32519

I am using BBOs deal generator with the following restrictions set: 5X♠/5X♣ 5 - 10 HCP: Odds = 0.45% 5X♠/5X♦ 5 - 10 HCP: Odds = 0.45% 5X♥/5X♣ 5 - 10 HCP: Odds = 0.45% 5X♥/5X♦ 5 - 10 HCP: Odds = 0.45% And that is where I got the total of 1.8% from. 6X♦ 5 - 11 HCP: Odds = 2.97% Difference in favour of the weak 2♦ = 1.17% So if these numbers are wrong, then BBOs deal generator is spitting out the wrong odds. Regarding the rest of your post: Once I've revealed my hand via the 2NT/Unusual 2NT 5/5 minors bid, the hand layout is known. Good opponents have demonstrated that they can use the known hand layout to bid and make thin games in the majors by finessing partner for any missing high cards in both majors.

I think you misread what I posted. 1. Good opponents were hammering me with U2NT 5/5 minors whenever I used it! So I dropped it. 2. Muiderberg per se is not bad. The bad part is that it comes up so seldom that you are wasting the weak 2♥ and weak 2♠ which comes up a lot more frequently. A weak 2♦, 5-11 HCP has a probability of 2.97% of occurring. Muiderberg has a probability of 1.8% of occurring for the 4 possible hand patterns combined. So you are losing on the frequency of occurrence.

Which conventions on the opponents CCs do you gloat the most about, because - 1. They are so bad you know your side will be getting a good result if they get an opportunity to use it? 2. They come up so seldom that the opponents are wasting a good bid which can be used for something else with a higher frequency of occurrence? Regarding 1, good opponents were hammering me on the 2NT/Unusual 2NT bid promising 5/5 in the minors. I have since dropped it and can now smile when I see it still on others CCs. Regarding 2, I can smile when I see Muiderberg on the opponents CCs. It comes up so seldom that they are wasting the 2♥ and 2♠ bids. Chanelling these through the Multi 2♦ bid, they lose the weak 2♦ bid which has a much higher frequency of occurrence. The weak 2♦ also has a greater nuisance value than most would care to acknowledge. Not only have you consumed the entire 1-level bidding space, but also half of the 2-level as well.

Would Kaplan interchange qualify?

Pray, tell us all Barry; Why can we not upvote the posts of the forum moderators/admin if we think they have given a great reply to anything someone else has posted? Anyway, +1 for this one.

Very interesting this. Usually it is done the other way round i.e. replacing Landy with Multi-Landy.

I couldn't find FILM doing a Google search. What is it? How does it work? Or better, do you know of a link to it? Gerber we all know. What exactly are the other three?

Transfer Walsh is gaining in popularity.

I have a completely different question on "kickback." Both Minorwood and Redwood are frowned upon by many, yet both save bidding space. So I want to extend (simplify?) the term "kickback" (Redwood) to all 4-suits as follows - 1. With ♣ as the agreed trump suit, 4♦ becomes "kickback" for ♣ (currently known as Redwood). 2. With ♦ as the agreed trump suit, 4♥ becomes "kickback" for ♦ (currently known as Redwood). 3. With ♥ as the agreed trump suit, 4♠ becomes "kickback" for ♥ (as it is currently known). 4. With ♠ as the agreed trump suit, 4NT becomes "kickback" for ♠ (currently known as Blackwood for whichever version of Blackwood you use). This doesn't really change anything currently in use. Instead it is to create a unified term for keycard asking sequences for all 4-suit. Any takers?

This thread has been started to gather different methods in an attempt to improve on my own agreements. Transfer bids are an integral part of the modern game to rightside a contract and to keep the stronger hand hidden. Some transfer bids are so straightforward that virtually all players use them. To start the thread, the following transfer bids immediately come to mind - 1. Stayman / MSS (although not technically a transfer bid it serves the same purpose) 2. Jacoby transfers 3. 4-way transfers 4. Texas / SA Texas 5. NAMYATS 6. Transfer pre-empts Less popular/common transfer sequences include - 7. Puppet Stayman continuations 8. Continuations over a strong 2♣ opening What others are out there?

Why can I not upvote a post by one of the forum moderators / admin whenever I think they have made an excellent reply to whatever someone else has posted? :unsure:

I had to Google Good/Bad 2NT. The theory certainly sounds good.

When in 1st seat partner passes and the auction continues, P-(1M)-?, AGAINST GOOD OPPONENTS I no longer bid the Unusual 2NT promising 5/5 in the minors. Good opponents have demonstrated time and again that they can use the information given (the hand layout) to nail me. Nowadays I choose to pass instead. Sure the opponents may now have an uncontested auction but declarer doesn't have the hand layout. This only becomes apparent by trick 4 or 5 and by then he sometimes has chosen a wrong line of play. I still use it against weak opponents as they appear unsure how to deal with the bid. How about you?

From this I think they are trying to include the concepts of The Magic Club & Sparkling Diamond into this system.

Oops! Thanks Paul, no wonder I couldn't find them. :) Do you perhaps have a link to the hand records of the 2011 European Bridge Championships. I can't find the on the EBUs website, only the results after each round.

So East psyched a transfer to ♥? Did your side buy the psyche? How did the bidding continue and what was the final contract?

How about a link to the hand records for the 2012 Bermuda Bowl? I failed to find them on either the WBF website or the ECats website.

Can someone help with the link to the convention cards of the participants in the 2013 European Bridge Championships starting on the 15th of June?

Where's the full hand Jilly?

Zel, if this has any resemblance to your previous posts on hands from your local club, I sit in fear to find out what you actually did at the table. I will wait patiently until you post the full hand with the actual bidding. :rolleyes:

How about this one: We once had a player at our local club who would vigorously shake the bidding box before bidding whenever he was dealt a big hand? :)

I don't like it. Partner may decide to compete in 3♠ over 3♥ thinking I am singleton or void in ♥ and can trump enough ♥ if his suit doesn't have the top honours etc. Now I show up with a doubleton ♥ and only 2 ♠ :angry:

My F2F partner absolutely insists on sitting East whenever we are assigned E/W in a Mitchell Movement or move E/W in a Howell Movement, saying that, "It doesn't feel right if I sit West." :) Another quirk is that she always carries the same green Parker Pen with her for filling in our our personals, saying that, "It's my lucky pen." :rolleyes:

Become the pioneer and offer a defence to the opening in the OP. The ACBL apparently allows 2NT for both minors. So why not 2NT for the majors as well? All that needs to be done is give them the suggested defence as well? (OK-So maybe a protracted fight with them before it will be accepted also awaits :ph34r:)

Is 2NT for 5/5 in the minors GCC legal?