponsoring organizations don't allow them. The free-marketers around here should support the idea as well, just as they support ferts and other 'destructive' bidding methods.
#19
Posted 2004-November-01, 16:30
#20
Posted 2004-November-01, 16:47
PriorKnowledge, on Nov 1 2004, 09:59 PM, said:
Actually with o/e discards, playing a high odd card followed by a low odd card in the same suit has this exact meaning...