[kgr]

MP's

---

MP's
Partner leads ♣A (This shows an even number if he also has the ♣K)
You play obvious switch: A low ♣ denies the ♠A, a high ♣ promises the ♠A.
Is it best to play low or high?

[sfi]

Low, so partner knows whether the SK is an entry or not.

[kgr]

sfi, on 2012-May-02, 16:31, said:

Low, so partner knows whether the SK is an entry or not.

Partner does not know that dummy needs ♠K as entry (that I have the ♦A).
I think it is best that partner switches to ♠, but I'm not sure when that is most likely.

[gszes]

p has to have decent clubs to attack with
that suit vs spades. You know continuing clubs
is probably a bad idea. If you tell p you have
the spade A p may feel they have time to try
clubs first and then fall back on spades. We
cannot see through the backs of the cards but
it seems more likely p will try to eliminate the
spade K if we deny the A vs saying we have it.

[sfi]

kgr, on 2012-May-03, 08:52, said:

Partner does not know that dummy needs ♠K as entry (that I have the ♦A).
I think it is best that partner switches to ♠, but I'm not sure when that is most likely.

True, but it will be an important concern in partner's thinking. Your values are limited and will not include two aces, so if you show the SA then partner can count 7 diamond tricks for declarer unless the suit is blocked and is likely to look for desperate measures. If you don't show it, then they can hope you have the DA and will knock out dummy's entry.

Unless it's clear that partner will do the right thing when you give them false information, it's generally best not to lie to them at trick one. Here showing the SA gives a false picture and it looks less likely that they will switch to spades when you do so.

[kgr]

Partner knows I don't have much and maybe he started from ♣AKJxxx or even ♣AQJ9xx with a side entry. If I play small then he hopes I have a high club (Q, T) or a 3-card.
If I play high he will maybe return a high ♠ hoping that I can return a club through declarer?

[Bbradley62]

Did you post this question because you want to know what others think, or so you could defend your decision to misinform your partner?

[kgr]

Bbradley62, on 2012-May-03, 14:24, said:

Did you post this question because you want to know what others think, or so you could defend your decision to misinform your partner?

Did you post this question because you want to know why I posted the question, or you want to pretend that I'm trying to defend my decision?

[kgr]

Thank you all for your thoughts. This was the full hand:

MP's

---

MP's
Partner leads ♣A (This shows an even number if he also has the ♣K)
You play obvious switch: A low ♣ denies the ♠A, a high ♣ promises the ♠A.
I played the ♣2 and partner continued with the ♣Q.

[Antrax]

Leading the ♣A from that holding basically means he thinks W is a moron, no? It seems like either a spade or the ♣Q (assuming it doesn't deny the A in your methods) would've been better leads.

[sfi]

kgr, on 2012-May-03, 16:14, said:

I played the ♣2 and partner continued with the ♣Q.

Given partner's first two cards, I don't think your signalling methods were the issue on this particular hand.

[Fluffy]

How do I signal with a club honnor?

[phil_20686]

I think north should have bet on southholding a diamond stop, and led the club Q.

[kgr]

Fluffy, on 2012-May-04, 04:09, said:

How do I signal with a club honnor?

You cannot signal a club honnor if playing obvious switch. You can only signal the ♠A/K

[kgr]

sfi, on 2012-May-04, 04:01, said:

Given partner's first two cards, I don't think your signalling methods were the issue on this particular hand.

Maybe not, but I simply wondered if I should have done better.
in fact..
- I played the ♣2 without too much thinking and when the ♣2 hit the table I wondered if I would have done better to play the high ♣ to pretend I had ♠A
- At the end of the evening I was convinced that this was my worst play of the evening.
- When I was rethinking this in my bed, I wondered if it was really that bad.
- The next day I wasn't sure if low or high club was best play.
...and so I posted the question here
(to be honest: I'm still not convinced that low is better than high)

[Antrax]

kgr, on 2012-May-04, 08:50, said:

You cannot signal a club honnor if playing obvious switch. You can only signal the ♠A/K

Are you sure? I thought the meaning of your signal is whether you prefer the led suit over the OS suit. In this case, spades. So an encouraging signal doesn't necessarily tell partner to continue clubs (and indeed he shouldn't, since you can't possibly have the K), just tell partner you don't want a spade switch.
Do you have stricter / different meanings, playing OS?

[kgr]

Antrax, on 2012-May-04, 10:35, said:

Are you sure? I thought the meaning of your signal is whether you prefer the led suit over the OS suit. In this case, spades. So an encouraging signal doesn't necessarily tell partner to continue clubs (and indeed he shouldn't, since you can't possibly have the K), just tell partner you don't want a spade switch.
Do you have stricter / different meanings, playing OS?

We play that OS shows A or K in the OS-suit (or Q behind AJ, KJ). It does not necessarily say that we want the switch. Partner will have to look at his hand and decide what is best.
Rem: With a previous partner I had the explicit agreement that we should lie about the OS if we see that continuation of the opening suit is bad and see that opening leader will not be able to see it. I don't have that explicit agreement now, but I think it is logic.
BTW: Can't I have the Club K iso D A? NT-bidder explicitly asked what 1C was before he bid NT, so it is not sure that he has a stop.

[Zelandakh]

kgr, on 2012-May-05, 04:34, said:

We play that OS shows A or K in the OS-suit (or Q behind AJ, KJ). It does not necessarily say that we want the switch. Partner will have to look at his hand and decide what is best.

This sounds like a great way to save declarer a 2-way guess, or to isolate the position of a guard for a squeeze. Any method that systematically tells declarer where the queen is in a suit that might be AJ opposite KT when all we actually need is for partner to continue the suit led has to be pretty badly flawed. I might even be somewhat upset if my opponents were playing such a method and did not tell me at the start of the round (and did not have a CC).