Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ian Wilson
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 12 13 14 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks, Paul, I think it's becoming clearer now.
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This example is exactly what I am having a problem with (in addition to that preposition):

Auction 1: 1 - 1; 2 - 3 … (finds their 4-4 fit)

Auction 2: 1 - 2; 2NT .. (didn't find the 4-4 fit)

Auction 3: 1 - 1 => 2; 2 .. (finds the 4-4 fit)

In auction 2, there is no reason for opener to probe a 4-4M fit, since responder denies one. Auction 3 is presumably illegal since only UI tells opener that responder may have a 4M. But this is orthogonal to HJ (a couple of comments above this one).
Nov. 18
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Indeed. I am impressed beyond words.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Yes, W changed 3 to a pass.
Nov. 14
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rixi Markus once told me that our system (Precision with bells and whistles) was a bad one, because we would reach many contracts that we weren't good enough to make. This would seem to suggest that there is a dynamic equilibrium between bidding, play and defence - as one improves, the others are bootstrapped into improving.
Nov. 8
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My (peripheral) vision is a lot worse than it used to be, but even with bifocals, I would be surprised if I missed either of those actions. I try hard not to look anywhere I'm not supposed to, but it is difficult to turn off one's analytical vision centres.
Oct. 25
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jim,
You need to backtrack to where the evil of Approach Forcing became part of bidding. It is quite possible to bid many hands by bidding what you expect to make. This works better than you might imagine for single-suiters and balanced hands. Pronounced 2-suiters are not handled well, but you can't have everything.

So, assuming you can teach LTC in a few minutes, then:
- all suit bids are natural (5+ except for 4441's)
- no responses are forcing (advancer decides the terminal spot)
- 6-7 loser hands = 1<suit>; 5-6 loser hands = 2<suit>; 4-5 loser hands = 3<suit>. Anything else is too rare to bother with
- 1NT=12-14; 2NT=15-18; 3NT=19+
- optional conventions: Stayman, Blackwood (to avoid accidents)
- overcalls follow the same principle. No WJOs!

My guess why this works as well as it does is that in most auctions, far more information is transmitted than you need to reach a playable (but often not optimal) spot. It also helps that there are no complex sequences to get wrong. Your (dwindling) brain cells can be usefully employed in the play or defence.
Oct. 20
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4.2 1c - <anything> - <any # NT>:
- systems on if there are no natural suit bids in <anything>
- systems off otherwise
My personal experience has been that basic Precision + weak NT equips beginners to handle many ‘ordinary’ hand decisions better than 5cM, strong NT, “standard” systems.
Oct. 19
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Narrow-gauge perhaps?
Oct. 17
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Invitational, natural (6-card suit and 2/3 top honours, ideally).
Oct. 7
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Me too. I don't know whether I'm trippely disappointed or just dubbely.
Oct. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This is teams, no leakage from other tables.
Also no suggestion of an ethical problem. I was surprised by the lack of response from the director about the system implications, hence my post.
Sept. 11
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
For some reason, this doesn't look like a 6-loser hand to me. Perhaps there should be an LTC adjustment (like the one for Queens) for hands that lack first-round controls..
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
This was a fun hand for us. S declined to open for some reason, so we were in 3 on the lead of J. I won this in hand and led a toward dummy. S won, cashed A, and led Q. Won this, drew two rounds of trumps, and played 4 rounds of ditching the loser. 3+1 scored well in our club.
Aug. 2
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Paul:
I see that you correctly diagnosed that I was South :)
I knew that 5s hadn't been discussed (just getting all the main boxes on the CC filled in in 5 minutes before the start of the event is quite an achievement), but whatever it is, I think it must be a grand slam try in hearts. Not that I was at all happy about our combined heart length.

re Aside1: I thought about it. But Kokish seemed not too much of a distortion and there it was on the CC…

re Aside2: it would have felt better to have one GNT B once out of the 5 times we made it to the Nationals :)
July 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The entire system discussion occurred while filling out a CC just before the start of the event (a pickup partner, as stated). The relevant bits went “2c? Kokish?” “OK” and “1430? no, RKC” “what responses?” “3041”. Then we moved on to more mundane things like major suit raises.
July 28
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If N has AQx then there is no upside to 7 as opposed to 7NT - N has to have to have 2 fast winners to take care of your 2 losing clubs. It's not as if you can afford to cash cAK and then ruff a club low!
July 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
We still don't know that we have 9 hearts. N would have bid the same way with AQ doubleton.
July 26
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have an official letter on ACBL stationery signed by Chris Patrias that states that Bludgeon, a system even more natural than yours, is playable anywhere, under any conditions. He did suggest that we prealert parts of it just to avoid whining about unusual methods (my words, not Chris's). It is very refreshing - and interesting in its own right - to play systems like this sometimes as a welcome break from artificiality and the relentless march of approach-forcing methods.
July 15
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In a strong club framework, it's useful to get these hands out of the 1 openers. Obviously if you can intervene at the 4-level then you can jam a 1 opener. So I think we're ahead here, in that partner is in the picture.

If not playing a strong then Namyats is less useful. Perhaps.
July 3
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... 12 13 14 15
.

Bottom Home Top