[miamijd]

bluenikki, on 2020-July-27, 15:23, said:

No no a thousand times no.

When the queen is not in dummy, encouragement shows the queen.

You apparently are a partner who needs to be re-educated by underleads.

Your signalling strategy needs an "attitude" adjustment. Come to think of it, you might benefit from one, too.

[bluenikki]

miamijd, on 2020-July-27, 18:21, said:

Your signalling strategy needs an "attitude" adjustment. Come to think of it, you might benefit from one, too.

My signalling strategy is not something I made up. I learned it from books. Getting a 3rd round ruff is great if the contract is 5.

Otherwise, it sets up a winner for declarer he can't develop himself.

[bluenikki]

crapdown4, on 2020-July-27, 17:18, said:

That statement is fundamentally wrong.

First of all, "encouragement" never shows any particular card. It shows A DESIRE FOR PARTNER TO CONTINUE THE SUIT. This could be because the leader's partner has the Queen OR can ruff the third round.

If the leader's partner does not have the Queen and CANNOT ruff the third round, then he plays low to discourage. This is to prevent the Queen from being established in declarer's hand. This would be particularly useful if the opening leader had, say, AKJx.

With Qxx, the leader's partner would play his highest spot card to encourage. This means that the opening leader will not know immediately WHY partner is encouraging. But it's simple. Just play the other top honor and a third round. Partner will win the third round, one way or another.

If you follow the "rule" espoused by bluenikki, you'll never get a third round ruff when you have a doubleton, because you'll always be playing low (lacking the Queen). That can lead to letting a lot of contracts that should go down making.

There is no bar to opening leader deciding the best chance is to try for the ruff.

Especially if the contract is 5.

[bluenikki]

Stephen Tu, on 2020-July-27, 17:14, said:

You seem to be playing a different signalling strategy than 99.9% of bridge players.
The rest of us play an attitude signal (either high = encourage = so called "standard", or low card = encourage = "upside-down"), suggests partner to continue with the other high honor, and suggests *either* doubleton looking for a ruff *or* the Q and desire to contiinue the suit *or* a strong idea that shifting will be much worse than just continuing.

Find a book on defense sometimes, any book, read what it says about such situations.
The time you can safely underlead is when partner plays the Queen under your honor from AKx(xx), showing QJ or stiff Q. Or if partner encourages,has shown length in the suit during the auction or otherwise simply cannot have doubleton and you need him in at trick 2 for some reason or another.


What do you do if you actually do have a doubleton and want a ruff? Low? What if you have neither doubleton nor Q and want partner to shift? It seems your strategy either gives up on ruffing or gives up on suggesting a different suit.

A different strategy from 99.9% of badly taught players maybe.

What all of you overlook is that in the vast majority of cases it is wrong to cash the second high honor even if partner can ruff. The point of the equal honor signal is that the leader can underlead at trick 2 and retain control of the suit.

[smerriman]

You lead from AKxxx, and see xxx in dummy. When partner has xx, which 'vast majority' of cases do you not want to give him a ruff?

It is when partner plays low with both xx and xxx, as per your suggestion, when you completely lose, since you can't "try for a ruff anyway" without setting up declarer's queen for free in the latter case.

[Stephen Tu]

bluenikki, on 2020-July-27, 19:27, said:

My signalling strategy is not something I made up. I learned it from books. Getting a 3rd round ruff is great if the contract is 5.

Otherwise, it sets up a winner for declarer he can't develop himself.

Which book title by which author?

Getting a third round ruff also works quite well in lower contracts when you have additional tricks beyond these 3 and you need this ruff to set the contract.

If you have AKxx, dummy xxx, declarer QJT9, declarer can set up the 2 winners by leading the suit himself later after trumps are drawn. If you force a ruff you hold declarer to one winner in the suit, and gain a trick unless this kills a natural trump trick from partner. Plus, if you have a quick entry in a side suit, you can potentially profitably lead the 4th round of the suit, which can promote a trump trick for partner if they can overruff dummy or force dummy to expend a high honor leading to an eventual additional trump loser. Or just to force declarer to ruff high and remove his ability to pitch a loser in another suit on this one.

That's 2 tricks, a ruff, a side entry, and a trump promo, that's enough to beat a 3 level contract.

[miamijd]

bluenikki, on 2020-July-27, 19:27, said:

My signalling strategy is not something I made up. I learned it from books. Getting a 3rd round ruff is great if the contract is 5.

Otherwise, it sets up a winner for declarer he can't develop himself.

I think you should stop reading books by Gerard Cohen.

(RIP, G-man)

[Stephen Tu]

smerriman, on 2020-July-27, 19:43, said:

You lead from AKxxx, and see xxx in dummy. When partner has xx, which 'vast majority' of cases do you not want to give him a ruff?

It is when partner plays low with both xx and xxx, as per your suggestion, when you completely lose, since you can't "try for a ruff anyway" without setting up declarer's queen for free in the latter case.

This one is a somewhat bad example as you gave leader too many cards, though I guess it depends on how high your spots are compared to dummy's spots. In this case if partner has 3 declarer's Q will drop. The main problem here is whether you need to lead the third round of the suit (hoping partner ruffs declarer's J winner), or if partner will follow with the J and declarer ruffs, in which case you might have missed a tempo to do something else that was necessary.
Better example is perhaps something like holding AKTx with xxx in dummy. If partner has Jxx, you definitely need to get him in to lead through to take 3 tricks in this suit. But if partner has 2, it might be necessary to give him a ruff here to collect 3 tricks.

Or maybe AKxxx with dummy Jxx. If partner has doubleton, ruff is often necessary else declarer scores a trick eventually. But if partner has 3 small, trying to play a 2nd round would drop declarer's Q and establish the J for a pitch somewhere which could often be bad, you have to switch and set up your winner elsewhere before declarer sets up the J himself.

[helene_t]

Since 3♥ is forcing, the choice is between double and pass.

If you double, you'll have to pass a 3♣ or 3♦ rebid, so whether this is safe or not depends a bit on your agreements. You don't want to play 3♦ in a 5-1 fit. If partner is supposed to rebid 2NT with any balanced hand and only rebid 3♦ with a 6-card suit, it would make it a bit safer. Also, if partner would rather bid 3♥ on a 3-card suit than 3♦ on a 5-card suit, double is quite safe as partner is unlikely to have [3253] given that you have four spades yourself.

If you pass, it helps to have the (modern?) agreement that opener is supposed to double with almost any hand with shortness in spades, even if minimum. Assuming that you play strong notrump, partner will pass primarily with balanced 12-14 hands, and defending 2♠ undoubled is fine in that case.

I would normally pass with this hand, but I can imagine doubling with certain specific partnership agreements. In particular, I would double if we play a weak nt 5-card majors system.

[crapdown4]

Stephen Tu, on 2020-July-27, 20:08, said:

Which book title by which author?

Getting a third round ruff also works quite well in lower contracts when you have additional tricks beyond these 3 and you need this ruff to set the contract.

If you have AKxx, dummy xxx, declarer QJT9, declarer can set up the 2 winners by leading the suit himself later after trumps are drawn. If you force a ruff you hold declarer to one winner in the suit, and gain a trick unless this kills a natural trump trick from partner. Plus, if you have a quick entry in a side suit, you can potentially profitably lead the 4th round of the suit, which can promote a trump trick for partner if they can overruff dummy or force dummy to expend a high honor leading to an eventual additional trump loser. Or just to force declarer to ruff high and remove his ability to pitch a loser in another suit on this one.

That's 2 tricks, a ruff, a side entry, and a trump promo, that's enough to beat a 3 level contract.

There are several bridge comic books, and I've had partners who obviously had read all of them.

[crapdown4]

bluenikki, on 2020-July-27, 19:27, said:

My signalling strategy is not something I made up. I learned it from books. Getting a 3rd round ruff is great if the contract is 5.

Otherwise, it sets up a winner for declarer he can't develop himself.

Misreading a book is not "learning."

How does giving your partner a third round ruff "set up a winner for declarer," in any scenario? In point of fact, it might PREVENT declarer from eventually developing a winner in that suit...for instance, if he had QJx opposite xxx (after you've led the A or K from AK).

What you're failing to understand is that partner's first signal is ATTITUDE...he wants you to continue the suit for one of two reasons: he has a doubleton or he has the Queen. Play two more rounds of the suit and you'll find out which. He should play small from xxx (or Jxx), which would show both count AND attitude. From xxxx, he would also play small, which would tell you he is not interested in seeing you continue the suit.

He could also play high with xxx or xxxx if he has a yarborough and thinks that cashing your other high honor would be the best course of action (rather than him switching and underleading a Q or something like that).

[crapdown4]

helene_t, on 2020-July-27, 20:39, said:

Since 3♥ is forcing, the choice is between double and pass.

If you double, you'll have to pass a 3♣ or 3♦ rebid, so whether this is safe or not depends a bit on your agreements. You don't want to play 3♦ in a 5-1 fit. If partner is supposed to rebid 2NT with any balanced hand and only rebid 3♦ with a 6-card suit, it would make it a bit safer. Also, if partner would rather bid 3♥ on a 3-card suit than 3♦ on a 5-card suit, double is quite safe as partner is unlikely to have [3253] given that you have four spades yourself.

If you pass, it helps to have the (modern?) agreement that opener is supposed to double with almost any hand with shortness in spades, even if minimum. Assuming that you play strong notrump, partner will pass primarily with balanced 12-14 hands, and defending 2♠ undoubled is fine in that case.

I would normally pass with this hand, but I can imagine doubling with certain specific partnership agreements. In particular, I would double if we play a weak nt 5-card majors system.

The fact that both double and 3H could lead to awful contracts steers me toward 2NT. That, or (eventually) 3NT, is unlikely to be an absurd contract. The only issue is missing a 5-3 heart fit, but I'm less enthusiastic about playing suit contracts when the opponents have preempted---more bad trump breaks than normal.

[helene_t]

crapdown4, on 2020-July-27, 21:48, said:

The fact that both double and 3H could lead to awful contracts steers me toward 2NT. That, or (eventually) 3NT, is unlikely to be an absurd contract. The only issue is missing a 5-3 heart fit, but I'm less enthusiastic about playing suit contracts when the opponents have preempted---more bad trump breaks than normal.

Yes good point, 2NT is maybe the best choice. I should certainly have included it as an option.