some carding issues

[kenberg]

I am W, N deals, everyone is vul. The first three calls are 1 , 1 by partner , 2 ! H on my right.

My hand:

QT82 863 KQ92 93

Perhaps a preemptive 3 is right but I went with 2 .  This is followed by 4 on my left, X by partner, all pass.

1   1   2   2 4      X      P      P    P

The opening lead is the A.

J                       T42                       74                         QJT8754           QT82 863 KQ92 93

Uh oh. Partner will not have AK tight, he would start with the K with that holding. If he has AKxx the is about to be ruffed. But most likely he has AKx. In this situation, I like to play that I do not really have an attitude, I have a count. The 9 is either a stiff or a doubleton, the 3, if partner is looking at the 2, is definitely a  stiff. So I play the 9.  Partner shifts. But not to a as I had hoped. He cashes the A. What now? I played, erroneously, the T. The Q would have been better. The J is in clear sight, it just wasn't registering in my head.  So my bad but still, do I really want another ?  He continued with a . Why did I not just play a small at T2 ? Back to T1. That 9 was from the 93. But on another hand it might have been a singleton. If so, I want my ruff. I think a small should encourage partner to give me my, in this case non-existent, ruff. So a small is wrong. The Q is right. So I think.
 
My high at T2 definitely should have been the Q which, among other things, would deny the K. But even with a shift at T3 it's too late. Declarer is 3=6=3=1.  Partner has the stiff K of but there is no need to drop it. On a at T3 it goes to the A, then cash the K throwing the from the board. Ruff the last . Back to hand by ruffing a , ruff a , back with another ruff , ruff the last .  It's true that declarer is now on the board and  the last from the board will be over-ruffed, but that is the third and last trick for the defense.

Should pard have figured out the needed switch at T2?   That's another matter. Partnership issues are what the carding means, then we all do our best.   My at T1 cannot be both count and suit preference, and where I come from it is count.  So he is on his own for finding the shift at T2.   My at T3 should have been the Q. It denies the K, and I think it asks for a . Sure it is too late, but I think that's what it means. And when I don't play the Q, partner can well ask himself why I didn't. So I should have.

His hand:

A9753 K J863 AK6

 

[OliverC]

You didn't say what signals and discards you were playing.


I always tell my students not to be subtle. Subtle signals almost always go unnoticed, except by experts. Hit Partner over the head with your important signals!. As you say, given the stiff Jack of Spades in Dummy, there's no different between the Queen and the 10 in terms of trick-taking potential, so play the Queen, which must be a suit-preference signal for a Diamond.

[kenberg]

Standard carding.

My error potentially was even more troublesome. If we agree, as we do,  that with the T and the Q I should be playing the Q then partner, seeing the T,  is entitled to ask himself why i did not play the Q.  I might not have it, that would explain my not playing it. Or if I have it I might be using the T to encourage another thinking that playing the T rather than the Q will be encouraging, since the Q is suit pref. Although it seems seriously unlikely that i would want another spade. Sometimes we want to force a ruff but here? Anyway, the T was at best pointless and at worst misleading.


Playing the T was simply a lapse. I completely agree the Q is right. As mentioned, once the A is cashed we cannot stop declarer from making 4 but the   continuation gave her a chance to make 5. If she chooses the right sequence she can get her three ruffs and still get back to her hand without being over ruffed, and the drop  partner's stiff K.   Not that it much mattered.  4 X making was half a matchpoint, 4 making 5 would have been no matchpoints.


For partners to get on the same page I think it is important to get these things out. I could probably argue as to whether he should have switched to a at T2. But that's a judgment and reasonable people could disagree. And for that matter i doubt I would have doubled. Again that's a choice. But signals are agreements, and discussion can be very profitable there. My T was careless, not quire the same as a judgment call that went wrong.