[cwiggins]

In "Countdown to Winning Bridge," Tim Bourke and Marc Smith suggest that the a discard should mean "don't lead this suit" regardless of size. In "Bridge Cardplay," March Smith suggested that the discard could also state count.

Does anyone have experience playing discards this wahy? Do you recommend it over Lavinthal or Odd-Even?

Thanks.

[nigel_k]

For a long time I played that the first discard is discouraging (in that suit) and reverse count. The benefit is that you can show count right from the first discard, as well as indicating suit preference. Lavinthal and odd/even cannot do that.

I can't say whether it is technically superior, but knowing the count of each suit as early as possible used to give me a feeling of comfort on defence though this has lessened over the years. It's fairly rare that the method leaves you stuck without a good choice of card.

I think I first learned this method from Lionel Wright around 1989 but I don't know where it originated.

[gnasher]

It used to be quite common in England to play all discards as count, endeavouring to make the first discard in a suit you don't want partner to lead. It's a bit out of fashion now, but some good players still play this. For example, it appears that one of England's best women's pairs do it:

http://bridgefiles.n...ondy-senior.pdf

I played this style for years without noticing any great problem with it, and I still play it with partners who prefer it. It's rare that you can't work out what to do, but I wouldn't want to go back to it. It can sometimes to be quite helpful to declarer.

[Mbodell]

I tried this a bit with one partner and thought it was reasonable. I usually like to discourage suits instead of encourage, so that was fine. And count is usually useful to the defenders. But I'm not sure if it wasn't more effective in part just because most opposing declarers didn't ask and/or pay attention.

[dake50]

Second nigel_k. Comfort of clarity even if no notable technical merit.

[mcphee]

The advantage to discarding from a suit you do not want, #1 everyone has a suit like that. #2 you do not need to have an odd or even card.

[Siegmund]

It's not a common method in my neck of the woods but it sounds reasonable.

I'd recommend just about anything over Lavinthal, but I am not convinced this suggestion is better than good old standard discards.

[Dinarius]

nigel_k, on 2010-March-29, 00:23, said:

For a long time I played that the first discard is discouraging (in that suit) and reverse count.

I've just done a search on discards and discarding and this is one of the threads that popped up.

Question: Why "reverse count" necessarily?

Also, what are the perceived disadvantages of Odds and Evens?

Thanks.

D.

[mgoetze]

Dinarius, on 2015-December-08, 06:37, said:

Question: Why "reverse count" necessarily?

Probably because many people never play "standard count" in any situation.

[ahydra]

mgoetze, on 2015-December-08, 06:56, said:

Probably because many people never play "standard count" in any situation.

I played against Robson and Zia once and they said their discards were "reverse attitude and standard count".

Reverse count has an obvious advantage when you need to signal from Qx, Jx, etc, but other than that I don't see a lot of difference (have been playing standard count for years without trouble, though only in signalling, not discarding).

As for odd/even discards: the problem is, what if you don't have a card of the right parity? With reverse attitude or count discards you are almost never in this situation, as if you can't afford a signal in one suit, you can make one from another suit.

ahydra

[mgoetze]

ahydra, on 2015-December-08, 07:38, said:

I played against Robson and Zia once and they said their discards were "reverse attitude and standard count".

Reverse count has an obvious advantage when you need to signal from Qx, Jx, etc, but other than that I don't see a lot of difference (have been playing standard count for years without trouble, though only in signalling, not discarding).

Well yes, that is a common method in England. My point was that there are areas where it is not a common method, but rather an exotic one. (Germany is one such area.)

One advantage of reverse count, in combination with reverse attitude, is that you don't need particularly firm agreements about whether you are playing count or attitude when partner leads the ace against a suit contract and you have a doubleton.

[nullve]

Where I live, everyone plays (reverse) attitude discards, even though it really doesn't make sense vs. NT. (You don't want to encourage by discarding a potential long suit winner; that's a beginner's mistake.)

[mgoetze]

nullve, on 2015-December-08, 09:43, said:

Where I live, everyone plays (reverse) attitude discards, even though it really doesn't make sense vs. NT. (You don't want to encourage by discarding a potential long suit winner; that's a beginner's mistake.)

Which is why, obviously, you are more likely to discourage than to encourage. There can still be reasons to encourage directly, for instance against 3NT, your partner starts with AKQJ of a suit, and on the fourth round you show him your Axxx.

[wank]

nullve, on 2015-December-08, 09:43, said:

Where I live, everyone plays (reverse) attitude discards, even though it really doesn't make sense vs. NT. (You don't want to encourage by discarding a potential long suit winner; that's a beginner's mistake.)

that might be so against part scores, but the higher the level, the more defence becomes about not giving the opps tricks, in which case your strongest suit is often the one you can most afford to throw.

[Phil]

I have no idea where I saw, or read this, but a very common way to discard is to play the same card that you would have led. So, discarding against NT, if you hold ♥KT862, is to discard the 6 (c.p.).

Assuming partner is paying attention, he can apply the Rule of 11 and get a pretty good idea about the layout around the table.

if anyone knows the origin of this agreement, please share.

[wank]

nullve, on 2015-December-08, 09:43, said:

Where I live, everyone plays (reverse) attitude discards, even though it really doesn't make sense vs. NT. (You don't want to encourage by discarding a potential long suit winner; that's a beginner's mistake.)

wank, on 2015-December-08, 17:38, said:

that might be so against part scores, but the higher the level, the more defence becomes about not giving the opps tricks, in which case your strongest suit is often the one you can most afford to throw.

i play bridge in a very insular country where they all blindly play the same methods. when it comes to discards they all play lavinthal. i've tried to point out the drawbacks of this method, but noone believes me. i think a better tactic might be to agree to play lavinthal versus 1+2NT where it has merit and make them play attitude against anything else.

[rhm]

mcphee, on 2010-March-29, 06:19, said:

The advantage to discarding from a suit you do not want, #1 everyone has a suit like that.

Really?
Am I the only one, who often can only discard from a specific suit, whether I like the suit or not, because any other suit discard might give declarer additional tricks?
Sometimes you need to keep parity with dummy or declarer.
Sometimes you should not discard from a suit to avoid giving declarer a blueprint about the layout of the deal.
Reese famous "idle fifth" comes to mind.

An intermediate player often has many more choices, but then such a player often takes less tricks on defense.
Simple rules for simple players.
This is supposed to be the "expert forum",

Rainer Herrmann

[WellSpyder]

There are two conflicting problems being discussed.

1) Playing natural discards, you sometimes have to discard a potential winner in a suit in order to get partner to play it

2) Playing some sort of suit preference discards, you are sometimes in the position that your only safe discard is in your long suit, but you can't discard one and at the same time encourage partner to play the suit.

Personally, I have always found (2) to be more of a problem than (1). But I am intrigued by wank's idea that the balance between these two problems may depend on the level of the contract you are defending against.

[gnasher]

Phil, on 2015-December-09, 01:06, said:

I have no idea where I saw, or read this, but a very common way to discard is to play the same card that you would have led. So, discarding against NT, if you hold ♥KT862, is to discard the 6 (c.p.).

Assuming partner is paying attention, he can apply the Rule of 11 and get a pretty good idea about the layout around the table.

if anyone knows the origin of this agreement, please share.

I think it was invented on Mars, or possibly Pluto.