Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Csaba Czimer
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Kieran: not that much - mostly only if they preempt in a minor. Our 1 response is or (maybe both) and not GF. The system is absolutely playable in practice, from the last 3 major championships we won 2 and were runner-up in the 3rd one. (and I play badly)
June 8, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Pass is either no stopper or strong desire to play. Responder redoubles unless short.
Redouble is some desire to play (good 4-carder, not too good 5).
Usual responses show stopper.
June 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
we play 1-1 as GF relay in precision (our 1 is 2+, weak NT is included). Relays are less straightforward playing a wide range system.
June 6, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
To eliminate sacrifices let's examine 7N, you never bid it as a sacrifice, I suppose. Avg tricks taken = 12.65 (12.69 double dummy). Much better, only one in three goes down. Nicely corellates with the old wisdom that you need at least 2/3 chance of making to bid a grand.
June 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I found a shocking fact in Richard Pavlicek's stats: those expert partnerships bid far too many grand slams: 12.26 tricks are made in average in 7 level contracts. It means that roughly 3 of 4 grands went down (a bit less than that if some of them went down 2 or more).
And these are the nationals.

OK, the picture can be shinier if we take into account that a (successful) 7-level sacrifice going down 4 can draw down the average well.
June 3, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(moved)
June 3, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment June 3, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I'd bid 4NT. There is nothing special having 10 HCP in partner's suits and no known 8-card fit when you promised 20 or more. Even your red suit honours are secondary. If partner has a shortness then either the heart king or the diamond QJ is useless.
May 2, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
In theory it looks good and (in theory) I like it, but…

The most serious problem: in those 6-level competitive auctions you can very rarely predict how many defensive tricks you really have.

The other thing is that facing those modern day preempts sacrifices are rarely cheap enough.
April 19, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Board 3 is the easiest one, East should bid 3 on 2 with his 4-loser 5-5, west can move on to game. 1-1N-3 is not terrible either.

You must be a bit old fashioned on board 2 and bid 2 on 1. I prefer 1NT, but know many players who don't.

Board 1: first of all, many players respond 1 lacking 5-card club support. This hand is borderline of course. A possible auction: (with walsh and 2-way checkback)
1 - 1
1N - 2 (GF)
2 - 3 (probably 4, because did not bid 1-2)
now West has a maximal hand with very valuable diamond honours, ha may move on
April 19, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
As far as I know GIB poduces a random sample for the unseen hands (that are consistent with the bidding and play so far) and chooses the line of play that is successful on most of those hands. Thus there is some random element in its play.
April 19, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Also far from standard, but let's see how easy it is in a good system:

1 - 1 16+ // 8-12 HCP, 4+
2N - 3 exactly 4=1=4=4 // 4+ (sets trump)
3 - 4 18-19 HCP // RKC
4 - 4 0 or 3 keycards // spiral scan
4N - 5 Q but no K // spiral scan
5 - 7 K but no Q // *

* here we can plan the play (not knowing about the Q): lead, A, K, ruff with the !Q, back to hand with a , ruff with the Q, A, ruff, draw trump, claim. (requires 3-3 or 4-2 hearts, if hearts are 3-3 then 4-1 trumps are OK too.

But let's say opener forgets this special 2N bid (or does not want to bid it because of the Q) and simply relays:
1 - 1 16+ // 8-12 HCP, 4+
1N - 2 relay // 6+
2 - 2N relay // 4+
3 - 3 slam try in // singleton , that is 1=6=4=2
4 - 4n orkc // good hand, AA, no Q
5 - 5 spiral scan // K, no K

even easier 7
April 5, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment April 5, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Rohit: a friend of mine did, and found very few errors (if I remember correctly)
Feb. 21, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
@Peter Hasenson

I think a hungarian museum of literature would pay you a nice sum for it, if you interested in selling it.
If not, they probably would be happy with a photocopy too.

Ottlik was also an excellent novelist (he is one of my favourite authors, funny but not due to Adventures in Card Play).
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
You may mention Ottlik if you like Adventures, it's based on his ideas.
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
1. Victor Mollo
2. Victor Mollo
3. Victor Mollo

My other favourites are Mike Lawrence, Terence Reese and Eddie Kantar
Feb. 20, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
OK, right. I try it another way. How will partner know that you may have diamond control when you fail to cuebid it?

Whenever he is missing any of the minor kings he will bid 4.
Feb. 18, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Feb. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Can't you have KJx, AKQJ, QJx, QJx when you cuebid 4 (take away a jack if that's too much for you)?
Feb. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
(I voted opener, but it's a bit more complicated like that…)

Opener must bid 6 instead of 6. It asks for the K in Kantar's original version of RKC, but most importantly, in the meantime it shows all the keycards too. In this case, responder can see 12 sure tricks, and 3-4 extra HCP that may be the 13th, in the worst case we'll take a finesse).

Originally the limited hand should be the teller, not the asker, in this case due to the cuebidding sequence the roles were somehow exchanged. The 6 bid tries to restore the original setup and tell responder (the unlimited hand) that we have all the keycards.

Anyway, did responder promise 6 spades with 3?

One more note: control (cue) bidding can cause a lot of headache many times (like in this case). It requires awfully lot of intelligence and intuition (and sometimes guesswork), that most of us (including world class players) simply do not have. Combined with last train it is even worse. And even when it's good, in many cases it helps the opponents more. In my view it is simply a bad tradition (well, at least in non-competitive auctions).

Had responder not worried about diamonds stopped he could have asked RKC himself on 4. Then

4 - 4N
5 (1/4) - 5N (kings?)
6 (K only) - 7N (claim 14 tricks before opening lead)
Feb. 18, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Feb. 18, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Sorry David, I just tried to (over)simplify things.
I just wondered how good this slam was.

Actually our bidding was:
1 (2+, 10-15) - 1 (any GF)
1N (11-14 BAL) - 2 (relay)
2 (4) - 2 (relay)
3 (3=4=3=3) - 3N (4333s play very badly, and no fit anyway)

Had I wanted, I could have invited with 4N (or even with 3 = ORKC and can still stop in 3N if partner is lower range)

OK, now seeing the 26 cards, please tell me how much chance this slam has. Thanks
Feb. 8, 2018
Csaba Czimer edited this comment Feb. 8, 2018
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I am happy to play in Europe when I read regulations like this one.
Jan. 28, 2018
.

Bottom Home Top