Join Bridge Winners
Are Smith-Peters pants or is it me?

I have played an awful lot of bridge but I haven't yet come to grips with Smith Peters (Smith Echo). Recently I started playing with a partner who is addicted to Smith Peters. He is addicted to a whole heap of other things, some good and some bad, but Smith was the real bug-bear. I found that I was:

(a) Constantly worrying over whether or not I had the right holding to Smith

(b) In the course of so worrying, I was inadvertently giving UI because I ended up hesitating

(c) I didn't like wasting good intermediates - in fact in some cases I couldn't rationally afford wasting the good intermediates to Smith

(d) Smith affects the count of the hand so it made me more prone to misdefend

After a more than a few defensive abominations that would shame a 5-yearold, my partner suggested switching to Smith for dislike as opposed to Smith for like.  The situation improved in that we only misdefended approximately half the hands we were previously misdefending but we were still misdefending far more than if we had never heard of Smith

So I came to the conclusion that in my case, I would pay out to the cases where Smith is reputedly invaluable, because my defence would be significantly improved without Smith.  

Are you all Smith addicts?  Should I just persevere?  Will it come right in the end?  Or is Smith just pants and not worth the trouble?

(translation for American readers - "pants" means items of underwear and not trousers.  It's not a flattering term.)

Smith Peters are an invaluable tool
Smith Peters take some practice but they are worth it in the end
You are a duffer! Smith Peters are easy, you should be able to get it
Smith Peters are pants

Sorry, to answer polls. Registered users can vote in polls, and can also browse other users' public votes! and participate in the discussion.

Getting results...
loading...
89 Comments
Getting Comments... loading...
.

Bottom Home Top