[phoenix214]

I was wondering, what counts as a encrypted signal. Does it only count when defender posses a key that declarer doesnt have and therefore he cannot use the information.
The problem is, if "Combine" signals counts as a encrypted or not, where you singal partner the number of small cards in a suit, or you signal that you have xx or Hxx Lo/Hi and xxx/Hxxx Hi/Lo?

[helene_t]

yes i am wondering as well. can i play the"black suit count" when declarer's spades count is known ?

[Free]

I've never played the method so I don't really have a good understanding of how it works. However, at first glance, partner doesn't necessarily have the key here. If he's missing an honor card it may be in your hand or in declarer's hand. So I would say it's not an encrypted signal.

A good example of encrypted signal is after the auction 1NT-3NT, you encourage hi-lo with 0-7HCP and lo-hi with 8+HCP. Your partner will have a good estimate of your HCP so the chance is huge he has 'the key', while declarer doesn't have a clue.

[mycroft]

If I'm defending a sacrifice, say, we play "Hi-lo with the A or both, lo-hi with the K or neither." The number of times that declarer has the missing honour and can successfully hide it, compared to the number of times we have it and can hide it until it's too late...

[akhare]

A signal that clarifies the Combine lead isn't encrypted as long as the decryption key is also available to declarer.

For example, having led X from HxxxX or xxxX (right side up from an honor holding or upside down from junk), an agreement to play low-high in declarer's suit to indicate the former (and vice versa) should be perfectly fine as long as it's disclosed to declarer.

Note that this is no different than using reverse Smith to clarify attitude about the opening lead.

To give a contrasting example, consider a case where the decryption key is obfuscated. Assume that the defence knows that trumps were split exactly 3-2 and hand that made the opening lead plays low-high to show the HxxxX and high-low to show xxxX holding two trumps, but reverses the order when holding three trumps. In this case, the signal is encrypted until declarer draws the outstanding trump.

[rbforster]

"Encrypted" signals are a bit like "relay systems" in that they are talked about by in rules, very poorly defined, and used by everyone in ways that are complete "normal" for any bridge player. Many forms of Stayman for example are a relay system per the definition, yet what the ACBL means is not that they want to ban Stayman, but the weird stuff the LOLs don't like at clubs when you play advanced precision.

Similarly, it is common to give suit preference later in the hand by discarding your useless cards. If we have competed in a suit and are now defending the hand, we will have 8-9 cards in our suit between us. Furthermore, we are likely to have lead them and gotten all our tricks in that suit early on until declarer's hand is exhausted and he can trump in. In this fairly common case, the remaining cards in our suit are held entirely by our side, so when partner makes a discard in our suit only we know whether a discard was high, middle, or low from looking at the cards in our hand. This is encrypted and yet it is just "standard bridge defense". The rules against encrypted signals are only used to inhibit innovation in defense, not to prevent the experts from playing the way they presently do.

[Free]

rbforster, on 2013-August-12, 23:49, said:

"Encrypted" signals are a bit like "relay systems" in that they are talked about by in rules, very poorly defined, and used by everyone in ways that are complete "normal" for any bridge player. Many forms of Stayman for example are a relay system per the definition, yet what the ACBL means is not that they want to ban Stayman, but the weird stuff the LOLs don't like at clubs when you play advanced precision.

Similarly, it is common to give suit preference later in the hand by discarding your useless cards. If we have competed in a suit and are now defending the hand, we will have 8-9 cards in our suit between us. Furthermore, we are likely to have lead them and gotten all our tricks in that suit early on until declarer's hand is exhausted and he can trump in. In this fairly common case, the remaining cards in our suit are held entirely by our side, so when partner makes a discard in our suit only we know whether a discard was high, middle, or low from looking at the cards in our hand. This is encrypted and yet it is just "standard bridge defense". The rules against encrypted signals are only used to inhibit innovation in defense, not to prevent the experts from playing the way they presently do.

You should inform yourself better before writing this piece of rubish. Relay systems tell exact information to everyone (for example "I have a 5=3=1=4 distribution"), while encrypted signals tell information only to partner based on a key (relay systems don't have a key). Your example about an exhausted suit is also not relevant. By the time you discard there are at most 2 or 3 cards left in the suit. Any capable declarer knows which card is the highest and the lowest remaining card, so even with a void you know if it's a high or low card.

[Trinidad]

Free, on 2013-August-13, 04:31, said:

You should inform yourself better before writing this piece of rubish. Relay systems tell exact information to everyone (for example "I have a 5=3=1=4 distribution"), while encrypted signals tell information only to partner based on a key (relay systems don't have a key). Your example about an exhausted suit is also not relevant. By the time you discard there are at most 2 or 3 cards left in the suit. Any capable declarer knows which card is the highest and the lowest remaining card, so even with a void you know if it's a high or low card.

I think you should read rbfoster's post again. I think you completely misunderstood him.

He meant to say that the term "Encrypted signal" is similar to the term "Relay": Both terms are ill defined (probably on purpose), pretty much saying (hoping) that a TD will recognize one when he sees one. Both are forbidden (under certain circumstances), yet there are clear cases -that logically would fall under the term- that are perfectly allowed (suit preference discards from long suits with are encrypted and Stayman is a relay and both are allowed).

He didnot mean to say that an encrypted signal itself is like a relay. That would indeed be rubbish, already for the simple fact that one occurs in the defense and the other in the auction.

Rik

[rbforster]

Free, on 2013-August-13, 04:31, said:

You should inform yourself better before writing this piece of rubish.

Rik understood so I won't repeat the explanation of analogy. You can edit your insult for tone and spelling if you care.

Free, on 2013-August-13, 04:31, said:

Your example about an exhausted suit is also not relevant. By the time you discard there are at most 2 or 3 cards left in the suit. Any capable declarer knows which card is the highest and the lowest remaining card, so even with a void you know if it's a high or low card.

For others benefit, I'll give an example.

South declares 3♠ after EW competed to 3♥.

---

A♥ is lead and encouraged with the Q, then the K♥ continuation is ruffed as E drops the J (card he is known to hold, partner's open or overcall having promised 5 hearts). Declarer draws trump and finds them 3-1, perhaps as above although it works similarly if they split 3-1 the other way. The first discard in hearts from either hand is made from 2-3 cards known to both defenders and not to declarer. As long as the highest or lowest of the 5 remaining hearts is not thrown, declarer will be unsure as to the signal. For example, the 7♥ by W or the 9♥ by E are clear signals to partner for low or high suit preference respectively. This is an encrypted suit preference signal in standard bridge.