[aawk]

The first rule of giving signals is that it cannot cost a trick.

With high cards you can make tricks so why waste them.

If you play high being encore or even it's more likely you have to give up a trick if you want your signals be honest.

[johnu]

 Winstonm, on 2017-January-19, 23:39, said:

Of course, looking at 5 hearts in dummy and the hearts in his own hand, there is a fairly good chance partner can work out the meaning of the 9 on his own.

OK, apparently it doesn't make any difference what signalling methods you use in this layout.

[nekthen]

 VixTD, on 2017-January-19, 11:36, said:

I know that upside-down signals would solve the problem, but switching is not an option. My partner is a dyed-in-the-wool traditionalist and won't change.

I didn't continue with a low heart, I switched to a spade. Declarer had the singleton ace and managed to discard his heart loser.

So did partner play the Q or the 6?

If it was the Q you would have attempted to cash the Ace presumably.

If he played the 6, I think he is 100% to blame. When asked to give count you must do it as clearly as possible with no regrets about "throwing a winner". If it loses a trick, you can then win the post mortem. Playing the 6 shows a lack of trust in partner.

[GrahamJson]

Given that N is missing HQ I'm struggling to come up with a hand in which he would think that count is more important than attitude. The bidding does not suggest that this is a rapid cash out situation.

Incidentally I have two regular partners. With one I play normal signals with the other reverse. Maybe reverse has technical advantages, however I certainly find them more difficult to play. But perhaps that is because I have grown used to the normal method.

[nekthen]

 GrahamJson, on 2017-January-20, 07:22, said:

Given that N is missing HQ I'm struggling to come up with a hand in which he would think that count is more important than attitude. The bidding does not suggest that this is a rapid cash out situation.

My guess is

North
♠Jx
♥AKxx
♦Kxx
♣KJxx

West
♠A
♥Jx
♦QJTxxxx
♣Axx

[GrahamJson]

Maybe, but I think I would ask for attitude rather than count if I held the north hand.

[VixTD]

 nekthen, on 2017-January-20, 07:58, said:

My guess is

North
♠Jx
♥AKxx
♦Kxx
♣KJxx

West
♠A
♥Jx
♦QJTxxxx
♣Axx

That's fairly close, but there were actually thirteen clubs and thirteen diamonds in the pack.

♠Jx
♥AKJx
♦Kx
♣KJxxx

West
♠A
♥xx
♦QJTxxxx
♣Axx

I didn't want to give the full hands to avoid the distracting comments about how I should have continued hearts anyway, or led the ace, or something. I wanted an answer to the question.

Thanks for all your contributions.

[miamijd]

You're stuck playing small from Qx. You can't have everything, and if you play Q from Qx in this situation, how is partner to know if you have one or two? He can't. So you might as well preserve the Q.

This isn't that hard a situation for partner to figure out:

Partner pretty much has to have four hearts here. If he has AKx or AKJ, that's an Ace lead. If he has five hearts, it's unlikely (though possible) that he would overcall 1NT instead of 1H or X (depending on his hand strength). So he has AKxx or AKJx.

From partner's point of view, it's unlikely that you have a stiff H, as you are pretty much booked for a stiff D on the auction. So you should have 2-3 hearts.

If declarer plays the Q, your partner can tell immediately what is going on, because you will give him count.

If declarer plays the J, declarer could have a stiff J, QJ tight, or be falsecarding from Jx. If you play the lower spot card available, that means declarer could have stiff J (you have Qxx) or Jx (you have Qx), but not QJ tight (you would play high from xx). So you have the Q, and partner can safely lead a low heart at trick 2 if he wants (although he doesn't know if you have Qx or Qxx). If you play the higher spot card available, declarer could have QJ tight or be falsecarding from Jx, but he doesn't have a stiff J (you would play low from Qxx). So partner knows he can cash a second heart, but he doesn't know who has the Q (declarer is more likely).

If declarer plays the Q, it's even clearer. If you play the lower spot card available, declarer must have the stiff Q (you would play high from xx or Jx). If you play the higher spot card available, declarer must have QJ (you would play J from Jx and low from Jxx). If you play the J, declarer is falsecarding from Qx (this is unlikely).

What is going on if declarer plays a small card at trick one?

Well, I don't think you should play the Q from QJx here, b/c partner asked from count. Q ought to show QJ tight (or Q stiff, but that's unlikely given you d stiff). From QJx, I would play low. If you play the J, of course, you have Jx (or J stiff, but that's unlikely given the D stiff).

So if declarer plays a small card, what's going on? Well, if you play Q, you likely have QJ tight and declarer xx. In any event, partner can lead low next if he likes. If you play J, you likely have Jx and declarer Qx. In any event, you can cash at least one more H trick. If you also play a small card, then either (A) you have Qx and declarer Jx or (B) you have QJx and declarer has a stiff. Here, you can't know if another trick will cash, but partner knows you have the Q, so that low is safe at trick 2.

Cheers,
Mike