Stefan_O

Also note that X was support-double.

What means "f2f"? And whom exactly are "we" here? :) That seems like a very dubious criteria/formulation, prone to cause misunderstandings/conflicting interpretations...

Perfect contract, true :D Two tables had this auction in Robot Duplicate and got 96,43%. Pure fluke, of course...

diagram See 4NT description. ???

No, control responses to 2C were deployed already back in the Neolithic Era... (1930'ies or so) Blue Team used them over strong-1C opening, where you have much more bidding room, thus is quite a different animal.

And what was the rationale for that?

Nyah... not necessarily -- there's more than one way to do it... :) Using statistical methods, you can certainly discover patterns and relationships without answering any "whys" at all. Apparently, that is more the approach Tim has taken... The crucial question here: Does it give you an advantage over other, existing methods? This we will not know until it's been tested in practical play, of course. That said --- if we find one workable method to improve evaluation, obviously, it does not exclude that other approaches even more workable might be discovered in the future... :)

(deleted)

If 2NT shows unbal, this looks like more than a "gadget", since you then need a way to bid 18-19 balanced, etc. Such "gadget" is pointless, unless you explain the whole structure. Otherwise, I have a better "gadget" for you: 1D-1S-1NT = 20+, 3-2-7-1, and 4 aces :)

I was considering that option, but then I find no suitable opening bid at all when you have, for example, 5-card minor + 4-3-1 (12-15), which does not make sense... Maybe better to let Tim clarify himself... :)

I really like your work on improving hand-evaluation :) I fail, however, to see how that is related to the bidding-system you present here? Maybe I am missing some context...? Wouldn't it be more efficient to just start out from a familiar and proven system, like SAYC or 2/1 (or some existing proven strong-1C system, if such is preferred) and make the bidding-structure more systematic by (re)defining bids and ranges in "Evolin points" scale? Would be interesting to hear you motivation behind this new bidding-system.

I actually get a lot of questions re your notation... In Chart.docx, pg2, Response, it says: +1 suit 6-11 4+ (major preference) +1 major (free bid) 6-11 5+ What exactly does "+1" mean? Does this table apply to normal 1-over-1? And what is the difference between tables "Response" and "Advance"? Clarifications needed :)

Hi Tim, In your Chart, when you say "No 5 major, no 6 minor, no singlets" What means "singlet" here? Not familiar with that term...

If you play SAYC-ish (ie 2-over-1 not GF), I also think 1NT=14-16 is technically the best approach. Main reason is you can then bid eg. 1H-2D-2NT=12-13 (rather than 12-14, which is too wide when you have no room to invite). (This situation is the same if you play a strong 1C-system, where 2-over-1M is not GF.) In a natural system, an elegant way is to place some NT-ranges in 2D-multi. You can then use this opening-structure with balanced hands: 1X followed by lowest NT-bid = 12-13 1NT = 14-16 1X followed by jump NT-bid = 17-18 2NT = 19-20 2D-2H-2NT = 21-22. 2C-2D-2NT = 23-24. 2D-2H-3NT = 25-26. 2C-2D-3NT = 27-28. In a strong 1C (without 2D-multi), the 17+ NT-ranges need to be handled differently, though. ____________________________________________________________________ ps. the way I prefer weak openings with 2D-multi is this: 2D = Weak major 8-10 or 21-22-NT. 2H/2S = Weak major 5-7. This way, you can also safely open weak-2's more often than std SAYC.

Umm... how can you conclude that? Dummy did not have Ace or King. Seems to me the third option would apply... In this case, gib-pard actually did have the queen, refuting these rules then...?

Against a trump contract, I lead A+K from AKxxxx in a side-suit. Dummy has xx, my gib-partner plays 10+8, and gib-declarer plays small+Jack. Is there anyway to tell from this, who has the remaining Queen, and who is void?

Ummmm... excuse me... it's dead easy to bid when you see pds hand, of course, but 2C only promises 5 clubs (since opener can have 4-5 in the minors without reverse strength). So jumping to 4C or 4NT (esp w 5♥ suit) would not even occur to me at the table... I agree with kenrexford, you continue 2♠ over 2♣. This is safe, since opener has already denied 4 cards in ♠ (did not bid 1♠ over 1♥).

"Three aces" you can cross out from your list. it's not a bad thing. "Two suits without stops", is statistically quite negative if the final contract is NT. But if you then find a trump-suit, it switches to a positive. These are also hands where a 4-3 (or 5-2) major contract is often better than NT. But you need advanced methods to find out such things during the auction.

One needs to see the FULL hands to answer this. Exactly WHY did you get those bad scores? Highly doubtful if these opening-bids, per se, was the main culprit behind your results. There is usually a series of decisions made during a single bridge-hand, all of which could go more or less wrong :)

Well... since it is the opponents who lead to trick one, this suit might also take 0 tricks in NT? Perhaps, the long-term average actually is 21/3 = 7 tricks for such suit? :)

Yes, well spotted... :) I didnt implement the "combination-rules", and missed that one...

3♣

Looks like the wiki-stats are correct -- I found exactly 17 hands in 1 million! :D Deal 4493: K42...AKQJT76542 NT => 24 S => 17 H => 9 D => 9 C => 31 Deal 58287: AKQJT986432...T4 NT => 23 S => 31 H => 7 D => 7 C => 11 Deal 131106: AKQJT97432.3.5.7 NT => 21 S => 27 H => 8 D => 8 C => 8 Deal 187123: Q75.AKQJ987654.. NT => 22 S => 16 H => 30 D => 8 C => 8 Deal 325519: A.KJT8765432.82. NT => 18 S => 7 H => 26 D => 10 C => 6 Deal 371358: .Q43..AQJT987532 NT => 19 S => 5 H => 13 D => 5 C => 27 Deal 440790: AKQJ985432..53.5 NT => 20 S => 28 H => 7 D => 11 C => 8 Deal 512579: QT..AKQJT98543.9 NT => 24 S => 13 H => 8 D => 29 C => 9 Deal 697433: 53.AKQT987632.5. NT => 19 S => 10 H => 27 D => 7 C => 6 Deal 717414: A.Q7..AKQJT97432 NT => 27 S => 13 H => 17 D => 12 C => 33 Deal 819367: AKQJ876532..5.J8 NT => 21 S => 28 H => 7 D => 8 C => 12 Deal 881121: KQJT987542..J6.Q NT => 19 S => 25 H => 4 D => 9 C => 6 Deal 898986: AKQT976543.7.9.5 NT => 19 S => 26 H => 7 D => 7 C => 7 Deal 913494: 6.6.2.AQJT987532 NT => 17 S => 5 H => 5 D => 5 C => 24 Deal 939445: AKQJT96542.K4.4. NT => 24 S => 30 H => 14 D => 10 C => 9 Deal 961699: 7.4.5.AKJ9865432 NT => 18 S => 6 H => 6 D => 6 C => 25 Deal 994598: AKQT765432..T4.J NT => 20 S => 27 H => 6 D => 10 C => 8

Hi Tim, I wrote a program to calculate "Evelyn-points" under the various denominations, and applied to some random hands... Does this look correct? :) Deal 1: AT32.KT.975.Q743 NT => 11 S => 11 H => 9 D => 9 C => 12 Deal 2: J872.9.KQJ4.JT83 NT => 9 S => 10 H => 4 D => 11 C => 10 Deal 3: AJ5.J64.T75.AT76 NT => 11 S => 11 H => 11 D => 10 C => 11 Deal 4: KJ98.AK.864.Q874 NT => 13 S => 15 H => 12 D => 12 C => 15 Deal 5: Q82.K42.AQJ8.743 NT => 13 S => 11 H => 11 D => 13 C => 10 Deal 6: 965.Q3.72.T97642 NT => 3 S => 3 H => 3 D => 2 C => 9 Deal 7: KQJ4.943.A4.JT86 NT => 12 S => 14 H => 10 D => 9 C => 13 Deal 8: A532.JT632.8.A53 NT => 9 S => 13 H => 15 D => 8 C => 12 Deal 9: A8.KT9.Q4.AK8653 NT => 18 S => 14 H => 16 D => 15 C => 22 Deal 10: 54.64.KT9.QJ7632 NT => 8 S => 5 H => 5 D => 7 C => 13 Deal 11: K9.AT7.93.QT8754 NT => 12 S => 9 H => 9 D => 8 C => 16 Deal 12: 875.Q8.KQ52.AJ72 NT => 12 S => 11 H => 11 D => 14 C => 14 Deal 13: A6.Q.T7642.KT753 NT => 10 S => 9 H => 8 D => 14 C => 15 Deal 14: AT73.A3.J965.K73 NT => 13 S => 14 H => 11 D => 15 C => 13 Deal 15: T9865.J86.A9.T73 NT => 5 S => 9 H => 7 D => 5 C => 6 Deal 16: A74.K32.KJ2.AJ97 NT => 16 S => 15 H => 16 D => 16 C => 17 Deal 17: 73.JT5.AQT843.J3 NT => 10 S => 6 H => 8 D => 14 C => 7 Deal 18: 5.KJ96.AQT2.J742 NT => 12 S => 8 H => 14 D => 14 C => 14 Deal 19: A8632.9432.632.8 NT => 4 S => 10 H => 9 D => 8 C => 4 Deal 20: K7653.5.T65.A873 NT => 7 S => 13 H => 6 D => 10 C => 11 (Voids:) Deal 94: Q963.KQ98.KJT54. NT => 12 S => 15 H => 15 D => 17 C => 7 Deal 104: AQ8532..Q987.Q94 NT => 12 S => 18 H => 6 D => 14 C => 12 Deal 183: QJ86.J87642..A96 NT => 9 S => 13 H => 17 D => 5 C => 10 (8+card suits:) Deal 539: AKJT9832.A832.A. NT => 22 S => 31 H => 22 D => 14 C => 13 Deal 759: AQJ98763.JT..KJ2 NT => 18 S => 24 H => 11 D => 7 C => 13 Deal 774: .87.AQJ87542.T52 NT => 13 S => 4 H => 7 D => 21 C => 9 Deal 816: A9.A2.AKQT8765.J NT => 24 S => 17 H => 17 D => 30 C => 16 Deal 861: QT72.6.KQJT9864. NT => 15 S => 14 H => 5 D => 22 C => 4

OK, got it :)