Most of you will run across this convention sooner or later. One of you asked me to put it on our card. I pretty violently refused that request. Here's why.
First off, this convention is seriously misnamed. It should not be called "A asks for attitude, K asks for count". Rather, this convention should be named (relatively nice) "A requires attitude and K requires count". Or, (not so nice) "A demands attitude and K demands count". Or, my true feeling "the Control Freak Convention".
Now that I've elicited your emotion, let's get to bringing forth some of your bridge logic. Presumably, this convention allows opening leader holding the A/K of a suit to pick a high honor and require partner to signal according to his/her presumed needs. Trouble is 1) opening leader will rarely know from the bidding what his/her needs are and 2) opening leader isn't always dealt the A/K of a suit, rather KQ(x) or Ax(x) only. And another special case is AK tight.
Here are some clarifications.
1) My partner bid diamonds. I held KQx in the suit. I led the K (having no A choice) and dummy decked xxx. Partner dutifully gave me a count card. Big deal, that's not what I needed to know. I needed to know where the A and the J were. I have the same problem if I had led from Kx. Note this is problematic even if pard hasn't bid the suit.
2) Suppose on some auctions you decide to lead the A from A(x)(x). Remember, partner is required by your convention to give an attitude card but here's the problem with that. Partner will not know if you hold the K so is he/she supposed to give you an atittude card for the K or Q? With standard methods you don't know that either but guesses are much more accurate.
3) With standard methods you can often show partner a doubleton holding. For example if you have agreed to lead A form A/K --holding AK only you would simple reverse that position, leading K form AK. Vice versa leading K from AK. With the above-named method one would not know whether partner were showing a doubleton or merely requiring you to give an attitude vs count card.
Suppose you held the golden suit combination for this method. AKx(x).Here's the problem. Often you would not know what you need from partner until you see the dummy. If dummy shows up with the Q, well you obviously don't need an attitude card. You know the attitude. If dummy shows up with xx, then you need an attitude card for the Q, wishing to know whether partner or declarer held the Q.
So with my expert partners I play thus. If one of us leads a high honor and dummy shows Qx(x)(x), partner gives a count card. If dummy does not show a Q, partner requires to give opening leader an attitude card for the Q.
How does this last treatment differ from the above-named convention? Simple, opening leader is not assuming he/she knows what is needed before seeing dummy. In otherwords he/she waits for one more piece of information to start the D going in the right direction.
Here's a perfect "mess up" using this convention. Opening leader holding Q85,AK954,Q4,J62 heard the auction go (1D) 1H (3D!) 4H, (5D) P (P) X at all nv imps. He decided that before the dummy came down he needed a count card from pard. HK. (side note, I don't know why, perhaps he thought there were a side suit somewhere). At any rate, the dummy decked J76,87,T9872,QT5 and partner dutifully gave him a "count" card from 942,JT3,6,AK8743. Not knowing what to do, opening leader continued hearts. I knew what to do, pitch a spade from dummy and claim down one -100 only. My hand: AKT3,Q62,AKJ53,9. This is clearly a mistake, the second heart should never have been cashed. With me? Partner would have led A or K per agreement. I would have offered the J denying the Q and partner finds a switch. Now the HQ
never sets up for a pitch.
Now, believe it or not, I've played this treatment with partners who have insisted on doing so.(Yes, even I can be that acquiescent). I'm convinced that it "works" when you hold AKQ in a suit and you "know" the attitude for the Q. So in this case, you clearly request a count card from pard. Is this slight feature, not available in standard methods, worth giving up the non-confusing and solid D that other more "traditional" methods provide.
I think not.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Isolde 8500
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Dedicated Players--We're Cool, Too!
Hi all,
I've been meaning to write about this for a long time and the words are finally coming to some kind of coherent order. I've been working with all of you somewhat and I hope that relationship is pretty well established so that some of the information below will come more of an 'aha!' then an ultra shock causing a major myocardial infarct.
I think it would be silly to deny that once one establishes a dedication to this fascinating game of bridge and becomes somewhat successful at it --something significant happens. Although most of us started geek-like we become even more so. Lots of the male players are accomplished attorneys. Lots of the females players are mathematicians dismayed by society to follow that course and 'vent' in this arena. Ask, you'll see that there is some merit to this.
Above that, however, we're human. We laugh and cry and send our sons/daughters in harm's way and are upset by that. We have goals beyond bridge and sometimes we are happy when we achieve them and upset when we don't. However, the latter is hardly noticeable as we practice our passion.
When we come to the table, we come to play. We've studied systems, card combinations, rules, advanced theories. Talk about the plant sale next door, the acquisition of a favorite pet or who is dating whom these days is not what's on our minds. In fact, it's distracting from performing the many analytical skills necessary to bid/play a hand. Please understand when we move the commotion/conversation back to the next hand.
Along with that we play very slowly. It's often important to us whether pard follows with the '2' or the '3' in an off suit. We make high-card and distribution decisions made on such plays. Forgive us if we ask to see the last trick for a long time as it languishes on the table. In general we post mortem 'on scene' very little. Most of the stuff we can talk about between boards, we did years ago. The rest takes much more analytical skill and emotion than what is available during the event. Excuse us if we don't commit to the discussion as to whether five spades was a good save or not. Mostly we know, and we also know if it is field protected.
We routinely call directors and have directors being called on us. It's normal, part of the game and we let the directors do their jobs and quickly get on to the next hand. No particular emotion about feeling guilty or animosity occurs. When we call the director, the person who calls speaks. The directors will then generally ask the others if the situation was explained accurately. Now is the time for others to talk.
In general we allow the opponents the dignity to come to terms with a bad board within their own partnership away from the opposition. So even if we successfully accomplish something, don't expect us to say much. If we screw up, silence is likewise appreciated, i.e. avoid saying 'the diamond was good in dummy' :)
We do love to talk about bridge and happily entertain questions about systems and hands we've played. However, we do that after the event is over for the most part -and we're particularly violent about it with email.--come join us.
It sometimes appears we overzealously ask questions about systems and carding. This is because most of us have thoroughly discussed these issues and just want to know if you have done likewise. We understand the term 'no previous discussion, assume standard' Please don't take it as an affront to your systems, we're just trying to analyze beyond imagine the high card and distribution placements of the cards. Let us be the geeks we are. Expect us to discuss defenses to your new conventions on the fly so we're ready for them.
Most of us have habits acquired over years of learning and growing that may seem foreign to you. For example, when someone asks us to be teammates and we have a commitment to other teammates we merely say 'we're not available'. We know choices about teammates can be as sensitive as choices about events and partnerships. We handle all that with kid gloves because we know there are egos on the line (mainly ours)
Most of us don't get overly excited about a particular event score or win/loss. Sometimes this is in our control (e.g. we got enough rest or nutrition to perform well) or not in our control --(e.g. the cards didn't match our system well --weak nt is a good example). We get much more excited about that one save that worked out well, or the intra finesse play we found or the one hand that matched our system perfectly. So expect conversations to steer in that direction. Major regional and national events are notable exceptions of course.
Often, as seeded players, we get to field comments like: "Man, I've been avoiding playing against you all day.""Oh, now we're really going to get beat up.""Oh, do we have to play against you good players, too." Although to a certain extent we value our commitment to the game and relish in executing it successfully, there isn't one of us who wouldn't temporarily step into your lives and embrace your achievements. We're jealous of the math degree from Stanford, the Public Health awards you've received, the businesses you've established and the careers you've had educating our young folk! Professor emeritus from Annapolis, you've got to be kidding me --Head of the math department at SOU --you've got to be kidding me! Professor of Dentistry at OHSU, you've got to be kidding me. Please be appreciative of that two-board moment we get to enter each other's lives and if by chance we find that slam against you that no one else has, or we take a daring sequence that works, or we force you to play good defense, talk to us about it afterwards. Many times I've played hands against you where later I wished I had had the opportunity to chat. What better resource might you have for your bridge growth.
Above all, we take it as a compliment when someone who is excited about bridge and has potential asks us to play with them. Keep asking, knowing, however that our main commitment is to our own events and partnerships. But please be forgiving if you might on occasion experience a bridge culture shock playing with us. A couple more hands and you'll be right where we are! Trust me on that one. It's infectious. And quite frankly our behavior and demeanor is so religiously practiced that it truly becomes second nature -to us anyway.
Of course there is another salient reason I entered into this discussion. Misunderstandings of others' behavior can lead to isolation --(or much worse) and we all know there are plenty of other reasons more serious than bridge that cause between-person frustrations! See you (smiling with appreciable understanding) at the tables.
Isolde 6322
I've been meaning to write about this for a long time and the words are finally coming to some kind of coherent order. I've been working with all of you somewhat and I hope that relationship is pretty well established so that some of the information below will come more of an 'aha!' then an ultra shock causing a major myocardial infarct.
I think it would be silly to deny that once one establishes a dedication to this fascinating game of bridge and becomes somewhat successful at it --something significant happens. Although most of us started geek-like we become even more so. Lots of the male players are accomplished attorneys. Lots of the females players are mathematicians dismayed by society to follow that course and 'vent' in this arena. Ask, you'll see that there is some merit to this.
Above that, however, we're human. We laugh and cry and send our sons/daughters in harm's way and are upset by that. We have goals beyond bridge and sometimes we are happy when we achieve them and upset when we don't. However, the latter is hardly noticeable as we practice our passion.
When we come to the table, we come to play. We've studied systems, card combinations, rules, advanced theories. Talk about the plant sale next door, the acquisition of a favorite pet or who is dating whom these days is not what's on our minds. In fact, it's distracting from performing the many analytical skills necessary to bid/play a hand. Please understand when we move the commotion/conversation back to the next hand.
Along with that we play very slowly. It's often important to us whether pard follows with the '2' or the '3' in an off suit. We make high-card and distribution decisions made on such plays. Forgive us if we ask to see the last trick for a long time as it languishes on the table. In general we post mortem 'on scene' very little. Most of the stuff we can talk about between boards, we did years ago. The rest takes much more analytical skill and emotion than what is available during the event. Excuse us if we don't commit to the discussion as to whether five spades was a good save or not. Mostly we know, and we also know if it is field protected.
We routinely call directors and have directors being called on us. It's normal, part of the game and we let the directors do their jobs and quickly get on to the next hand. No particular emotion about feeling guilty or animosity occurs. When we call the director, the person who calls speaks. The directors will then generally ask the others if the situation was explained accurately. Now is the time for others to talk.
In general we allow the opponents the dignity to come to terms with a bad board within their own partnership away from the opposition. So even if we successfully accomplish something, don't expect us to say much. If we screw up, silence is likewise appreciated, i.e. avoid saying 'the diamond was good in dummy' :)
We do love to talk about bridge and happily entertain questions about systems and hands we've played. However, we do that after the event is over for the most part -and we're particularly violent about it with email.--come join us.
It sometimes appears we overzealously ask questions about systems and carding. This is because most of us have thoroughly discussed these issues and just want to know if you have done likewise. We understand the term 'no previous discussion, assume standard' Please don't take it as an affront to your systems, we're just trying to analyze beyond imagine the high card and distribution placements of the cards. Let us be the geeks we are. Expect us to discuss defenses to your new conventions on the fly so we're ready for them.
Most of us have habits acquired over years of learning and growing that may seem foreign to you. For example, when someone asks us to be teammates and we have a commitment to other teammates we merely say 'we're not available'. We know choices about teammates can be as sensitive as choices about events and partnerships. We handle all that with kid gloves because we know there are egos on the line (mainly ours)
Most of us don't get overly excited about a particular event score or win/loss. Sometimes this is in our control (e.g. we got enough rest or nutrition to perform well) or not in our control --(e.g. the cards didn't match our system well --weak nt is a good example). We get much more excited about that one save that worked out well, or the intra finesse play we found or the one hand that matched our system perfectly. So expect conversations to steer in that direction. Major regional and national events are notable exceptions of course.
Often, as seeded players, we get to field comments like: "Man, I've been avoiding playing against you all day.""Oh, now we're really going to get beat up.""Oh, do we have to play against you good players, too." Although to a certain extent we value our commitment to the game and relish in executing it successfully, there isn't one of us who wouldn't temporarily step into your lives and embrace your achievements. We're jealous of the math degree from Stanford, the Public Health awards you've received, the businesses you've established and the careers you've had educating our young folk! Professor emeritus from Annapolis, you've got to be kidding me --Head of the math department at SOU --you've got to be kidding me! Professor of Dentistry at OHSU, you've got to be kidding me. Please be appreciative of that two-board moment we get to enter each other's lives and if by chance we find that slam against you that no one else has, or we take a daring sequence that works, or we force you to play good defense, talk to us about it afterwards. Many times I've played hands against you where later I wished I had had the opportunity to chat. What better resource might you have for your bridge growth.
Above all, we take it as a compliment when someone who is excited about bridge and has potential asks us to play with them. Keep asking, knowing, however that our main commitment is to our own events and partnerships. But please be forgiving if you might on occasion experience a bridge culture shock playing with us. A couple more hands and you'll be right where we are! Trust me on that one. It's infectious. And quite frankly our behavior and demeanor is so religiously practiced that it truly becomes second nature -to us anyway.
Of course there is another salient reason I entered into this discussion. Misunderstandings of others' behavior can lead to isolation --(or much worse) and we all know there are plenty of other reasons more serious than bridge that cause between-person frustrations! See you (smiling with appreciable understanding) at the tables.
Isolde 6322
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
