[humilities]

edit: the diagram came out funny - east should be at the top as North is on opening lead and east is dummy

---

We play standard signals.

Opponents have inadvisably sacrificed in 6Dx provided we can get all of our tricks. (rightly or wrongly) North starts with the A then J of hearts to Souths 10 and K (I think we have just set up West's Q for a possible discard).

South continues with the A of clubs. Which is the proper club to play to ensure South continues with a club and not a spade?

1. Is the J strongly encouraging? Or does it promise J10 but no K?
2. Should we play the 10 and not worry about partner thinking we do not have the J? or perhaps the 9?
3. What if North's clubs were KJ1043 ... do the same priniciples apply without the 9?

Thank you for helping with such a basic question.

[SteveMoe]

Great question! - You want to encourage partner's return. If your agreements are standard, then a HIGH card encourages. However the play of an Honor is a special signal that typically denies a higher honor and promises a sequence below the card played. I like to keep the honorcard signal for A, K, Q, and J. It's usually less valuable to show partner 10 9 8 7 .... by discarding a 10. So 10 or 9 can be an encouraging signal. Playing the J here would deny the K for many players.

Since you bid the suit, partner shouldn't have too much doubt about encouragement.

Having raise the question, the holdings you show are good examples why people like to play upside down signals - here a very low card encourages (hence upside down or reverse signals).
The approaches are roughly equivalent except playing standard sometimes we have to "waste" a perfectly good 9 or 10 to encourage. Sometimes that 9 or 10 will take a trick on its own. Upside down allows encouragement with cards that are not winners, and discouragement with high spot cards in a suit we don't expect to exploit.

If for example your ♣s were ♣AJ103, better to encourage with the 3 so you preserve the J and 10 as later round winners.

[Stephen Tu]

 SteveMoe, on 2013-January-09, 09:26, said:

Playing the J here would deny the K for many players.

Do you have any book references for this? I've never seen this recommended other than by you. J shows the ten and denies a higher *touching* honor, the Q, but I've never seen anyone say that it denies a *non-touching* honor. I have Kantar & Root books recommending encouraging signals J from KJT9 and T from QT98.

What's the advantage of showing partner the JT here, with declarer having the KQ? Why not just discourage not holding the K for the same effect?

[Phil]

The J would be the most encouraging signal possible playing standard and the 3 would be the most discouraging.

It would also tend to show the T, but you can manufacture positions where this isn't the case.

[SteveMoe]

 Stephen Tu, on 2013-January-09, 13:12, said:

Do you have any book references for this? I've never seen this recommended other than by you. J shows the ten and denies a higher *touching* honor, the Q, but I've never seen anyone say that it denies a *non-touching* honor. I have Kantar & Root books recommending encouraging signals J from KJT9 and T from QT98.

What's the advantage of showing partner the JT here, with declarer having the KQ? Why not just discourage not holding the K for the same effect?

Hi Stephen,
There is no consensus on what the J shows. Here is a recent Debbie Rosenberg question in Bridgewinners showing the point: JACK. So an agreement is necessary. I use Kantar's Advanced Defense books too as reference, but am unsure they mention the specific situation.

Signalling the J when declarer holds the KQ would appear to me to be suit preference not top of sequence. (Signals are context dependent). But that's not what the OP wanted to talk about.

Here with Qx in dummy, Signalling with the J can be ambiguous (does it promise the K or deny the K)?
I like denying the king for 2 reasons: 1) I often open J109xx suits and don't want partner to confuse the opening bid with an attitude signal.
2) I have other good positive attitude cards without having to play the J.

High cards are encouraging, but at some point an honor shows soemthing else. Some make the division the Q so the J is a high card (see Phil's comment) and some make it the J so the 10 is a high card.

After a dummy with Kx and I am holding AQJTxx, it would never cross my mind to play the Q as an encouraging signal.

Getting back to the NC forum OP, If you agree J is a high card and does not deny a higher honor, then the J will work. So, likely will the 10.
your lower(est) cards are discouraging.

Finally let me add that a holding like J10987 can test any partner because playing standard signals partner has to understand by reading the other spots available that the 7 is a low card and you do not want a continuation.

[Phil]

Steve, I think Debbie's comment on BW discussed the discard of the Jack, not the play of the Jack when partner leads the Ace.

Could you be conflating that to the current situation?

[SteveMoe]

 Phil, on 2013-January-09, 18:35, said:

Steve, I think Debbie's comment on BW discussed the discard of the Jack, not the play of the Jack when partner leads the Ace.

Could you be conflating that to the current situation?

Yes - I see the situations as roughly equivalent.

[Zelandakh]

 Stephen Tu, on 2013-January-09, 13:12, said:

Do you have any book references for this? I've never seen this recommended other than by you.

Just for reference, I play exactly the same way as Steve suggests. The 3 would be a general positive, the 10 a general negative, and the J would deny a higher honour. Regardless of whether it is standard or not, it is simple and effective and therefore perfect for B/I partnerships.

[Stephen Tu]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-January-14, 06:11, said:

Just for reference, I play exactly the same way as Steve suggests. The 3 would be a general positive, the 10 a general negative, and the J would deny a higher honour. Regardless of whether it is standard or not, it is simple and effective and therefore perfect for B/I partnerships.

But then you're playing upside down, basically, whereas the original question was in the context of std signals. In the context of standard carding, where high encourages, to me it's weird for J to be discouraging. It makes sense to me for honor signals to promise the one below (else you can't usually afford to waste an honor), and to deny the touching one above (since they are equals you may as well tell the truth to partner). But I just don't see the utility for J to be discouraging having opened your JT93 here and holding SA, when playing the standard discouraging 3 would achieve the same desired result? Why would partner care that you have JT93 vs. t93 or 873? All he cares about is whether he should play another club or switch to spade.

Why complicate things for beginners? (high encourages, unless it's the J, in which case that discourages?)?? Ten encourages, but denies the J, unless it's the J and a higher non-touching honor?

[Zelandakh]

On this hand partner does not care. But B/I signals tend not to be too situation-specific. That is, a simple method which is useful (but not optimal) in every situation where both partners know what each card should mean is, imho, better for such pairs than a more optimised set of signals based on the "need to know" concept which often leads to mix-ups. In the method under discussion, it is wrong to say that an honour card is discouraging, or encouraging. It is a specific signal showing a specific holding in the suit. In this context it doubles up as discouragement. Great, it solves our problem with JT98. In a different context, an honour might be encouraging because it shows partner where our entry is, or whatever.

I agree with you completely with your statement "Why complicate things for beginners?" The difference is that I think calling an honour card signal discouraging is simply wrong. A high (or low if udca) pip card is encouraging; a low (or high if udca) pip card is discouraging; an honour shows the card(s) below and nothing higher. That is it. Of course it would also be fine to think of picture honours as just another card and therefore more discouraging than a ten. If that is how you are taught, or how your mind works, then it is fine. But if you teach a beginner that a signal with an honour is special then it is not an exception per se. This also has the advantage of preparing the player for such ideas as alarm clock signals and the like in the advanced classes. That is, exceptions are good but they come later on.

[Phil]

 Zelandakh, on 2013-January-15, 02:49, said:

But B/I signals tend not to be too situation-specific. That is, a simple method which is useful (but not optimal) in every situation where both partners know what each card should mean is, imho, better for such pairs than a more optimised set of signals based on the "need to know" concept which often leads to mix-ups.

Quote

In the method under discussion, it is wrong to say that an honour card is discouraging, or encouraging.

A high card encourages. A Jack is a high card. A Jack encourages.

I mean, I don't know why this has to be such a controversy?

[Zelandakh]

As I wrote before, this depends on the method being used/taught. A high spot card encourages. A Jack is not a high spot card. A Jack does not encourage. Surely the "controversy" is caused by a faulty definition, not by the logical conclusion of the (alternative) definitions.