yunling

I‘ll be appreciated if you give a little more respect to their own culture. I can say that canis lupus arctos are all equal to me, but it does not matter at all. Canis lupus arctos with darker hair are discriminated among themselves. If I'm commenting on canis lupus arctos I'll try to state the fact instead of introducing my own cultural bias. e.g.People are not concerned with the racial segregation in Malaysia not because there is no/little dicrimination but because Islamic culture is more acceptable to them.

1♠. A 15 count for me, so playing standard I'll just pass after 1♠-1NT-2♥-2♠. 1NT can work most of the time but you won't be happy if LHO overcall 3m, passed to you.

My evaluator rates west as 17.5 and east 14 so west streched a little too far, with no high card in partner's longest suit, red suit honors aren't fascinating.

Okay, have told my teammates that :(

If possible I'll bring a team here. The team is ningbian + lennydarcy f0rest_zzy + yunling

Butterflies don't mind it at all. You have no right to justify whether they are different or not, unless you feel superior to them.

[hv=pc=n&s=skt94hdqt6cakj952&n=saq6hq863da82cq63&d=s&v=0&b=11&a=1c(natural%20or%20weak%2Fsuperstrong%20NT)p1hp1s(says%20nothing%20about%20clubs)p3nppp]266|200[/hv] This went down on a heart lead,with other room bid and made 6♣ after a precision 2♣ opening. So what should the 3NT mean here? How about 1♣-1♥-1♠-2♦-something-3NT?

Butterflies are not social animals so don't see how it's relevant. Wolf, lion or maybe killer whale are much more studiable but dunno the conclusion. Colour discrimination is common among canis lupus arctos if I got it right :(

I think that the development of youth bridge in China is more of a cultural thing. Chinese parents believe that mind games is a good way to improve children's intelligence development so it has been decades that Chinese are spending a lot of energy on it. But until a few years ago, bridge has not been a very popular game in China so not many are learning it. Most kids were playing weiqi(or "go" in the Japanese version of translation) or something like that then. These days some of them have turned to bridge(and also chess). Bridge teaching techniques in China borrowed a lot from them. Maybe you can get some good advice from a chess teacher:) If there is any successful experience in Chinese bridge teaching, it should be the good use of internet(thanks to BBO! and many other good sites). Via that, many materials, especially top-player's experience, are flowing into China and many of them are translated. It is a good way to reduce the preconception of local teachers and greatly improves efficiency. Bridge organisations in China is not unique at all. I think it is most similar to that in France. If there is anything different——most matches as well as teams are corporate-sponsored rather than personal-sponsored, which is the case for almost all sports in China. Thus a team name in spingold in Pan-China(the name of the corporation) instead of the more common surnames. Some years back employees in state-owned companies are encouraged to participate in the competition for the honour of the company, but it is less so these days. In fact China is learning from North America and encouraging native client players. But I believe that "future of bridge is with China" is still a huge overbid. The young Chinese players you see in Lyon are all from rich families in big cities(it is only affordable to them), which cannot reflect the situation of most bridge players in China. As I have mentioned above, they learn bridge in their school years only as a tool and most of them drop bridge in their late 20s. Well anyway glad to see more people playing bridge. btw, as a past Chinese junior team runner-up(2015), I played no more than 5 times in the local club this year. Job stress is a bit hard here:( Though "it is said" prize of Chinese tournaments is high, Chinese bridge pros are earning 1/5 to 1/3 of the average European pros. Life is hard:(

I recall a somewhat similar but more extreme hand, played in 2013: N ♠KJx ♥KQJx ♦Axx ♣Axx S ♠AQxxx ♥Axx ♦Qxxx ♣x Madala(S) opened 1♠ then showed 5341, after which Bocchi drove to 7♥,making. The other room went down in 6♠.

You might just try 1 or 2. The "modern Chinese popular precision" uses structure 2. I had played it with a few female friends and it worked ok for us.

I doubt if it is the case. Opener often has a major shortage so with a probable 3-1 fit it might be important for responder to be the declarer in order to guard that suit.

It has been discussed here: http://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/72281-ideas-on-1m-response-structure/

I play 1♠- ……1NT=forcing, weak w/o much shape or GF 0-3♠ ……2♣=weak with ♦ or inv with 4+♥ ……2♦=weak with ♥ or inv with 0-3♥ ……2♥=5♥-2♠ or 5♥-5m, weak ……3♣=natural weak I think it is better to mix the invitational hands with weak-one suiter since they are limited and you can clean up a range and reserve some space for your 1NT response. Have not learnt your structure in detail but I suspect it might be unfriendly to GF balanced hands and superaccepts.

The problem here is, if south holds HT8, whether is there a higher chance that he will play 8 or T. Against intermediate players, I believe most of them will play 8 quickly so if T appears, usually 8 would be in north's hand, thus finessing with J is the correct play. Against strong players who are able to notice the effect it's 50-50.

In rare occasions adjustments can be much greater. e.g. KQ QJxx KQxx Jxx is a 12- hand, not 14-

As Zel has pointed out, at the decimal level, card combination and suit length is quit important so working on values of individual high cards is far from enough. I once created an evaluation table via some statistics, accurate to 0.25 points, and I tried it myself; but it is so complicated and rarely uesd that I would never recommend it to my partner. You must have a headache if you are told to remember something like Kx=2.75 AK=6.75 KJTxx=4.25 AQTx=6.75 etc.

From jackbridge.com, published in IMP-bridge magazine: To be able to gauge Jack's playing strength objectively, the Jack team organized several matches against human opponents. In April and May of 2005, Jack played 28-board matches against seven strong pairs. All but the first of the following pairs play in the highest echelons of Dutch bridge, some having represented the Netherlands in European and World Championships. Jack-Bart Nab & Gert-Jan Paulissen 26 - 90 Jack-Paul Felten & Eric van Valen 43 - 60 Jack-Erik Janssen & Jeroen Top 43 - 51 Jack-Vincent Ramondt & Berry Westra 45 - 53 Jack-Jan van Cleeff & Vincent Kroes 61 - 46 Jack-Hanneke Kreijns & Just vd Kam 74 - 53 Jack-Ton Bakkeren & Huub Bertens 67 - 32 "So using imagination and judgement in ways that will not confuse your partner gives you a big advantage against Jack. That is, if you don't tell Jack what might be going on and his programmers have not anticipated it. Importantly, we have learned from these matches that disclosure about partnership methods when playing against human opponents is different from disclosure when playing against other computers. If Jack is to play matches against humans again, some clear procedures for more thorough disclosure must be provided. " These problems has not been solved during the past years and I believe that computer bridge had little progress since then. They depends too much on double-dummy simulations and are not designed to give enough pressure on opponents. Probably we can learn a lot from texas hold'em(In which computer just beat top human player this year). I voted for 2021 but it may last longer. Technically this is not that hard but this game just isn't attractive enough to top developers, I think.

How will your bid with 4-4 and 4-5 majors？ Is it easy to find 4-4 fit in the other major？

My experience is that (1) is not playable if you often open 2♦ with a 5 card major. My partner has caught opponents in 2♠X a number of times. :P Dunno which is better if you play a sound 2♦

Double. 3C usually show 5C&4H for me.

My idea is quite the opposite. I open most 11-count 4441(5 card major so mostly 1♦, though) and it works well in competitive bidding. For suit contracts, 4441 is a mild plus for playing strength and has very good defensive potential. Despite its strength, the shape has a poor ODR and often cannot afford to compete to 3 level, so the pass-then-double-for-takeout stretagy can turnout to be a disaster. [hv=pc=n&s=skq43hj82d9863c74&w=st52hq94da52ca852&n=s7hk653dqjt4ckqt3&e=saj986hat7dk7cj96]399|300[/hv] Both vul This hand is played at 2012 spingold. Weinstein passed as north, Helness opened 1♠ and Helgemo raised to 2♠. Now Weinstein decided to double for takeout :( At the other table Multon opened 1♦, Meckwell bid 3NT and was doubled for 1 down.

My choice is "natural" since I think it is important to be able to stay in 1NT, particularly after 1♦-1♠. 2♣(maybe 1♠?) can be preserved for Gazzilli then. This works quite well, if you use reverse flannery & can afford to throw minimum 5-5 minor hands into other opening.

There was a match in 2005 between Jack and some top Dutch pairs http://www.jackbridge.com/eperhum.htm But I can't find any report since. Probably it is because computers find it very hard to understand humans' alerts. :unsure:

[hv=pc=n&s=sa742hkqt8dt2cq97&d=w&v=n&b=12&a=3c3dp]133|200[/hv] What's your choice of bid?