Flame

Didnt mean to say you stole it, just usually when i think of something i like fiding someone else preferably at a top level who play it, because expirence is better then any thoretical logic.

I misread part of the idea. Ambra uses the next bid to as a relay but not allowing a weak transfer hand. Since i cant read polish im not sure but in WJ2005 there is a future that look like ur idea, when 4th suit is a transfer. Anyway it sound cool.

I agree with the concept, you can check ambra for more details. ambra play 2c over a rebid of 1, and ur kind of relay over 2 level rebid.

Getting good is not easy, its a process that takes time, so dont rush it, just keep working on it. Thinking time is something that differ the good players from the bad ones, good players think when they should and dont think when they shouldnt, they also dont waste time , which is very importent if you want the time to think. its amazing to see how much of a board time is wasted, how long it takes for ppl to pick up the cards, how much they talk. In riality you wont be able to think as much as you want, i advice you to think as much as you can afford to without your opponents leave, and do the extra thinking after you play, this mean put a little peace of paper next to you when you play, write notes, go back and check those boards later after the game.

maybe you guys can solve the problem we had with keri (on the non nat systems) What do you bid as opener with max 5♠3♥. 1nt-2c 2d-2h ???

Question about keri, should i buy the book, or the post by Ron on the forum is enough ?

You misunderstood me, i said his books are great and ment it, i also said they are great for non great players or non great partnerships which i ment exactly as you later said, non expert players(not that an expert wont learn anything, just not too much). As I mentioned before, ppl in israel dont believe in complex systems, so even our world class player might play something suggested by bergen. Our number 1 cauch which coach the juniour believe and teach that no convention is worth one misunderstanding, and therefore teach them to play as simple as possible. I object to that and think it will do well in the long run that our juniours will expirence new things even in a cost of bad results at the present, for more enjoysble bridge and a long run benefit. (but who asks me) For more serious, less fun reading you can read mike lawrence's books.

Many play this in israel, mostly because its simple and easy, i dont think its best or nearly best, infact i believe nothing bergen write suppose to be a perfect solution, bergen is writing great books for not great bridge players, or not great partnerships.

just like i dont play 1c (1d) D as penalty, 1c (D) as looking to punishment our opponents seems right. Today ppl shift to 1c (1d) D to show hearts, 1H =spade. So on the same idea, you can play 1d-(D) RDble= hearts, 1h=spades. I made the question genral not talking about different sequences, but i think there is a big different between the chances to catch them after 1S (D) and 1C (D)

both tables began with the Q, it might have been easier to do so from entry precpective.

Today most play this as 10+ no good fit. Wouldnt we in few years think of it as an oldfashion waste of bid, just like we think of doubles which used to be for penalty ?

I wish i could get into your head once to see how you do it. You dont count points and losers, you dont count the cards(atleast not the way i do). Its sounds great.

This one happend in a strong match today on BBO. This was the trump in 6S. A8432 Q106 whats the right play to lose only one spade ?

2c for me, the club is a too good alternative to pass.

opps changed my mind again.... I better not give any answer till ill get my sleeping time.

Iv notices, playing in israel and also watching turnaments and bidding contest that Israelies open 1NT more frequently then others, we like this bid, and when in doubt we bid 1nt, we bid it with any 5 card major, you wont hear israly saying I had a balance 16 hcp but the points wernet NT oritented, if we have the strengh and shape we open 1nt. About strengh, you will see ppl strech it and bid 1nt with some 14 and some 18, iv seen our best pair bid 1nt on 18 hcp including 3 aces and 2 kings!, on a bidding contest. we strech it for the shape too, you will see some 6331 and 5-4 ,even 5 higher then 4 as bid by doron yadlin on the final of NEC cup today, with 5 diamond and 4 clubs. I think the idea beind this is 1nt is the "best" bid, it give more information about you hand then any other bid, its also the easiest bid, everyone remember their system over 1nt, but its much harder over 1 opening. Its also make life better in competition field, making it harder for the opps to get into the aution. I can tell you that bidding in israel are preety premative, you wont see all the nice gadgets that you see in other places. having less gadgets makes it harder to show you hand after non 1nt opening. The bad side is probebly slam bidding, but those are pretty rare. What do you think ?

Not saying i know how to play equal level coversion, i dont have expirence with it, but it seems like a really bad idea to use double with this hand even if you play equal level coversion, i would save this double to a more equal 2 suiter like a 5-4 hand and not a good 6 bad 4 hand. Its not exactly right to compare equal level coversion and raptor, raptor show 2 suiter, equal level coversion doublt might be a 2 suiter, this must mean you should be more conservative with the suits when you double as an equal level coversion than when you bid 1nt raptor. In general i think its usually a bad idea to show a 6-4 with a 2 suiter bid, and as i explained definationly not with something that only could be a 2 suiter.

There are two ressons for that, first the higher your level his , you are more likely to access tables, and especially good tables. second most bridge players like most drivers see the action only from their point of view and always accuse the other person, the more time pass more players play eith other players and if they see that this "less skilled" is putting expert for his skill they will put expert for thier LEVEL

I dont play all these nice fetures, but if we have away to show 5 hearts , like pupet stayman, then after asking for aces, i will be able to know about partner's Q of heart and bid 7H.

I am totally against trying new things at the table, putting partner under presure, but when i play for practice i would be happy for apportunity like this one, its much easier to remember something afte we have seen it at the table and have both thought of its logic from both side of the table, than doing we do it tehoretically at home.

yes agree with everyone, small to the Q. Misplay is a big thing to say, and need to see the all hand to make that conclusion.

ok ill tell you what i had, and you tell me if you think it make sense. I had 2245. If you agree that this 1nt should show the minors, how strong do you think it should be ?

Had an intresting bid today. 1♣ (1♥) P (P) D (P) 1♠ (P) 1NT what do you think this 1nt mean ?

What are you talking about ? Rating system is something that make sense which a logical birdge player might think is needed, thats why you have it at other online and offline bridge organizations. There is nothing bad about wanting a rating system, BUT expirence taught that rating system leads to bad beheviours and other bad things that make it not worth it, I accept it and think its right not to implement a rating system, but i dont think ppl arent allowed to ask for it, its not complaining, it suggesting, and no need to send those "BAD" ppl away.

Its so hard to follow the game like that, scorlining up and down, i didnt even found the endplay you mentioned so i will response more generally. it make perfect sense that you got a bad score here since your opponents had many chances to make mistakes and didnt make them, you might have taken a very smart line, but other lines like finnesing the club or playing to the K of diamond would have getting you atleast as good result. This doesnt mean your play was wrong.