[fann4]

I wrote the article - It's interesting that 22 years after I wrote the article 'Side suit signals', discussion appears here. I'm working on some more complex variations of the signal now, but as it was originally postulated, it's not particularly difficult. The key factors are; 1) Dummy has a long dangerous suit with no side entry 2) It is clear to both defenders that if declarer plays this suit early, before a defender has managed to discard once or twice in the suit, then the defender with the Ace is going to have to commit himself before partner plays, THEN, so long as 3) a defender was not simply playing 3rd hand high initially, or 4) it is clearly not a case of attitude required in the led suit, THEN the player without the Ace will give a Side suit signal, using the same count method (standard or upside down, it matters not), and will signal count in the CRITICAL suit with the count card he plays in the played suit.

Jeff Rubens and the American Bridge World were happy with the term Side suit signal, so why change it to offsuit signal?

The example hand by Inquiry (post #9) is a great example. As it happens, it's not needed because declarer is not a lunatic, and can't have DJx. But one could change a few things, or the final contract, and then it would be critical for east to give partner the count of the diamond suit with his choice of card from the club suit.

[inquiry]

fann4, on 2011-January-24, 13:43, said:

I wrote the article - It's interesting that 22 years after I wrote the article 'Side suit signals', discussion appears here. I'm working on some more complex variations of the signal now, but as it was originally postulated, it's not particularly difficult. The key factors are; 1) Dummy has a long dangerous suit with no side entry 2) It is clear to both defenders that if declarer plays this suit early, before a defender has managed to discard once or twice in the suit, then the defender with the Ace is going to have to commit himself before partner plays, THEN, so long as 3) a defender was not simply playing 3rd hand high initially, or 4) it is clearly not a case of attitude required in the led suit, THEN the player without the Ace will give a Side suit signal, using the same count method (standard or upside down, it matters not), and will signal count in the CRITICAL suit with the count card he plays in the played suit.

Jeff Rubens and the American Bridge World were happy with the term Side suit signal, so why change it to offsuit signal?

The example hand by Inquiry (post #9) is a great example. As it happens, it's not needed because declarer is not a lunatic, and can't have DJx. But one could change a few things, or the final contract, and then it would be critical for east to give partner the count of the diamond suit with his choice of card from the club suit.

I'm sorry. Some 20 plus years after reading the article, I didn't remember the name of the signal as you wrote it up. As you see, when I referred to the article, I got the name right. A rose by any other name, yada yada yada. I know side suit signals are easy to use, I have used them for years. This is a good addition to anyone's signalling scheme and quite easy to remember... even if the name was not...

[Tomi2]

D8 suit pref = heart switch<br>H6 meant as ud count in clubs (we use udca)

---

hope this works. This deal was played in the 2010 German Bridge Trophy, I was sitting east, our opps were Herbst-Herbst from Israel.

After I won the heart I could not read partners card and thought it would be the normal "count" in hearts, so I expected Q65 with partner and decl having 7330. I tried a small spade expecting decl to make 7 spade tricks, one ruff and club ace.

Partner tried to show his count in clubs in that trick, so I would know, that decl. has 1 club and partner Kx or xx. Since we play udca the small ♥6 shows even count in clubs... Returning a club and killing the dummy was the only chance to beat the contract.

I think this is even one step further than the situation some posts above, because partner did not signal, he lead the "suide-suit-signal"

edit: since my father never had a copy of BW in his hand this idea must have spread somehow to poland/germany. I was obv. also not reading BW when I was 5 years old

[Siegmund]

I think there's a general understanding among partnerships-of-two-experts that "if you can clearly see there is one thing your partner needs to know, you make that answer available to him, and trust him to trust you to have done so." I've seen one or two hands of this type floating around in magazines before, but only ever had one partner who (on his best days) would have been up to the task of actually doing it.

Wish I could say I would have more use for this type of signal. But (even I sharpen up my own game enough to be alert for the possibility) think I am going to have a long wait before I need it.

[Lurpoa]

BridgeHands decribes Obvious Suit Preference Signal (http://www.bridgehan..._Preference.htm). They are similar, in the sense that an impossible signal, according the methos you use, is conveying an urgent fact, and that might be the count of dummy's suit.

.... Indeed easy to use... but much more difficult for partner to see