tm255

If OP is still looking, Beginning Bridge Using 2 over 1 by Jim Ricker IMO fits the bill.

Wow, whoever has you as a mentor is fortunate, indeed! Post game analysis is of course helpful, but I think it would be invaluable to go through hands together in "real time" as you describe.

That is a fascinating article. Good info in the other posts, also. One thing that makes bridge so hard is seemingly minor differences translate into completely different approaches. For example Kantar discusses how AQxxx is played one way and AQxx is played yet another way. On top of that, opportunity to apply ones learning during play may not come up for weeks or even months. I seem to learn best from my mistakes. Which is good, because I make a lot of them!

Thanks! I was guessing that you were referring to Watson. I read the first part right after I began playing and I think it is probably time for a re-read. I picked up used copies of Root's books on declarer play and defender play based on many glowing reviews but I have not yet been able to get much out of them. I'm not sure if it is because they are over my head or if it is his writing style. I might have a look at Kantar's Modern Defense instead of re-reading Watson. I find that sometimes presenting the same idea just a little differently makes it "click" better. Virtually all of the discussion at my local bridge room is centered around bidding concepts, so I try to spend most of my independent study time on card play.

What book are you referring to?

I'm looking for opinions on Larry Harris' book Players Quick Reference Companion. It seems like it might be a nice compact work that pulls a lot of material together to facilitate quick reference. But, I haven't found any online reviews and have not seen a copy locally so I don't have much to go on other than the description. Thanks!

Vampyr thanks for stating the concept ie false preference. That allowed me to look up additional discussion and examples.

Thanks, I enjoy problems like these.

I'm glad to see this thread. I'm new to duplicate, and have been told repeatedly at the local club that things are "always even" and there is "no luck involved." That never made sense to me, especially in small sessions with only a few tables and limited number of hands.

This is a really good point. For a long time the first question in my mind was, "Based on my hand, what should my reply be?" Now after every bid I try to stop and ask myself, "What is my partner trying to tell me?" And when the opponents bid, I ask myself, "What are they saying about their hands?" On the surface it seems a small point but it makes a difference.

I looked around the www a lot for info on software. Most of what I found was analysis of which program was "best" as far as strength of play at the expert level. What I was most interested in was which program would be "best" from a beginner learning level, and I never found any really useful info. I downloaded the demos of BB and JB and they seemed to be comparable. My bridge mentor really likes BB so I bought it, plus it runs on a mac and JB requires Windoze emulation software. Also, my mentor told me exactly how to set up the convention in BB so that saved me a lot of trial and error. There were a few things that I actually preferred on JB as compared to BB, and vice versa, but I don't remember exactly what they were at this point. I don't use BB for postmortem analysis on the BB hands. I will sometimes play the same hand over a few times with different bidding to see what happens. I try to play through hands slowly, thinking about each bid and each play carefully as practice does not make perfect, it makes permanent so I believe in trying to practice perfectly. Another book you may enjoy looking at is by Simon, "Why You Lose at Bridge." I have only read a sample but he focuses on making the best plays from a risk/reward standpoint, and uses poker as an analogy. Should be right up your alley!

I am in the same boat, having started bridge study about 6 months ago. I used to play competitive chess, and am an OK amateur poker player (meaning I understand probability and do not play "no foldem holdem.") IMO you need to ask yourself what kind of learner you are, and go from there. Maybe looking at what worked, and what did not work, with learning poker would be a start. My chess play really took off when I found an instructor who focused on concepts, not minutiae. I am best starting with a big picture, and fine tuning as I progress. Others apparently assimilate many fine details to form the big picture. To each his own. I read somewhere that getting solid at bidding and basic card play while ignoring some of the rare fine points will make you better than the majority and this fits with my overall philosophy. If you consider yourself like me, then I would avoid the Root books as they are 300+ pages of detail after detail. Watson is not so bad, but does get into the weeds a bit. For card play, I so far like Marstens Principles of Card Play and the Barbara Seagram books Planning the Play of a Bridge Hand and Defensive Play at Bridge. For bidding I like the Audrey Grant 2 over 1 book written with Rodwell, as well as the Bridge for Dummies book. Try to find a bridge club and start playing in the beginner sessions. I like the Bridge Baron and Jack Bridge software programs for non human practice. IMO the BBO robots are not good because the odd plays they make are not conducive to learning the right way to play a hand. Good luck. It is a fascinating game.