[marmot101]

I see a lot of players on BBO play UDCA instead of traditional signal.

Who can give a comparision of these two? Why people prefer UDCA?

To me, it is just confusing -- against intuitive  

Thanks.

[inquiry]

UDCA is exactly opposite (upside-down) from standard signalling

                              STANDARD           UDCA
encourage         High                Low
Even cards        High                Low
Odd cards               Low                High

Technically, neither one should be counter-intuitive, these are just simple partnership agreements.

Now, does one have an advantage over the other? It is my  believe UDCA has a slight technical advantage over standard. Two examples.. Partner leads a suit you want to be continued, but due to the spot cards (say in dummy), you can't afford a "high" card (you throw away the setting trick).  Also, to give count with 92 doubleton has been know to expose your partner to a deep hook...but if you keep the NINE and use the 2 for the distribution signal, your nine can still stop the deep hook. It is also harder for declearer to false card to make your "high" card look low than to make your low card look high.

[Cave_Draco]

There is a "Third Way"...

I play Inverted Attitude but standard count.

As Ben pointed out, there are times when, playing standard attitude, you wish to encourage but cannot afford a "high" card. To some extent it depends which of "Yes" or "No" you want to give higher priority,  .

With respect to count: 4th highest is, intrinsically, Lo-Hi for even; whereas, 3rds & 5ths allows Hi-Lo to show even, in all cases,  ;D.

Does anyone play UDCA with 3rds & 5ths? Just curious,  .

[Codo]

Hi Dragon,

I try to play udca with 3/5 in suit 2/4 in NT  and low promises an honour. Besides: If you had raised pd in his suit and they outbid you, I play 2/4 again.

Unluckily, I don`t find too many pds online to play this way...  ;D

Kind Regards

Roland

[Cave_Draco]

"low promises an honour"?

MUD or top-of-nothing?

I'm not surprised few play the system you described, Roland.

Advanced players can simplify their signals, no point playing UDCA with a novice. Although, I will admit 3rds & 5ths are automatic... I have to think about playing 4ths, .

In my experience, beginners are taught "4th highest" and don't have the Rule of 11 explained. So, the Rule of 10 or 12 makes no sense! To play both...?

I would be interested in your rationale; do the benefits outweigh the potential confusion?

[Codo]

Hi draco,

no I don`t think that you should simplify your carding while improving. Defending is the toughest and most complicate part of the game, so any help from pd is welcome. And to give stupid only one kind of signal is like always driving in the first gear on the highway.

And no, 3/5. is not automatic. Just see the ups and downs: With 3/5. you have no easy rule of eleven :-)
And with 3./5 you have difficulties to show the difference between 3 or 4 cards in a suit. But you are better placed to show, if you have 2  or 3 cards:

F.E.:
                                                                  2./4.           3.5.
You hold
            8,2                     2                8
            842                    4                2
           8642                2                 4
          T8642            4                 2

So, with 2 or 3 cards, the difference between the cards is bigger with 3/5., so it is easier to see.
That is why  a lot of people play 3/5 against suit contracts.It is easier to see, if you lead a doubleton, or a tripleton.
But if I raised pd, I nearly always promise three+ cards in the suit, so the difference between 3 and 4 is more important, that is why I would prefer 2/4 if I promised some cards in that suit.

To play low to show an honour may confuse pd sometimes about the length but makes it easier to find out about the strength.  I am a big fan in showing strength, I don`t like count signals (besides when they are needed :-)), so I believe, that a lie about the length is not as worse as a lie about the strength. OF course, it is prefered, to always play the right card, but unluckily, they are sometimes dealt in another hand.

And that defence system, together with a lot of obvious shift and suit preference worked really wonderful. But we needed hundred+ boards to play it accurate enough to gain.

Kind regards

Roland

 

[JRG]

May I recommend: Defensive Signals by Marshall Miles (ISBN 1-885691-11-4). Not only does the book describe UDCA, and many other signalling conventions, but provides an analysis. Miles also explains why you should also play upside down count if you play upside down attitude. The book was published in 1995.

A short excerpt (he then goes on to give examples and analysis):

"Most top expert partnerships now play upside down signals, although some professionals play standard signals because that is what their clients are accustomed to. I know of only two top pairs who play together regularly and still play standard signals. In one case it is probably a matter of ego. One player thinks he can beat anyone in the world whatever system he plays, and he considers rejection of modern defensive conventions an appropriate handicap. He actually is that good, and he has a record to prove it. However, all serious players admit that upside down signals are theoretically superior to standard signals, and the only thing that prevents some players from changing is the effort required." (pp 62-63)