Because I’m old, too, I’m identifying with Tom (TOM, The Old Master).

I’m enjoying the series very much.

Patrick also weighed in with a spot-on comment noting a flaw in the analysis of the original blog entry. I thank him very much for that, and took the liberty of modifying the text – these things last forever in cyberspace!

It’s every bridge writer’s nightmare to make a technical error in the analysis, and I would hate to leave it out there.

Hi Ross,

First, I am wishing you very good luck in the upcoming CNTC. It must be an exciting and quick developing event to play in, wherein results and changing positions are rapid indeed.

My reason for this blog is to ask your opinion on whether you think that Smith Echo and/or its derivatives can be played ethically enough by all ranks of players, thereby making good use of its important advantages, but at the same time not transmitting any, or should we say, too much UI to partner.

You talk eloquently about the horror stories that Smith Echo practitioners have and, I know, because of your own conscientious practice of Active Ethics, it may not occur to you that some may get around those difficult decisions by using more off limits evidence than you.

I, myself, gleaned much experience playing complete odd and even signals while playing as partners with members of the Omar Sharif Circus bridge team in various match point events, and to my recollection I have never played better before or since. Since, as you know, an even card played or discarded, in addition to denying interest in that suit, also carries suit preference implications which in turn usually results in pause for thought when one has a choice of cards to play. This break in tempo, even if brief, can be used to break ties as to what partner is trying to tell you.

Does Smith Echo lean in that direction also or is it different and can be played ethically without having to jump through hoops?

To my knowledge this question and others like it are seldom asked, at least in public, but, especially from a player like you, your answer may be eagerly anticipated.

Keep up writing about the tales of the Old Master. Your readers will get a big kick out of your stories since all of us, especially the long toothed ones like me, have a special Old Master in our past (usually a mentor), that we can associate with.

Thanks for the well wishes Bobby – much appreciated – through the round robin format of 23 ten board matches, parity is quite evident – but generally the better teams find a way to make it through to the round of eight – with one or two upsets quite possible though. Our own team is in such a situation -placed 11th with time running out.

Your question about Smith Echo and the necessary ethics required to use such methods is an intriguing one – and I will give it my attention in the future.

Off the top of my head, it would seem there is no reason to single Smith Echo out (vis a vis other carding practises). Any methodology – including standard momma papa signals, can cause ethical issues at the table.

But I do feel there is far more to Smith Echo than most practitioners have really thought about – many subtle situations where it is not clear what the message should be or how it can be delivered in the context of a particular hand or situation.

And then there is the whole realm of psyching Smith Echo (analagous to falsecarding) when you know that a true Smith signal will help declarer more than it will help partner.

But if that is part of your game, should that be explained somewhere on the convention card – or is that just good bridge?

Anyway, as I said, your simple question could beget a complex answer Bobby.