Help
Can someone explain Modified Lavinthal and give an example or two ?
Page 1 of 1
modified Lavinthal
#2
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 695
- Joined: 2013-July-07
Posted 2025-April-21, 04:31
I think it is, on your first discard, pitch a low card if you’d like that suit led to you. Or pitch a high card to suggest you don’t want this suit or the higher ranking suit returned. So if declarer is running hearts and you want a diamond lead, pitch a low diamond or a high spade. The hugh spade saying I don’t want a spade or club lead. I think a pitch of a ‘middle card’. , say a 6 or 7 suggests you don’t have a suit preference
#3
- Group: Advanced Members
- Posts: 13,204
- Joined: 2005-June-15
- Gender:Male
- Location:Canada
- Interests:Bridge, golf, wine (red), cooking, reading eclectically but insatiably, travelling, making bad posts.
Posted 2025-April-21, 09:43
I think that Lavinthal shares with odd/even discards the problem that it is difficult to play ethically without great effort and a willingness to accept bad results
The problem is that you may not have the ‘right’ spot card in the suit you wish to use for your signal.
Players insensitive to their ethical responsibilities will dither over which ‘wrong’ signal to give, and that puts partner in an ethically difficult position. Unfortunately many players, either unaware of their ethical obligations or simply not caring about them draw the inference that partner didn’t mean what his card conveyed and would find the winning switch even though partner ‘slowly’ had told them to do something different.
Standard or udca methods are less prone to creating this situation because the signal doesn’t systemically say anything about a second suit.
If partner, say, discourages a spade, his card doesn’t also systemically say anything about any other suit. Partner, if faced with then choosing, say, between clubs and diamonds, has to work it out from thinking about the auction and the play to date.
This, when one holds the ‘right’ cards, both Lavinthal and odd/ even are excellent…better than simple standard or udca methods….this is why players sometimes adopt Lavinthal or o/e. To me, the ethical issues outweigh the technical advantages.
One has either to be ethical and knowingly make a switch that you know or infer, from partner’s hesitation, he doesn’t want or to be unethical and, in essence (in my opinion) come dangerously close to being a cheat.
I admit that many non experts don’t see this issue in as harsh a light as do I, but I suspect my views are common in the expert community, if only because so few experts appear to play Lavinthal or odd/even.
Ironically, I’ve been playing o/e for several years in one partnership…with a very ethical partner. We did occasionally get bad results because neither of us have any desire to get a reputation for shady behaviour. Now, it’s rare that it happens but it’s horrible when it does. Just two days ago I had one of those hands and in tempo made a discard suggesting a switch I couldn’t stand…partner made that switch. Ugh. I said after the hand (and the match) that I’d much prefer not to play o/e and partner said ‘I only play it because you like it’….turns out that neither of us wanted to play it but thought we were humouring partner.
Btw, one can (greatly) improve std or udca by incorporating suit preference when following suit in trump or declarer running winners.
Most experts do show suit preference (rather than count) in the trump suit and many also when following suit in a suit declarer is running.
I’d definitely advise an advancing player or partnership to drop either Lavinthal or o/e and learn udca plus the suit preference given in a suit being run by declarer, including trump.
The problem is that you may not have the ‘right’ spot card in the suit you wish to use for your signal.
Players insensitive to their ethical responsibilities will dither over which ‘wrong’ signal to give, and that puts partner in an ethically difficult position. Unfortunately many players, either unaware of their ethical obligations or simply not caring about them draw the inference that partner didn’t mean what his card conveyed and would find the winning switch even though partner ‘slowly’ had told them to do something different.
Standard or udca methods are less prone to creating this situation because the signal doesn’t systemically say anything about a second suit.
If partner, say, discourages a spade, his card doesn’t also systemically say anything about any other suit. Partner, if faced with then choosing, say, between clubs and diamonds, has to work it out from thinking about the auction and the play to date.
This, when one holds the ‘right’ cards, both Lavinthal and odd/ even are excellent…better than simple standard or udca methods….this is why players sometimes adopt Lavinthal or o/e. To me, the ethical issues outweigh the technical advantages.
One has either to be ethical and knowingly make a switch that you know or infer, from partner’s hesitation, he doesn’t want or to be unethical and, in essence (in my opinion) come dangerously close to being a cheat.
I admit that many non experts don’t see this issue in as harsh a light as do I, but I suspect my views are common in the expert community, if only because so few experts appear to play Lavinthal or odd/even.
Ironically, I’ve been playing o/e for several years in one partnership…with a very ethical partner. We did occasionally get bad results because neither of us have any desire to get a reputation for shady behaviour. Now, it’s rare that it happens but it’s horrible when it does. Just two days ago I had one of those hands and in tempo made a discard suggesting a switch I couldn’t stand…partner made that switch. Ugh. I said after the hand (and the match) that I’d much prefer not to play o/e and partner said ‘I only play it because you like it’….turns out that neither of us wanted to play it but thought we were humouring partner.
Btw, one can (greatly) improve std or udca by incorporating suit preference when following suit in trump or declarer running winners.
Most experts do show suit preference (rather than count) in the trump suit and many also when following suit in a suit declarer is running.
I’d definitely advise an advancing player or partnership to drop either Lavinthal or o/e and learn udca plus the suit preference given in a suit being run by declarer, including trump.
'one of the great markers of the advance of human kindness is the howls you will hear from the Men of God' Johann Hari
#4
- Group: Full Members
- Posts: 108
- Joined: 2024-May-21
Posted 2025-April-21, 10:23
mikeh, on 2025-April-21, 09:43, said:
I think that Lavinthal shares with odd/even discards the problem that it is difficult to play ethically without great effort and a willingness to accept bad results
The problem is that you may not have the ‘right’ spot card in the suit you wish to use for your signal.
Players insensitive to their ethical responsibilities will dither over which ‘wrong’ signal to give, and that puts partner in an ethically difficult position. Unfortunately many players, either unaware of their ethical obligations or simply not caring about them draw the inference that partner didn’t mean what his card conveyed and would find the winning switch even though partner ‘slowly’ had told them to do something different.
Standard or udca methods are less prone to creating this situation because the signal doesn’t systemically say anything about a second suit.
If partner, say, discourages a spade, his card doesn’t also systemically say anything about any other suit. Partner, if faced with then choosing, say, between clubs and diamonds, has to work it out from thinking about the auction and the play to date.
This, when one holds the ‘right’ cards, both Lavinthal and odd/ even are excellent…better than simple standard or udca methods….this is why players sometimes adopt Lavinthal or o/e. To me, the ethical issues outweigh the technical advantages.
One has either to be ethical and knowingly make a switch that you know or infer, from partner’s hesitation, he doesn’t want or to be unethical and, in essence (in my opinion) come dangerously close to being a cheat.
I admit that many non experts don’t see this issue in as harsh a light as do I, but I suspect my views are common in the expert community, if only because so few experts appear to play Lavinthal or odd/even.
Ironically, I’ve been playing o/e for several years in one partnership…with a very ethical partner. We did occasionally get bad results because neither of us have any desire to get a reputation for shady behaviour. Now, it’s rare that it happens but it’s horrible when it does. Just two days ago I had one of those hands and in tempo made a discard suggesting a switch I couldn’t stand…partner made that switch. Ugh. I said after the hand (and the match) that I’d much prefer not to play o/e and partner said ‘I only play it because you like it’….turns out that neither of us wanted to play it but thought we were humouring partner.
Btw, one can (greatly) improve std or udca by incorporating suit preference when following suit in trump or declarer running winners.
Most experts do show suit preference (rather than count) in the trump suit and many also when following suit in a suit declarer is running.
I’d definitely advise an advancing player or partnership to drop either Lavinthal or o/e and learn udca plus the suit preference given in a suit being run by declarer, including trump.
The problem is that you may not have the ‘right’ spot card in the suit you wish to use for your signal.
Players insensitive to their ethical responsibilities will dither over which ‘wrong’ signal to give, and that puts partner in an ethically difficult position. Unfortunately many players, either unaware of their ethical obligations or simply not caring about them draw the inference that partner didn’t mean what his card conveyed and would find the winning switch even though partner ‘slowly’ had told them to do something different.
Standard or udca methods are less prone to creating this situation because the signal doesn’t systemically say anything about a second suit.
If partner, say, discourages a spade, his card doesn’t also systemically say anything about any other suit. Partner, if faced with then choosing, say, between clubs and diamonds, has to work it out from thinking about the auction and the play to date.
This, when one holds the ‘right’ cards, both Lavinthal and odd/ even are excellent…better than simple standard or udca methods….this is why players sometimes adopt Lavinthal or o/e. To me, the ethical issues outweigh the technical advantages.
One has either to be ethical and knowingly make a switch that you know or infer, from partner’s hesitation, he doesn’t want or to be unethical and, in essence (in my opinion) come dangerously close to being a cheat.
I admit that many non experts don’t see this issue in as harsh a light as do I, but I suspect my views are common in the expert community, if only because so few experts appear to play Lavinthal or odd/even.
Ironically, I’ve been playing o/e for several years in one partnership…with a very ethical partner. We did occasionally get bad results because neither of us have any desire to get a reputation for shady behaviour. Now, it’s rare that it happens but it’s horrible when it does. Just two days ago I had one of those hands and in tempo made a discard suggesting a switch I couldn’t stand…partner made that switch. Ugh. I said after the hand (and the match) that I’d much prefer not to play o/e and partner said ‘I only play it because you like it’….turns out that neither of us wanted to play it but thought we were humouring partner.
Btw, one can (greatly) improve std or udca by incorporating suit preference when following suit in trump or declarer running winners.
Most experts do show suit preference (rather than count) in the trump suit and many also when following suit in a suit declarer is running.
I’d definitely advise an advancing player or partnership to drop either Lavinthal or o/e and learn udca plus the suit preference given in a suit being run by declarer, including trump.
Thanks. I like to think my partner and I are bending over backwards to be ethical, so that's nor really an issue with us. Not really sure what you mean by your first sentence though. Are you thinking people continue to use odd-even or dual messaging after the first discard ?
We currently use odd-even on first discard and then upside down attitude on subsequent discards. As you mention, one of the downsides of odd-even is you may not have the right card in which to give a signal. It seems to me that this 'modified Levinthal' would be very less likely to have this problem than odd-even.
We do so suit preferences when following a suit that declarer is running trump. eg if I have the 8 and 2 of trump, the order is which I play the two cards gives a suit preference. Haven't thought about when declarer is running a non-trump suit - we just give upside down count. You may have opened up an avenue to explore for me. Can you explain your method for when declarer is running a non-trump suit ?
Page 1 of 1