Help
I really like to play attitude vs NT. I play odd-even vs suits (similar to 3rd and 5th) but with less conviction. However im thinking about playing odd-even everytime declarer show 2 or 3 in the suit that im leading.
(1NT)--(2C)
(2D)---(3Nt)
with K875 in a M, leading the 8 to suggest even number and my partner will know if declarer has 2 or 3 and that ive got exactly 4, but he wont know if my suit is good or not playing attitude i would normally lead the 7 (but sometimes the 5 if ive got little on the side)
With K8753 (att lead the 3) or K83 (att lead the 8) ill lead the 3 also giving partner exact count (if he see the 2) the same way as 3rd and 5th leader would in a suit contract.
I also see the advantage that maybe you will get a quicker full count of the hand.
It does have the disadvantage of sometimes waisting a useful spot when you lead from 4 card suit.
Page 1 of 1
Odd even against NT only when declarer showed 2 or 3 in the suit.
#1
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,465
- Joined: 2006-January-07
- Location:Montreal Canada
- Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.
Posted 2013-July-10, 09:33
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#2
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 7,786
- Joined: 2004-September-05
- Gender:Male
- Location:Galloway NJ USA
-
Interests:Bridge, Poker, participatory and spectator sports.
Occupation - Tax Attorney in Atlantic City, NJ.
Posted 2013-July-10, 11:38
Where to begin.
OK. First, general principals. It is usually correct to determine what suit to lead based on the auction and your hand rather than the specific card holdings in each suit in your hand. Obviously, there are exceptions, but that is a basic principal
Once you determine which suit to lead, you are faced with determining the correct card in the suit to lead. In your system, all is well if you have a spot card that matches the parity (odd or even) of your holding. If not, or if the card that matches the parity of your holding is one you can not afford to lead, you are stuck. So, you hesitate. This creates ethical issues - issues similar to players who used to play odd/even discards at every opportunity during a hand until that carding method was banned.
I would advise against employing such a carding method.
OK. First, general principals. It is usually correct to determine what suit to lead based on the auction and your hand rather than the specific card holdings in each suit in your hand. Obviously, there are exceptions, but that is a basic principal
Once you determine which suit to lead, you are faced with determining the correct card in the suit to lead. In your system, all is well if you have a spot card that matches the parity (odd or even) of your holding. If not, or if the card that matches the parity of your holding is one you can not afford to lead, you are stuck. So, you hesitate. This creates ethical issues - issues similar to players who used to play odd/even discards at every opportunity during a hand until that carding method was banned.
I would advise against employing such a carding method.
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 3,465
- Joined: 2006-January-07
- Location:Montreal Canada
- Interests:All games. i really mean all of them.
Posted 2013-July-10, 13:45
I probably misexplained, Odd-even lead (at first trick only) is leading lowest from odd number and highest you can afford from even number it has nothing to do with the card itself. Parity leads is probably the correct name.
Q973 lead 7
Q9753 = 3.
Its like 3rd and 5th except when you have Q874 you lead the 8 you lose the rule of ten but leads are sometimes clearer. This is not compatible with top of nothing or MUD.
I did find this
http://www.davidjwei...eatTrickOne.htm
Q973 lead 7
Q9753 = 3.
Its like 3rd and 5th except when you have Q874 you lead the 8 you lose the rule of ten but leads are sometimes clearer. This is not compatible with top of nothing or MUD.
I did find this
http://www.davidjwei...eatTrickOne.htm
From Psych "I mean, Gus and I never see eye-to-eye on work stuff.
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
For instance, he doesn't like being used as a human shield when we're being shot at.
I happen to think it's a very noble way to meet one's maker, especially for a guy like him.
Bottom line is we never let that difference of opinion interfere with anything."
#4
- Alchemist
-
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 1,764
- Joined: 2004-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Beside a little lake in northwestern Montana
- Interests:Creator of the 'grbbridge' LaTeX typesetting package.
Posted 2013-July-10, 19:17
David Weiss is a (the?) big proponent of the method. His defense problem books feature it in action. Hard but thought-provokiing books, whether you like the method or not.
I think it's an interesting idea to use it vs NT when declarer is known to be short. I wonder whether it actually comes up much. May have to keep an eye out this weekend and see if there are any hands where it would apply.
I think it's an interesting idea to use it vs NT when declarer is known to be short. I wonder whether it actually comes up much. May have to keep an eye out this weekend and see if there are any hands where it would apply.
Page 1 of 1