Flame

I will take your word about the top US players, but as a teacher i think its very important to teach them the 8 card fit principle. The last thing that is important is for the students to learn the best system, much more important is for them to understand a system even if its far from best.

But sometimes it's about interpretation. True but you have to know and understand the law and only then can have an opinions about it.

Can you give example of suit combinations that taking the opening lead (as opposite to ducking) might cause block in the opponents suit. Example [hv=n=s10xx&w=s&e=s&s=sax]399|300|[/hv] west leads the Q. If west has QJXXXX we will cause a block by taking the first trick. Thanks

Guys no need to convince me that a good analysis will lead to leading the Q of Spade, i know it, i think the analysis is great, and maybe this specific example is one that you and your partner can both digest, but in general most non experts partnership wont. This could mean partner will not understand the lead and will do the wrong thing, could be that partner will be distracted because of this strange lead, which will make him non focus and mistake on different partner of that board, or more likely it wont happend on this deal , it could happend on many ways, for example next time you will lead a Q partner wont feel confident you have the J, but most likely it will happend when you will overthink leads and will make "smart" leads but forget to take something into account. You can think what you like, i can only give you my advice based on many many years of playing this game.

Well if the Q of spade is your first thought at the table then i think you got affected and need to check up. As i know you arent an expert this kind of leads will not benefit you. I dont say this isnt a good book, not at all, its a good book,but its also a dangerous one to any non expert (i dont mean BBO experts i mean real experts). non experts if read it must do it carfully, because this isnt the real world its an extreme.

bridge law is not about opinions.

With screen - yes Without screen as long as partner didnt explain or gave a clue by alerting - yes. When partner explained right and you were wrong - No

Improve your opening leads by Hugh Kelsey and John Matheson short 7 chapters book each on adifferent subject like leads against slams partscores..., each page you get your hand and the bidding should tell whats the bbest lead, then comes a full page of analysis, the grades for each lead and the full hand. This book has been a riddle to me for a long time, i began reading it about every 5 years since my early bridge days. I didnt know how to relate to it, every time i read it I could accept few more hands problem. Others I still didnt agree with the book till the next time I read it. Its a strange leading book unlike other books that teach you leads, like lawrence book this one isnt teaching youthe normal leads. This is a book on spectacular leads, and I had hard time to accpet it, first of all i thought It use too much analysis for opening leads, and probelby this analysis is effected by the faqct that the authors already seen the full hand, they like picturing the hands that they already saw, second I didnt like the spectacular leads because partner will never understand what Im doing for example when im leading K from Kxxx. Today I can say its a good book but its a very dangerous one, I think experts can benefit the most of it, non expert must read it carfully, I dont let my partners read it, I dont like my partners wasting 2 minutes on a stupid opening lead and later giving me full analysis of why it should have worked, usually its will not work because either they miss somethign in the analysis, or the bidders werent as smart as them, or I thier partner didnt read the lead, and aside from this i dont like wasting too much time on leads, bridge is a short game and leads shoudnt take long, also it raize some ethical problems. I'll give you a normal example so you'll see what im talking about you west holds [hv=d=e&v=n&s=sq10652h1093d6cq854]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] E S W N 1♠ 2♦ 2♠ 5♦ What do you lead ? I will not copy the full analysis (unless you ask really nice) i'll just give you the grades hidden:

What is the effect of playing support doubles on later doubles. 1d (P) 1M (1S/2) P (P) D partner denyed 3 card support, what is responder double now, is it change whater there is an unbid major ? and now the other side of it 1d (P) 1M (1S/2C) D (2S/3C) D This time partner showed exactly 3 card support, is my double t.o or penalty. There are ressons to play it as penalty oriented since we have a good idea of our fit, but this is not absulute, we can still have a fit in other suits, and especially when there is an unbid major there is a good resson to play the double as t.o.

I played it for a while id like to learn from others who play it if and what changes did they make to the original system. Ill summerise the system as i see it. 1. Focus on suit preference rather then count, or one suit qulity, the attitude signal on the first lead is actually a suit pref between the suit led and the obvious shift suit. 2. give count on specific prediscussed cases only. 3. decide on the obvious shift suit based on a list of rules. Some questions: 1. Do you use a set of rules for defining the os, or do you just count on having same logic as partner, and if you use a list, do you have something new in it that doesnt include on the original list ? 2. Its very heavy on suit pref and light on count, Do you keep giving suit pref discard after discard, or do you switch to count ? (example is second discard in a suit, or maybe even a discard in a suit you or your partner lead) 3. do you have more count situations then the original text ? Anything you want to add about how you play it is welcomed. obvious shift princple

[hv=d=s&v=n&n=s6532hq9da8cqj1085&s=sj8hkj763dk654ca9]133|200|Scoring: MP[/hv] Bidding 1♥ (D) RD (1♠) p (P) 2♣ (P) 2♦ (2♠) p (p) D Played this hand yesterday and need help with most of the bids. I opened 1H, LHO doubled and now to the first question what should partner bid, we play 1nt-2d as transfers so we dont have natural 1nt. what is best , 1S, 1nt, P, redouble ? Partner choosed redouble, RHO bid 1S, Whats my bid now ? I passed , i only bid when im shapy and weak. next hand pass,and now whats partner's bid ? can she doubled with these spades ? she bid 2C, my rho pass, and what should i bid ? can i or this is forcing ? i think its forcing and i bid 2D, my LHO bid 2S, now what ? should partner double now ? she passed and it waspassed to me, am i still in a forcing situation ? I wasnt sure, and anyway thought we have 21-22+ hcp and no fit the opponents were weak and decided to double (wouldnt do it at imp). the score for -1 was ok but I dont feel we knew what we are doing. So if you can give your opinion for the bids but also explain the forcing principle what ends it, and how do we show extra, how do we differnce between 13 hcp and 10 hcp with responder's hand.

I responded to the original post, reading it i think i was too hard with it, its a problem of choosing the right words which wasnt great here.

a. (1♠) P (P) D (2♠) D b. 1♥ (1♠) P (2♠) P (P) D Penalty or T.O ?

The bid has no logic, the strong hand showed a weak hand and the weak hand showed a strong hand, these two upside down mistakes got you by accident to something that has a chance.

Why not ? Who said moscito isnt blue ? I dont see any resson for it. Surely the transfer openings make it red? I dont think so but we dont have any problem with red here in Israel. edited I think its more blue then red, but yes i might be wrong and its red.

I Like the 1♦ idea.

Why not ? Who said moscito isnt blue ? I dont see any resson for it.

I will not repeat the comments and will just add , you did a move (actually 2 moves) just sit back and hope those moves worked well.

well done

This is not standard and not played by 99.9% of players, that is the point ;). Enjoy! This is Barry Crane style. If you hate his style, as many do, great, but he could win with it and he opened this stuff all the time. Well if you say so. I guess your 99% and my 90% never met.

standard is 12 hcp or rule of 20. more then 90% of the people i know use it.

The most fun playing turbo was when we could use it at 3NT, it was fun but i dont think its better then serious/unserius or just game choice offering.

Not exactly, I do have ways to distiguege strengh, but with most 4 cards raise those ways will take me to the 3 level, for example a cue bid or 2nt freqently show raize with more then weak hand.

yep :unsure:

Justin we live by this logic, you cant take it away just like that, it deserve a serious article on your blog. Most of us bid competitive autions based on the lott, when we have 9 spades(as long as partner read your article on overcalling over strog 1c) we usually bid to the 3 level, especially when it looks like opponents have thier heart fit. The second rule we live on is the last guess principle. The idea is that by bidding 3S we give them the last guess, lets say opener has 6 hearts, now if his partner has anice hearts he want to bid 4H but he is on guess, if we only bid 2S he has an easy 3H bid, now when we bid 3S they are in a perfect position to either bid 4H or pass or double us. I guess these rules need serious refinment, and will be very happy if you help with this.