Join Bridge Winners
All comments by Simon Stocken
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
My bag from WestJet from UK also took forever - I don't think its an Air Canada issue specifically.
July 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I have offered my services to transition them to bidding. Very well done in Bratislava. I had a flight booked but my passport managed to get locked behind a closed door….
July 20, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Andrew - this is great to read this.
I've been working on a system where a 2C response is GF and very nebulous with no guarantee of any clubs at all. Your way seems to solve some of the problems I was coming up against

I have no regular partner to play this with so it is mostly theory. I had not reduced my options for the 2C response as you have. One primary reason for my exploration was to keep responder's hand as concealed as possible and so have him declare as many NT contracts (provided it does not wrong-side them) and also as many contracts in the other Major. This brings me to the point of my comment.

Would it work after 1 2 to reverse the meanings of the 2 and the 2 response?

2 shows the 6th
2 shows 4+ s

This would enable the s to be declared by responder (or opener should the hand require it).

This also creates a bidding opportunity for those situations where one member of the partnership is an expert professional, and will always maximise as declarer and the other partner is a paying client who has trouble following suit….the expert can always choose to declare.

Another advantage is that after

1 2
2 (showing 6+ s) 2 can then agree s at the lowest possible level.

The hand above would be even easier to bid as slam exploration can begin after the 2 bid

——-
My other thoughts on this were that after a 1 opener responder can bid 2 on some hands with 4 cards in s when the suit was of poor quality (possibly even 5 bad s)

——-
I've observed that Robson-Allfrey sometimes play this structure after 1:

2 GF (nebulous - unsure of exact length promised)
2 5+ s with 8+ points
2 weak spade raise
2 good spade raise

The advantage of taking hands with 8-11 points and 5+ s out of the 1NT response may be valuable.

—-
As I stated above it is all just theory for me at the moment.
I noted your suggestion to deal hands on BBO and practise
July 18, 2017
Simon Stocken edited this comment July 18, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Good luck Eric - if you know of other partners please feel free to direct them my way
July 17, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
If Tom's bidding is correct - why not go for 6NT?
July 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I emailed Jordan (the journalist) and mentioned the youth angle, referencing John O'Hara's BW article and linking the video of 440 kids playing earlier in the year in Toronto.
July 16, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
matchpoints 6NT looks to be the winner.
July 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Hi Eric.
I'm a bridge teacher from the UK - I teach bridge to kids and in schools as well as adults. I'm already here in Toronto. Aged 16 I was selected for the England U25 Squad. I've not got many US Master Points as I rarely play over here. Last time I played in the NABCs was Vegas 2014 - I got partnered with a Romanian/USA junior Marius ? and a regular pairing for the teams. We played team Monaco in the first round - we lost 100 - 150 over 64 boards.

I like to play 2 over 1 with a semi-forcing 1NT response.
The rest can be discussed.
my email is myname at gmail.com.

I don't necessarily check my bridge-winners emails so best to contact me through the email or via Messenger
July 15, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks Craig - I did not take it the wrong way at all. I realised I should have phrased my post better. I was also kindly sent a private message by a member here pointing out that my remark was not best phrased.

Phil - “bidding systems are proprietary” - just some clarification needed on that. Obviously full declaration when any relevant sequence occurs at the table and some declaration on a convention card, but other than that it's their property - is that right?
July 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Thanks David - just a brief glance so far - but it is clearly excellent.
July 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
It was indeed an innocent comment - I have since deleted this phrase. Ken's substitute phrase is excellent. I set up the Andrew Robson Bridge Club with Andrew. Alexander Allfrey also worked there - both are good friends. I am interested in the bidding developments that very rarely arise. I worked out a possible scheme of responses after a 2U+2663 GF and it was getting out of hand as it was so complex. I am sure Andrew would be forthcoming if I asked him.

There was no question of what you suggest Craig - they are most ethical. There is not a lot of defensive preparation needed to counter a 2C GF bid. I would say none at all in fact. Double with Clubs as long as you are sure opponents can't make 2C redoubled. Otherwise pre-empt, overcall or pass. Opponents are less likely to be involved in these auctions.

Thank you for the feedback
July 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
2 2 could be made better if this bid shows a double negative without support - either singleton or doubleton. This would mostly avoid wrong siding when opener has 4/5 hearts
July 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I would love to help support them towards bridge with bidding.
Mini-bridge is an introduction and encourages good card-play.
July 5, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
great to hear Alan
July 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
I believe the easiest way to teach beginners is that opening bids of 1D, 1H and 1S promise 5 cards. Thus if you overcall there is no difference in suit length.

Opening Bids of 2D, 2H and 2S show 6 cards. Opening 3-level 7 cards. The method is inherently logical and simple and emphasises the importance of the 5-card suit - the most important feature in declarer play (usually right to start establishing a 5-card suit in trumps and no-trumps and also when leading against NTs
Bidding clubs is usually code:
Opening 1C promises one club at least - a ‘Stayman’ style opening bid. .
Opening 2C is code
Opening 3C is natural 6/7 +cards

This method - the 5-card diamond opening - is becoming more popular at expert level.
July 3, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Rons book is acol based. Quite verbose
June 9, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Amareshe - that link has expired. I am interested to know more about this game.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Michael
This game you speak of is a quite brilliant game, especially once you introduce the ‘misere" option. I originally read about it in a book on card games and this game was written about by Hubert Phillips. He calls the game ’booby' and the extra suit ‘nanos’ where 7 nanos means you are bidding to make zero tricks. He ranks this suit between hearts and spades. Here are some variations that I believe improve the game. Dummy is dealt one card - we turn this card face up. We also turn a card up from dummy every time a ‘positive’ bid is made.

This game has many additional elements that bridge does not - it loses many too in the bidding of course, but that is the point of course as bidding is the difficult part of bridge that takes many years to learn.

These are some of the advantages I have noted:

You remove dull distributions - when you start with 17 cards you are guaranteed to be able to create a hand with a void.

The skill of discarding cards is considerable:
1. Discarding to get the best hand possible knowing you will likely win the auction.
2. Discarding to get the best hand possible while retaining defensive potential as you are not guaranteed to win the auction
3. Discarding to get the best hand possible while retaining the little cards (2s and 3s are vital in this game - see below) to prevent the misere option outbidding you.
4. Discarding defensively - you are not going to compete effectively in the auction and yet you do not want to improve dummy for an opponent's benefit.
5. Discarding with a view to going ‘misere’ - extremely skilful option. You have to have 2s and 3s in your hand and you have to seed dummy with these cards too. Holding a suit such as A K Q 10 5 4 3 2 is very powerful. Keep 7 cards in your hand and throw a little one into dummy.

Bidding - once you introduce the aspect of turning a card face-up with every bid you make the bidding very much more tactical. If you are two or three-suited you need to know what dummy holds, so you bid slowly. If you are one-suited you are best to bid fast and high to stop dummy being revealed.

There are also lead-directing considerations with the bidding. Bidding is highly tactical with the extra suit introduced.

Playing the cards - one great aspect is often hands are over quickly, especially with bridge players.

Playing ‘misere’ is great fun and an exceptional skill, quite different from normal declarer play.

In short I can not rate this game highly enough. My son found bridge dull in comparison to this game when we played as a family (he was 6-10 years old)

VARIATIONS:
You can deal everyone 13,14, 15 or 16 cards with the appropriate number in dummy.
With 13 cards - it is effectively cutthroat.
Choosing to turn cards face up or not (at the beginning or as bids are made) makes bidding for dummy less random

My job is to teach bridge in schools and to kids - one observation is that they don't like too many rules and they like to bend rules.
May 30, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
There's an assumption that two hearts have to be lost.
There are chances to throw two hearts one on AD one on a club.
West holding AQ clubs is on a mortons fork.
The hearts may be blocked
Opponents may fail to unblock.
Chances to do the wrong thing in clubs as stated above.
Zia plays a lot of poker.
My experience having played poker a lot is that it helps enormously placing cards when you play bridge. Some players can't help but reveal their holdings especially when you start looking at them. I'm puzzled why Zia hasn't played JC at trick 2.
May 24, 2017
You are ignoring the author of this comment. Click to temporarily show the comment.
Agreed - I've screen saved it. One day I will have a partner with whom to play such intricacies
May 21, 2017
.

Bottom Home Top