Help
yoder, on 2006-January-28, 08:51, said:
I strongly believe that count is at the heart of visualization, and agree with previous posters that learning count signals can trigger visualization in a way that nothing else does. I know, because it happened exactly that way with me, many years ago.
I know a bit about cognitive style and it's very true that people differ greatly in how they learn and how they process information. I happen to be a fairly visual person. As a beginner, I knew how to count suits, cards played, etc, but I played with other beginners who had, like me, been taught to give attitude signals.
Then one day long ago when I was still pretty novice, a very excellent player condescended to play a session with me. He asked that we play nothing but count signals, something that I had not done before.
That one session of bridge opened up the entire world of bridge to a new level for me. Suddenly I could visualize what the declarer had, I could figure out what card to save at the end, I could actually COUNT out the hand!! It was an epiphany for me in bridge.
To this day, if I can find a partner who likes to play mostly count, I treasure him/her. Count enables visualization, and as I have also learned to make inferences from play of suits, etc, I find that I can figure out where all the high cards are very easily from the play, so count is by far the most valuable thing that partner can tell me.
If you have not played count signals, find a partner who likes them and do it. You may be amazed what windows it will open into the hands of the opponents.
I know a bit about cognitive style and it's very true that people differ greatly in how they learn and how they process information. I happen to be a fairly visual person. As a beginner, I knew how to count suits, cards played, etc, but I played with other beginners who had, like me, been taught to give attitude signals.
Then one day long ago when I was still pretty novice, a very excellent player condescended to play a session with me. He asked that we play nothing but count signals, something that I had not done before.
That one session of bridge opened up the entire world of bridge to a new level for me. Suddenly I could visualize what the declarer had, I could figure out what card to save at the end, I could actually COUNT out the hand!! It was an epiphany for me in bridge.
To this day, if I can find a partner who likes to play mostly count, I treasure him/her. Count enables visualization, and as I have also learned to make inferences from play of suits, etc, I find that I can figure out where all the high cards are very easily from the play, so count is by far the most valuable thing that partner can tell me.
If you have not played count signals, find a partner who likes them and do it. You may be amazed what windows it will open into the hands of the opponents.
yoder seems to be on the wavelength I was refering to in my previous post, and to hav had similar experiences learning with expert pards to myself.
On the issue of whether to teach count signals or attitude, I think both must be discussed, but it is unwise to try to combine the approaches for early learners.
Count signals will help count out the thirteen cards in a suit, something beginners need to learn very soon. They also help create inferences about the fourth suit.
On the other hand, attitude signals are prefered by intermediate players and those who will never get beyond advanced stage, as they never completely learn to count out a hand and so inevitably see attitude carding as superior. But a teacher should not presume every beginner will end up as that sort of player.
Mixed carding is too tricky for beginners. It falls between two stools, like MUD.
I think attitude should be explained, as a lot of declaring against this type of signaling will be done, but count encouraged by the teacher.
Suit pref from known long suits should be encouraged as soon as possible also -- it does not really interfere with the other stuff.