Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Ronald Kalf
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
A nice challange, Frances. I would bid your examples wit Italian cue-bids and D.I. as follows:
1) starting from 4; 4-5; 5!N-6; 7. 5 denies -control, shows A; 5N is D.I. declares “all 1st round controls” and interogates “any extras”. 6 shows as source of tricks.
2) starting from 4: 4-4; 4N-5; 5N-6; 7. 4N is again D.I. (controls in all suits); 5 A; 5N D.I. 6 as a potential source of tricks. Note that with AQxxx you would bid 7 directly.
I don't damn RKCB, but it is my observation that it is used to often. I know bridge players who would be better off without it.
Also I don't contradict you with regard to your examples. I am sure that more then half in our bridge club would be better at slam bidding using “my” methods, but only a few would be able to come up with the reasoning from your examples.
Sept. 29, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
4crd is illogical, pard has FG value and will bid if he has 4. Playing WNT, X shows 15+ balanced, no stopper, but I suppose you play SNT and pass now with WNT. Should be answers 1+2: support and extras.
Sept. 29, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would expect 2 forcing and an alert if not. The other way around is okay for me to, but both standard and not alertable??? Obviously I still don't understand alerting! Again I pleed to banish alerting and get back to the good old practise of enforcing CCs.
Sept. 28, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Roland, I agree with most of your post. It would have been an excelent post had you completely avoided taking sides. After 15+ posts and 4000+ comments on what went wrong in Wroclaw, I would like to get back to discussing bridge problems.
Sept. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I agree with Bob, that missing occasionally missing a 4-4 M-fit is the downside of WNT in any position. I don't want to open a WNT vs. SNT discussion in this thread, but IMO the plusses outweigh the minuses. The real rwason for allowing 1M with 4 in 3rd/4th is that I want to have a solid 1N. I count the hand given as 11-. I guess the 1-voters are not used to playing WNT. Opening 1 with less then 12 clashes with the rest of your WNT-based system. A WNT-based system is more then just saying, we open 1N with 12-14.
Sept. 27, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Those situations are much rarer then the prevalent use of RKCB suggests. After the trump suit is set with 3M or even 4m Italian cuebids plus D.I. (Or Turbo if that suits you better) allows exchange of information instead of Q&A.
Sept. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If RKCB-bidder cannot place the endcontract either directly or after asking for specific Ks (personally, I prefer spiral scan!) he shouldn't have bid 4N in the first place.
Sept. 26, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1M-2M is 8-11 in our system (weaker jands bid F1N) and of course we alert. Q: Why do you alert? (Silly question, just ask the meaning, but ok). A: Because our raise can be stronger then usual (I admit, ignoring the silly question and just saying 8-11 with support would be better). No further questions, just “your alert is bewildering”.
Sept. 25, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I used Henry's point ranges (my point count, not just hcp). I didn't notice 1N being no 4crd M and only took weak two out of 1. the new percentages are:
1st 22%, 29%, 5%, 7%, 4%, 32% and 2nd 25%, 21%, 5%, 6%, 3%, 39%
Sept. 24, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 25, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did 5000 with 1 both minors 5-4 or better.
1st hand 1m: 14%, 1: 29%, 1: 5%, 1N: 16%, 2m: 4%, Pass: 31%.
2nd hand if 1st hand does not open. Playing my system 1st hand opens 41%.
Percentages are 13%, 21%, 6%, 16%, 3%, 40% respectively.
Sept. 24, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Leonard, of course I would and there are also reasons to upgrade a hand from a WNT to a SNT or a Pass to an opening bid. What I was trying to say, is that there is no reason to get mad if you misguess because an opponent doesn't have the exact highcards that you expect.
Sept. 24, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Barry, I sometimes pass with 12 hcp because I substract 1 for AQ stiff. That IS systemic. Alertable? A crime? Unethical?
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Roland, I do not play a highly unusual system, because psyching is not part of our system. Psyching is allowed if it is not systematic, which it isn't. I don't psyche very often, but here is an example: http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/bidding-problem-13287/ Pard doubled 4 and we had a bad score. Please note that the majority voted for pass, but nobody wrote anything about a suspected psyche. Well, I had psyched and I agree with the majority that pard shouldn't have doubled. Not because he could smell a psyche, but he should consider that we probably have no play for 5 AND because I might have opened light. Until now this was my only psyche this year. Last year I psyched twice. I remember one of those quite well, because one opponent was very upset. The bidding: P-(P)-1S-(X); XX-(2H)-P-(3H); AP. We were accused of cheating because my partner didn't double 3. After asking 4 good players their opinion, he came to me and said “let's shake hands, everything is okay”. My partner has never psyched in the 5 years that we are playing together. Is this a hidden agreement?
Sept. 23, 2016
Ronald Kalf edited this comment Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I did a simulation with the following results for hcp vs. KC. 0-5: .24, 6-8: .79, 9-11: 1.30, 12-14: 1.82, 15-17: 2.35, 18-20: 2.91, 21+: 3.47. I counted the K of the longest fit (highest at equal length) as the 5th KC.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There is an extremely thin line between psyching and an agreement to routinely open certain hands in 3rd seat. I would always open Txxxx Jxx QJxx x in 3rd seat because opps are bound to have some game. That is “just bridge” IMO. Is pard aware of this? Certainly, if (s)he is a good player. I expect her/him to bid as if I have a (possibly light) opening bid until opps reveal a psyche by their bidding. It is not my problem if one oponent trusts me more than her/his partner. That is not illegal IMO and that of a TD of the DBV (German Bridge Organisation). I also asked if we should make a remark on our CC and/or alert. The answer was “no”. We have no psyche control other then common sense, we don't even play Drury.
I would not open Axxx xx KJxxx xx. IMO it is not strong enough for a “light” opening bid, but to strong to be (pretty) sure that opps have a game. With the example given by OP I would prefer to open a weak two.
In the good old days psyche control was not forbidden. In KSU a psyche after a 1-opening was so common that jumping to 4 was not allowed and 1-1; 3-3N/4 revealed the psyche. After an opening bid in 1st/2nd seat a jump in a new suit was psyche control: rebid your suit with a psyche, never pass.
Bad? I don't think so. I certainly don't like over-regulating the game. As it is I do my best to stick to the rules and when in doubt I ask an official of the DBV.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Stefan, I didn't write that I agree with the policy, but it is the reality. Why should I put a lot of energy in the design of a system that I cannot play? THAT is my point. I played Regres for a while as it was not forbidden. There is a lot to memorize, in fact more then my then partner was willing to invest. It is not just about obstructing opponents, but of course opps have to tune their defense. Same as against Multi, Tartan, nebulous D etc. Rules and regulations differ from country to country, making it even more difficult. From what I read, ACBL is most restritictive, but here (in Germany) I cannot play NTO (1N for take-out) because a 1N-overcall must either be natural or promise an anchor suit. I designed my system compliant with German regulations.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
The same advantages as in 1st/2nd/3rd seat. The biggest advantage of WNT is when you DON'T open 1N. Your minor suit openings are either strong in distribution or in high cards. You have to understand that your NT-range is an integral part of your bidding system. Changing the range also changes the rest of your system. Although I take inferences from the fact that pard has a passed hand, I do not eant to play 2 or 3 or even 6 (taking vul. Into account) different bidding systems.
Sept. 23, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Taking this together with some other posts from the WBG I'd say that calling a director before, during or after the game will not help you anyway.
Sept. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 with a one-suiter, 1N Raptor, X 15+, 1D both M but not necessarily 5-5.
Sept. 21, 2016
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I don't understand the enthusiasm about forcing pass. Yes, it has a lot of merits, but you will not have many opportunities to practise. Playing different systems depending upon vulnerability adds another level of complexity in design and strain on memory. At 65 I say one system is enough!
Sept. 21, 2016
.

Bottom Home Top