Flame

I played all the trial bids mentioned here. All of them tries to estimate how good the hands fits, each one doing it in another way. but there are some side factors, like the one mentioned before about the lead, there are two side factors good for natural bidding showing a second suit, first you dont give the opponents an appotunity to double the trial bid, this can mean anything they like to, on short suit triel it doesnt have to have anything to do with the suit, the second factor is when playing natural you sometime can find a better suit, for example after 1M-2M you can find a better 4-4 OM fit.

Luke you are wrong, i love lawrence, i admire his geniousty in bridge and love his sense of humor, i seriosly ask wather a book on 2/1 by lawrence, or a book such as better bridge with bergen suppose to give a serious analysis that can lead to a conclusion such as "this is the best way to play it" , which is for example what zar was trying to do by cheking thousends of hands, or its a book explaining nice and good (but not necessary or even claimed to be best) to play a system. Dont get me wrong, i think those books are great and my bridge would be much better much sooner if i read them instead of learning it the hard way at the field, but i dont think or atleast not sure that those books ment to show the best way, but they ment to show a good effective way.

I didn't read Max Hardy or Mike Lawrence , or any other book about the subject, but do you consider their suggestions as a serious thoretical analization, or they just show an ok system with its logic that will help all around players.

When working out which bid is best its not enough to check which hand is more luckly accure. You should also check how much you will benefit from this bid, if for example splinter accure twice as much, but strong 5/5 is twice as imporent to show, then the bids are just as good.

I dont think one is better then the other, playing it as 5/5 strong is imo just as good as spliter. I used to play this as 5/5 weak when played sayc.

if pd has singleton hk, then selling it out doesnt matter, coz declarer has only 6h+2s+1c. right, and good for my trump return.

I think so too, and honstly i would be happy to learn and play something like viking or moscito, but i just began a new partnership playing polish club, and we have many holes in the system, so its not tight for me, but again i would recommand it to others.

what did partner overcalled 2D with ? AQxxxx of diamond and nothing else ? I dont think so, maybe coming back with the heart is a problem selling his K sgl, i dont know.

I think you got the seats wrong. You are sitting BEHIND dummy. (Also, partner didn't overtake your ♦K, he led the ♦A.) I got the seats right, (but the lead wrong, so i deleted my remark about overtaking), i know im behind dummy and i think declerer right play is to finnese and lose the clubs, rather then play on loswer precentage squeeze (that might not even exist)

I'll play a trump back.pretty sure its wrong because of how the question was asked but i dont see the problem. It seems werong to me, to play spade now inorder to break a possible squeeze when first we dont know if there is a squeeze and second even when there is , like in the example before me, decleare can and imo should play on the finnese club rather then trying the squeeze. about returning club, i dont see how it can help , and luke, when you play passively you dont need to see how it works, you just wait for declerer to take what his and leave you with yours, only when you try something offensive, like playing a club here you need to know how it will help. partner coming back with a small club doesnt mean he has a void, with xxx of club and xxx of spade partner must come back with small, this is because we can "see" that club is not a good return, but now he is telling us spade is no better either.

You're wrong very wrong, my partner and i never played any relay system , this is not something you learn in 2 minutes, you got to practice and get an understadning, im guessing you need to play relays for years before you really understand how to use them properly. It doesnt make much sense to me to do all this work for just overcalls, i have other places at the system which i rather practice first.

The question is if partner overcalls a suit and you know he could have a canape with another suit will you be able to fight for the partscore as well as you could with the normal overcalling method, I think you probebly can, the point of always having the suit bid is a big adv which you couldnt servive without. I would have tried it if i my normal system was based on relay, but adding this to a non relay system seems a bit too much, i might offer this to friend who play relay.

Yes you wont be in game, but you also dont want to be in game since 5D is a bad contract.

It looks very nice, but how good is it for bridge ? Im sure you will bid slams better then normal overcallers, but slam after an overcall are rare, the question is what do you pay, and is it worth it, im sure you can answer this better then me, how does the system work for the partsoce battle which is usually the case.

You should read the Law about revokes better, you will find out that the law deals with this problem. If by revoking you gained more then the 2 tricks you will give it back. This doesnt matter wather you cheated or made a mistake.

1430 is better. my 2 ressons are: 1. partner will have one ace more often then 0 aces. 2. There is more chance that you will want to look for additional inforation (q of trump or kings) when partner has one ace than when he got 0. For those two ressons you want to give priority to showing 1 ace with the lowest bid. You might think of playing 0314 when partner suppose to be very weak ex' after 2c-2d but i wouldnt put this on your memory , better focus on more importent things.

No one mentioned any of lawrence's books, i just love his playing books and would take one like "play these hands with me".

4D is pretty clear to me here, but i think ill pass 4H because my diffence is not too bad, especilly if partner has the A of spade.

I never heard of Economic cue bids, i can only tell you about the italians cue bids. The idea of the italian cue bidsa is to show both first and second round control together (not to distinguege between them atleast at the beggining) this is opposite the the "normal" cue bid that show a first round controlls and only when cue bidding a suit which you already known to miss the first round controll , it show the second. I think today almost everyone is usiing the italian style, or a version of it. you can read a pretty complex article (book) about italian cue bids on daniel's site. daniel its at the end of the second group. This is the original italian cue bid, its the simplest which mean its the hardest to play, takes lots of common sense and partnership understading , imo this is too hard for normal partnerships, playing an easier system that use the cue bids basiclly to check if the partnership is missing a controll of a suit and that the partnership have extras and then ask RKCB like FRED told us he and his partner play is a much much easier, even adding turbo or maybe a 4nt as trump asking helps alot.

Catching cheaters is a big problem in bridge, the law almost always assume that people dont cheat, when someone cheats you need to find a punish outside the law book. In this case i suspect they did cheat, i don't believe their story. I dont know what the directors options here, an adjust score is not what the bridge law would want here, but online bridge with annonimous players might not give you a better option , so an adjust score might be just the right answer.

Pass , dont really understand the question here.

I would have opened it 1d playing strefa.

2D - 2H 3c = ♦ + ♣ 3d = ♦ + ♥ right ? looks good. How much in the suits do you need ? atleast 6-4 or will 5-5 or 5-4 be good enough ? ( i think 5-5 must be enough, not sure about 5-4)

Never heard of this system but i have a basic problem with it, first the 1c is not including enough hands, 12-18 bal without 5 major is not enough, i once thought of playing all balanced 12-37 hcp to open 1c and it seems that the 1c can handle even more. The second problem is about 1c being forcing, if 1c is 12-18 bal, there is no resson for it to be forcing.

End play is when you put one of your opponents in lead and anything she leads gives away a trick or more, many time this envolved elamination suits, but it doesnt have to. a simple example could be if you have a suit with AJ10 if you play the A you will lose 2 tricks, but if you managed to clear everything else, you can play small from dummy to your J ,you will always get 2 tricks in the suit this way because if LHO win she will be endplayed and have to give up a trick. Many times it involved more then one suit.