You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Gene, I've reworded Q1, hope that helps. Petter, you can indicate your answers to both questions, e.g. 1a = answer 1 to Q1, answer a to Q2
Feb. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The questions approximate to -

1) Do you prefer to open 1C with 4D2C playing simple methods?
2) Does this change if playing more complex methods?
Feb. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My reason for posting this is that I've always preferred systems as described in Q2a above (most recently, 1D = natural/11-13 balanced, 1C = natural/17-19 balanced), but I'm further developing an idea for a fairly complex system based on natural opening bids (5-card spade, 4-card heart) - not the sort of thing usually played by system geeks! Not sure this poll will answer much with regard to the method's potential effectiveness but I'm interested in the results nonetheless.
Feb. 10, 2017
Mike Bell edited this comment Feb. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
How was North's tempo last time he held 28 for a 3NT rebid?

Marshall, this only needed about four lines and three options. “You have x auction. If it matters your hand is y. Does the hesitation demonstrably suggest - Option a: Passing, Option b: bidding on, Option c: none of the above”
Feb. 2, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Alternatively, partner could just make the correct bid over 2NT.
Feb. 1, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Slightly OT but in a similar vein - I've defended a slam where oppo had Jxx opposite xxxx, my partner was on lead with stiff ace.
Jan. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Just realised I failed to read the question (perhaps too distracted trying to work out who these opponents could be) - I was trying to write that I'd usually not enforce the penalty.
Jan. 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
More seriously, I wanted to answer, “usually”. Foe example, I can't imagine letting oppo off a revoke if they had enforced a similar penalty on my partnership on the previous board.
Jan. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The question is invalid - I'm yet to find two opponents approximately as good as me.
Jan. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also, how does the director decide whether to waive the penalty? Now the opponents get away with their revoke iff both I and the TD like them? :p
Jan. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It would also be considered a waste of the director's time in many situations, especially in clubs with a playing director.
Jan. 28, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agree that disclosing a five-card major helps a lot for defence after the opening lead. If I show four-plus hearts opposite regular Stayman, I may still have five clubs. If I show five hearts opposite puppet Stayman, it's unlikely I have more than three clubs.
Jan. 11, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Jan. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In terms of information leakage, this method is largely equivalent, but strictly superior, to 1N:3C or 1N:2N Puppet.
Jan. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I was also about to ask which of Stayman and blasting came out better at pairs, but it feels like the methodology of this might be quite difficult - how does one determine the best lead vs 3NT without knowing how many tricks are being made in 4S?
Jan. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Han, great work. The comparative results are all quite intuitive to me, but seeing the absolute results for a hand like that is very interesting.

My guess is that including all 4333s in 1N:3N will increase the theoretical advantage of bidding Stayman. It won't make much difference to 1N:2C, 2D:3N (they don't know where your doubleton is, after all) but you'll get more club leads against the auction 1N:3N.

Even if that is the case, it seems clear that the additional disadvantages of bidding Stayman (information leakage helping subsequent defence, giving 4th seat a chance to double Stayman or overcall at the two-level) would give 1N:3N the edge.

I don't suppose you have any numbers for how much better Stayman is than Puppet in terms of the opening lead?

Thanks again.
Jan. 10, 2017
Mike Bell edited this comment Jan. 10, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I think the only workable approach is for players to choose their primary partnership/team for selection matters. You get the same issue between age groups as well, usually the strongest U21 is a contender for the U26 team.

There were two players from around our time who made it very clear they wouldn't consider playing in the U26 women's team; I'm pretty confident they felt they had to take this stance to maximise their chance of selection for the U26s.
Dec. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Overhearing announcements from other tables is a much bigger problem at barometer scoring, IMO national regulations should stipulate no announcements in such events.
Dec. 15, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To me, the “AI suggesting the same thing as the UI” sounds very similar to “the UI doesn't suggest anything”.
Dec. 11, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It should be standard procedure for polls to be carried out in writing rather than verbally. Both sides could check that the facts presented are correct before the poll is taken, and any flaws in procedure would be obvious to an appeals committee.
Dec. 11, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top