Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Eric Sieg
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
What's the logic in passing showing a 2nd round control and bidding denying a control? Doesn't bidding now make it harder for partner to communicate what sort of control they have?
July 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For my 2 other choice: both minors, less than invitational
July 16
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
follow up after 3 should either include some sort of non serious or an agreement about the shape it shows (bid fragment or bid shortness). With neither of these in play and both sides bidding optimistically, you get too high.
July 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
“Disaster prone” seems like a huge mischaracterization. I have a hard time believing that errors are anywhere approaching “occasional” as well. I'm hardly an expert and have bid kickback hundreds of times in the past 2.5 years with various partners who have kickback experience and had exactly 1 kickback confusion - which was closer to a brain fart than a real confusion.

The people who think it is confusing or disaster prone seem to see issues everywhere while those who actually play the convention and are comfortable with it can comfortably play it and reap the huge benefits in imps/matchpoints (especially in minor suits) without issue.

I think it is telling that many of the votes for 4 being natural in this auction are from people who are convinced kickback is confusing/hard while those who have experience have an easy vote for kickback.

That's even with a system that makes things tougher - most systems are either going to go full relay or convert to natural after 2. Having 2 be a relay that finds exactly 1 more card without anything else about responders shape seems like an unfortunate use of space that then makes the follow up auction a lot more ambiguous.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Depending on how they play it, opener might still bid 1NT to clarify responder's strength and shape. However, opener would then need to come back and set spades immediately after if this was the case. That didn't happen here, so after not setting spades multiple times it doesn't seem possible that 4 could be natural.
July 9
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This seems like an easy invite. Aces, Ts, and 9s are all better than the classic 4321 HCP system accounts for, especially with Ts touching 9s. Two 4 card suits and one of them is a major. If partner has 4 hearts, your club holding is fabulous.

Rather than giving example hands, I have been pretty happy with the K&R hand evaluator so would recommend putting hands into that to see what it thinks.

Link: http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi
July 6
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Added 2NT as lebensohl to the list. Would have thought it would be lebensohl here, but in discussion someone thought it should be both minors. That might also have been wishful thinking since it would work well on this hand :P
July 5
Eric Sieg edited this comment July 5
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 being natural here makes some sense, but how do you make up for stayman while still accounting for the possible spade situations (4, 5+ non invite, 5+ invite, 5+ GF)?
July 3
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Zastera's argument below convinced me I'm wrong, 3 should be passable.
June 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
That's a good point on partner could bid 4 COG. For some reason didn't think about it from that perspective, so 3 being passable makes more sense.
June 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Would have bid 1 originally, but I don't think I can pass now since 3 seems like it ought to be forcing. It seems like if partner wants to get out below game they needed to pass 3. What if partner has a 7 count with 5 spades and wants to head to game but doesn't know the right spot between either major or 3NT. Wouldn't they bid 3 to show the 5th spade to see how the auction develops? Our hand could certainly be a lot stronger than it is. Passing seems like regret for not starting with 1. If they have a heart void and couldn't stomach a pass of 3, them's the breaks.

I wonder if 4 should perhaps be a choice of games just in case partner has a doubleton heart and 5 spades.
June 27
Eric Sieg edited this comment June 27
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Magic the Gathering does this. There are different levels of rules enforcement with the Regular being the social/casual “potentially educate players but don't penalize them” and competitive being the more serious one where people get more nitpicky about the rules. Calling out the two levels might help with tournaments as well because it makes people more aware that such exists and it isn't the same as their daytime club game where anything goes.
June 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Are there units that have done a revenue share with clubs from tournaments? We floated some ideas about that but got tripped up on mechanics of how to determine which clubs get how much. Also questions of non profit funds going to for profit clubs, etc. Would certainly be great to learn how it is done elsewhere.
June 13
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Christian That's something I didn't anticipate when I started playing multi but the extra 2 level bid has been the big winner for us. We play a multi 2 and a precision 2 and then the best bid for 2 has some choices. We initially tried a “constructive diamond preempt” as Kit seems to do but I have since fallen in love with 2 as both minors and avg imp pickup per 2 opener has been very high.
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Great article, thanks for taking the time to put it together. I've heard others express mini bridge as a good start but I think you do a better job of explaining why than many others.

Also, I appreciate and agree with your thoughts about technology. It feels like many people (especially 50+) think that “thing” + “technology” = now appeals to younger people. I love to see technology leveraged as a tool to make things easier/faster/etc but not at the cost of actual social/face to face interaction. BBO is a great way to practice with people who don't live nearby but if bridge went completely online/remote I would sadly bid this game adieu.

Pizza + cake being appealing is good to know as well. We've been doing that here but I didn't realize it actually mattered to people.
June 12
Eric Sieg edited this comment June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sure, I didn't see this as a way to wish for things to happen but rather a fun way to brainstorm. I've seen similar exercises in the past come up with some really good ideas that ended up getting implemented.
June 12
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To be clear, you can implement multiple changes. Don't think I can edit OP anymore to add that.
June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I play good/bad with some people but the scenarios where it is on are pretty defined and this isn't one of them. 2NT in competitive auctions is (when not defined otherwise) usually an attempt to find a fit/two places to play and that's how I would take it here as well.

To be fair,I'm more familiar with strong club systems where lebensohl here would be a lot less useful. Some sort of lebensohl/good bad seems a lot more appealing in a system with wider ranging openers.
June 11
Eric Sieg edited this comment June 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It seems like the unit board is seen as the enemy of the club owner here which is something I'm not sure I understand. As the clubs are the foundation for any successful bridge community, shouldn't finding ways to help/support local clubs be a priority for any unit board? If that's not the case, perhaps it is time to try to build a better relationship with the board or work to get more members on it who value the clubs.

I talk with club owners regularly and bounce ideas off of them and look for ways to help them and I am hardly the only one (or even the most dedicated on) on our board.

As for membership/retention, I would assume that's a given. Sectionals should be a net positive income flow or why would they be held? Thus everything from the ACBL and then some of the sectional revenues would go to “good things” that help with recruitment and retention in some manner.

Some examples for us:

1) Help create and distribute newsletter to units and clubs
2) Support local youth bridge efforts with money for their big event
3) Help send youth with financial need to the youth NABC
4) Send intro letter w/ free play coupons to new members and transfers that they club owners can send to the unit for reimbursement if used at their club

We've also spent quite a bit of time working to help clubs out in ways that don't show up as an expense.

While I certainly think there are things that can be done to improve the ACBL and am eager to contribute to any discussion on that subject, I'm not sure that this article really proposes any practical action.
June 10
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pro-Am-Ham?
June 8
.

Bottom Home Top