BBO Discussion Forums: Tough signalling problem... - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Tough signalling problem...

#1 User is offline   ewj 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 2005-April-12

Posted 2013-March-17, 04:42



E/W were actually vun. Ace of diamonds lead. Does anybody think that they could cash out successfully? What card should West play. Playing UDCA (or any preferred signalling method)
0

#2 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,092
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Mountain Biking

Posted 2013-March-17, 08:29

In standard methods, East has to do some guessing. Playing obvious shift where a discouraging card shows the A or K, the cash out is easy.

In standard of course West has to discourage. Partner's lead is either the stiff A or AKx, so encouraging diamonds is a bad idea.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
1

#3 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-17, 10:05

West should discourage,This should ask for club (its easier when playing OS) now if playing os i would feel confident to play small club (my partner will not enc club without the K), but not playing os i would probably play the A of club
0

#4 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2013-March-17, 10:10

If Pard has the KJ of hearts and/or QJXXX of clubs here, presumably he will encourage the Diamond continuation, so there will be no accidents.

Thus, discouraging diamonds does indeed make it an "obvious" (club) shift situation.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#5 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-March-17, 10:19

A small club can be right even when West prefers hearts. For example, if West has x Axx Q9xxx Jxxx.
0

#6 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-17, 11:00

 PhilKing, on 2013-March-17, 10:19, said:

A small club can be right even when West prefers hearts. For example, if West has x Axx Q9xxx Jxxx.


Yes but can be wrong on many hands where west doesn't have 5 diamonds.
0

#7 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-March-17, 11:25

 WGF_Flame, on 2013-March-17, 11:00, said:

Yes but can be wrong on many hands where west doesn't have 5 diamonds.


I don't understand your point. Do you mean on hands where West encourages diamonds? Give an example.
0

#8 User is offline   akhare 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,261
  • Joined: 2005-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-March-17, 11:32

+1 for OS -- in our methods pard will play D on the lead of the K, implying A/K of .

Deciding how many tricks to cash might be more interesting, but a shift to a third / fifth best club should make it easy for West.
foobar on BBO
0

#9 User is offline   gnasher 

  • Andy Bowles
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,993
  • Joined: 2007-May-03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:London, UK

Posted 2013-March-17, 12:48

 PhilKing, on 2013-March-17, 11:25, said:

I don't understand your point. Do you mean on hands where West encourages diamonds? Give an example.

x Jxx Qxxx QJxxx, with declarer having AQJxxx AKx xx Kx.
... that would still not be conclusive proof, before someone wants to explain that to me as well as if I was a 5 year-old. - gwnn
1

#10 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-March-17, 13:05

 gnasher, on 2013-March-17, 12:48, said:

x Jxx Qxxx QJxxx, with declarer having AQJxxx AKx xx Kx.


I still have no idea what his point is, since when pard encourages, I don't play a low club. :(

A low diamond is not totally clear though, and I'm never playing a heart.
0

#11 User is offline   cherdano 

  • 5555
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 9,519
  • Joined: 2003-September-04
  • Gender:Male

Posted 2013-March-17, 13:23

 WGF_Flame, on 2013-March-17, 11:00, said:

Yes but can be wrong on many hands where west doesn't have 5 diamonds.



 PhilKing, on 2013-March-17, 11:25, said:

I don't understand your point. Do you mean on hands where West encourages diamonds? Give an example.

I, in turn, don't understand your point.
Holding x KJxx xxxx xxxx, I would certainly discourage diamonds.
The easiest way to count losers is to line up the people who talk about loser count, and count them. -Kieran Dyke
0

#12 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-March-17, 13:37

 cherdano, on 2013-March-17, 13:23, said:

I, in turn, don't understand your point.
Holding x KJxx xxxx xxxx, I would certainly discourage diamonds.


Well that's all I was asking for. Without the statement that one would discourage with that hand (and I don't agree - I would play a Rosenbergian fudge card) I was too thick to work out what his point was.
0

#13 User is offline   ewj 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 2005-April-12

Posted 2013-March-17, 13:56

I don't really understand some of these points...I see comments like "I'm never playing a heart"....I mean obviously encouraging diamonds is game over...but how do you suggest a switch from ATx? What does "obvious switch" mean exactly? Discouraging diamonds would mean switching to clubs? And what you'd encourage if you didn't want a club switch?
0

#14 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-17, 14:00

Phil, i didn't mean when partner encourage, I meant when he discourage.
I thought this is what you meant to say, that even if partner discourage thinking that this shows hearts rather then club its still good to play small club. I'm not saying its wrong, just that on some hands it will lose.
0

#15 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-17, 14:08

 ewj, on 2013-March-17, 13:56, said:

I don't really understand some of these points...I see comments like "I'm never playing a heart"....I mean obviously encouraging diamonds is game over...but how do you suggest a switch from ATx? What does "obvious switch" mean exactly? Discouraging diamonds would mean switching to clubs? And what you'd encourage if you didn't want a club switch?


Signalling should never be just about the suit lead, so when you descarage diamond you imply that you want a shift. there are many hands that you cannot tolerate a shift and would therefore encourage the suit lead since it is less damaging than a switch. Obvious shift is a signaling system that the granoveters published in their book, you can read about it on daniel's site. Obvious shift is considered for experts but it actually design to make things simpler so make things simpler that the non expert player will be able to know what his signal mean as he was an expert by simply memorizing a set of rules and more important that his partner will be on the same waves. basically any signal is giving preference between the lead suit and the obvious shift suit which is defined by the set of rules.
0

#16 User is offline   PhilKing 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,240
  • Joined: 2012-June-25

Posted 2013-March-17, 14:18

 WGF_Flame, on 2013-March-17, 14:00, said:

Phil, i didn't mean when partner encourage, I meant when he discourage.
I thought this is what you meant to say, that even if partner discourage thinking that this shows hearts rather then club its still good to play small club. I'm not saying its wrong, just that on some hands it will lose.


Oh, I see. No - if partner encouraged I would continue diamonds.

If partner wants a heart switch, he has to play second lowest from four small playing UDCA hoping I can sniff it out, but I doubt that works here.
0

#17 User is offline   ewj 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 2005-April-12

Posted 2013-March-17, 14:52

 WGF_Flame, on 2013-March-17, 14:08, said:

Signalling should never be just about the suit lead, so when you descarage diamond you imply that you want a shift. there are many hands that you cannot tolerate a shift and would therefore encourage the suit lead since it is less damaging than a switch. Obvious shift is a signaling system that the granoveters published in their book, you can read about it on daniel's site. Obvious shift is considered for experts but it actually design to make things simpler so make things simpler that the non expert player will be able to know what his signal mean as he was an expert by simply memorizing a set of rules and more important that his partner will be on the same waves. basically any signal is giving preference between the lead suit and the obvious shift suit which is defined by the set of rules.


What if you held the ace of instead of the K and J...i.e. a around to the K is no good, while continuing would allow a discard to be established for a ...i.e. need a switch?.. I mean to me a through Qx doesn't look unattractive :P....Obviously appreciate that you can't do everything...if dummy was Kxx Qxx JTxx xxx, what would be the "obvious" switch? A still?
0

#18 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-17, 15:21

 ewj, on 2013-March-17, 14:52, said:

What if you held the ace of instead of the K and J...i.e. a around to the K is no good, while continuing would allow a discard to be established for a ...i.e. need a switch?.. I mean to me a through Qx doesn't look unattractive :P....Obviously appreciate that you can't do everything...if dummy was Kxx Qxx JTxx xxx, what would be the "obvious" switch? A still?


Sometimes you need to do the least damage thing, and if as you say i had the AH and nothing in club, i would enc diamond, but as east after partner enc diamond, im not sure i continue diamond (it could be very bad idea if partner has 3 to the Q, and nothing in Hearts, so probably should play dimaond)

about the hand you gave, 3 small is always the obvious shift first candidate.
0

#19 User is offline   Free 

  • mmm Duvel
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,728
  • Joined: 2003-July-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Belgium
  • Interests:Duvel, Whisky

Posted 2013-March-18, 04:41

I see some fine DD defenses here.
"It may be rude to leave to go to the bathroom, but it's downright stupid to sit there and piss yourself" - blackshoe
0

#20 User is offline   WGF_Flame 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 2003-December-19

Posted 2013-March-18, 05:28

 Free, on 2013-March-18, 04:41, said:

I see some fine DD defenses here.


Playing OS the defense is pretty clear here, i would make it at the table with a regular partner.
0

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users