[strong 1c]

n ACBL land. are Lavinthal discards only used on the first discard or can they be used on the 2nd ? As I understand them, they are not giving a dual message

While I do believe that when you make the first discard that there's a high probability that you don't like the suit of the card you pitched, but that this is not an absolute hence not dual-messaging.

Can someone who uses lavinthal discards tell me what they do?

I guess int he same vein, I believe odd-even discards cannot be used after the first discard because an even discard gives a dual message, but in theory, could 'odd-only' discards be used on the 2nd discard.

Asking for a friend

[mycroft]

Again, you are using old words from the GCC. (And in this case, it's something I would have also done. So, yeah, thanks for that.) The wording no longer says anything about "dual-message". What it says is:

ACBL Convention Charts, Carding said:

Other Signals: Only high-to-low or low-to-high ordering strategies are allowed. Distinct meanings for middle cards (vs. highest and lowest) are allowed. Defining meanings for specific spots (2,4,6…), as opposed to relative high/low agreements, are not allowed.

with the following example/clarification:

Quote

High/Low and Low/High encoding allows for cards which are neither. For example, it is permissible to have a distinct meaning for each of the plays from 3 small spots so long as the cards have the same meaning based on their relative rank, not absolute. That is, the 2 from 234 and the 7 from 789 should mean the same. Likewise, the 3 and 8, or 4 and 9. It is not permitted to “pre-define” the spots as being high or low (such as 234 is always low, 567 always middle, etc.) except on the first-discard.

So, yeah, "high ♦ = I like spades, low ♦ = I like clubs" is legal. Even, it seems, "high ♦ = I like spades. medium ♦ = I like diamonds. low ♦ = I like clubs".

Having played the latter third-hand to Opening leads, I strongly encourage the caveat "when it is from a *known* long suit". Otherwise you get the same kind of tempo issues the odd-even signallers get trying to find the "evenest" odd spot card in the suit. And where that leads is:

Quote

In addition, a pair may be prohibited from playing any carding method when they are deemed to be playing it in a manner that does not maintain proper tempo.

[Shugart23]

So , to clarify. Back in the day, odd-even discards were only allowed on the first discard (right?)) , but now they could also be used on the second discard.

Apparently, such a scheme could be used even when following suit. In your example on partners opening lead, we currently give attitude , but now can attempt to give a suggestion as to which suit to switch to

[Coelacanth]

Shugart23, on 2026-June-03, 13:14, said:

So , to clarify. Back in the day, odd-even discards were only allowed on the first discard (right?)) , but now they could also be used on the second discard.

Apparently, such a scheme could be used even when following suit. In your example on partners opening lead, we currently give attitude , but now can attempt to give a suggestion as to which suit to switch to

The full text of the relevant section of the Charts is:

Encrypted Signals are never allowed when leading, following suit or discarding.

Otherwise:
1. Opening lead: Any method may be used on opening lead.
2. First discard: Any method may be used on the first discard.
3. *** Other Signals: Only high-to-low or low-to-high ordering strategies are allowed. (plus other things already quoted above)

So, on the second discard, only high-low and low-high are allowed, not odd-even.

[mycroft]

Brian, as always, is right.

I think you were confused by my side note.

"Lavinthal" on second discard appears to be legal, even though it implies a "second meaning" of discouraging in discarded suit as well as encouraging in a specific suit.

Moreover, a system that differentiates between high, middle, and low cards' meanings is legal - provided it truly is that, and not "5s and 6s are 'middle cards'."

HOWEVER, you will be barred from playing the system - even if allowed by the rules - if you can not play it consistently in tempo, especially when the discard you choose to make doesn't have the "obvious" meaning the card itself would show (i.e. a "slow 8" from 98 is low; an "in tempo 8" from 853 is high).

Finally - and this is the only time I was talking about O/E - I noted that this was the problem that got O/E on the opening lead disallowed (as it still is, on any play following suit, and on any discard except the first one) - the inability of too many people to play it without providing "extra information" allowing partner to read if it was a true signal or not.

Having said *all* of this, I don't know why you would need this, unless your first discard shows something very else than "what suit you like". (oh, and RTFC. They're really not that hard to read, as long as you have *specific* questions you want a yes/no answer to.)

[blackshoe]

mycroft, on 2026-June-03, 19:03, said:

HOWEVER, you will be barred from playing the system - even if allowed by the rules - if you can not play it consistently in tempo, especially when the discard you choose to make doesn't have the "obvious" meaning the card itself would show (i.e. a "slow 8" from 98 is low; an "in tempo 8" from 853 is high).

That word "consistently" is important. There have to be multiple instances of not playing it in tempo.

[pescetom]

mycroft, on 2026-June-03, 19:03, said:

Brian, as always, is right.

I would like to agree, although Brian gets mixed reviews in Gaelic lore

Coelacanth, on 2026-June-03, 17:02, said:

The full text of the relevant section of the Charts is:

Encrypted Signals are never allowed when leading, following suit or discarding.

Otherwise:
1. Opening lead: Any method may be used on opening lead.
2. First discard: Any method may be used on the first discard.
3. *** Other Signals: Only high-to-low or low-to-high ordering strategies are allowed. (plus other things already quoted above)

So, on the second discard, only high-low and low-high are allowed, not odd-even.

mycroft, on 2026-June-03, 19:03, said:

I think you were confused by my side note.
"Lavinthal" on second discard appears to be legal, even though it implies a "second meaning" of discouraging in discarded suit as well as encouraging in a specific suit.

Which seems to contradict what was written above.

mycroft, on 2026-June-03, 19:03, said:

HOWEVER, you will be barred from playing the system - even if allowed by the rules - if you can not play it consistently in tempo, especially when the discard you choose to make doesn't have the "obvious" meaning the card itself would show (i.e. a "slow 8" from 98 is low; an "in tempo 8" from 853 is high).

Finally - and this is the only time I was talking about O/E - I noted that this was the problem that got O/E on the opening lead disallowed (as it still is, on any play following suit, and on any discard except the first one) - the inability of too many people to play it without providing "extra information" allowing partner to read if it was a true signal or not.

So could that not be the only criterium for barring a couple for playing an agreement, without barring one specific agreement?

[mycroft]

Blackshoe: yes, but several could, like psyches of a particular call, be as many as 2 if the first was spectacular. More seriously though, the number of times it happens divided by the number of times they get called on it, I'm sure you would not be surprised to know, is likely to be a large number. If two pairs call them on it in a tournament, it is *very* likely it's a consistent problem. Having said that, the wording is "a manner that does not maintain proper tempo." "Consistent" don't actually enner inna it.

Pescetom: No (unless I'm confused by what you're referring to), that's the point. We used to have "no dual-message carding except on the first discard". We no longer have that statement, even if the intent is effectively the same. What we have *now* is "only high-to-low or low-to-high ordering is allowed except on first discard" (with a caveat that "middle" is allowed to have a meaning as well as "high" and "low", and another that says that no meaning can be assigned to a particular *number*, just relative to the other cards held in the suit.)

But what that meaning *is allowed to be* is not constrained. "I like diamonds" by pitching a high heart can absolutely imply "I don't like the suit I pitched, otherwise I'd have pitched a card from another suit".

And, re: "can play in tempo" being the only constraint - see my comment to blackshoe. We have near 100 years of evidence that methods such as O/E trick 1 almost certainly *can't* be played in tempo (unless you're religious about 30 seconds after opening lead; nobody ever is, not even me. The ones that play this kind of thing tend to be especially bad at taking time to make "easy" bids and plays). And it's often really hard to call people on it (and those that can tend not to because of the reactions. Viz: fast actions over preempts, never mind all jump bids). So it embeds too deep and OBMs too high without the blanket restriction. At least, that's what (I read from history, I don't speak for them here) the ACBL believes.

Oh, there's a thought - on that Other Site, you might get a response from Jeff Ford or Danny Sprung, who are on the committee that wrote this and possibly *can* speak for their reasoning :-).