kgr

..from RP site... AJT9x - xxxx It is best to take two finesses; however, if this is inconvenient (or risks a ruff if this is your trump suit), it is almost as good to cash the ace first. Comparing both against each other: Two finesses looses if East has KQ : 6.78% Cash the ace first looses if West has KQx(x) : 12.43% + 4.78% => Two finesses is much (10%) better then cashing A first or am I missing something?

We need 3♣-3♦-3♠ to show a GF 2-suiter in the Majors.In a normal method you would need 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♥ before you described your 2-suiter...Ok partner also described his hand somewhat in the mean time. Agree Yes, but our openings tell more then a strong 2♣ opening so I suspect that the normal 2♣ opening is more suspect to interference then our openings. E.g Suppose you have a GF with ♥ and ♣. We open 3♦ with ♥ preempt, a GF 2-suiter with ♥ and a minor or a GF with ♠. Compare our bidding: 3♦-(4♠)-p-(p)- with standard bidding: 2♣-(4♠)-p-(p)- (We can now DBL to show a strong 2-suiter hand with ♥ and a minor) Agree, I play mostly against weak opps. One reason I play this system is that I want to see and learn some new bidding (we got this system from strongest pair at the club, including T-walsh, new 1NT system, 2-suited overcals.....). If this creates too many issues when we move up (...I hope :rolleyes: ) and play against stronger opps then we can switch back to a more natural system. Note that frequency of weak 2♣ is high. I guess it is more frequent then any Strong hand (any natural 2♣ hand). So I'm not really sure - certainly at MP's - if it is a disadavntage to play. Thanks a lot for your answer Mike. The thing I didn't really think about before is the room you take away for your partner to describe his hand. Like the example given above: We need 3♣-3♦-3♠ to show a GF 2-suiter in the Majors. In a normal method you would need 2♣-2♦-2♠-3♣-3♥ before you described your 2-suiter...Ok partner also described his hand somewhat in the mean time. If partner has something like x=x=Axx=KQTxxxxx we will have no way to show this. ...we kind of assume that we will play in a suit of the opener.

That is related to playing Muiderberg and multi 2♦. When comparing Muiderberg 2♥ and 2♠ with weak 2♦ my wild guess is that it is 10 times more frequent. Probably it is less effective, but the frequency should compensate some of this. Partly True: Partner can raise aggressively, but risks to preempt the 2D opener if he is strong. He will raise less agressively then without the stong option. At MP's partner can also risk to pass 2D with long D's. True. But or 3 level preempt are replaced by less effective transfer preempts to create room for a weak 2♣. A wild guess again: I think that our 2♣ opening is 3 times more frequent then a 3-level preempt. So, in total, do we really loose something by having to play less effective 3-level transfer preempts? True, Maybe it should even not be allowed without screens. The time partner takes could easily give you a feel if he has the preempt or something strong. Even when both partners have no bad intentions

I open 3C followed with 3NT showing a GF with both minors. 3C-3D 3NT ... Want to see how it goes with my system (hope opps don't intervene and partner does not preempt 4D or 5D thinking I have a preempt in D)

I would actually expect 5H to show 10 tricks in H (hoping that I can add one) and 5D to show 11 tricks - with S control - and an invite for 6H.

Yes. Maybe scoring (IMP's vs MP's) should not make a difference to bid this hand?

triggered from another post I wonder.. We play multi 2♦ including GF minor, and semi-focing major. We play transfer preempts that includes any 2-suited GF and GF one suit major. 2C is weak mini precision, 2M is Muiderberg. = = ..Apparantly most of you find this a very, VERY bad system. I agree that the transfer preempts gives opps more possibility to intervene, but I would think that the weak 2C is more frequent then strong 2C & we can more easily describe any GF two suited hand (We don't have to open at the 1 level with these). ...So why do you hate this system? Thanks, Koen

Thanks for the answer. This was partners hand: [hv=s=shakqjxxxxdkxcaqx]133|100|[/hv] Opp did not lead his ♠'s but did lead ♦Q for 6♠-1.

Most clear for me is 1S-1NT 2H-... And opps play in S or H and you hold good cards (like AQT8) in the 2nd suit. 1S-1NT 2H-all pass

2♣C...trying this in MS IE ...Seems to be a Netscape 7.2 problem

2C problem on BBF in enter your post window. Small Remark: If you enter a post and then go back to begining of the post and enter ♣ symbol as 2nd character then the rest of your text you already entered for posting is cleared. (like if before posting I would change 2C to 2♣ in the begining of this)

4C would be Namyats in H (9 tricks). 3C followed by 3H (..by 5H in this case) is 10+tricks in H (or 9 + 2 half tricks). No other ways to bid a strong hand with only Hearts (2C is weak mini precision) Opps are weak. They also don't know if 4S is weak or strong. You can expect some Spades however. :P Hope above details will give some more info. Actually, I wondered if this is not an automatic 6♥ and something can be said against bidding 6H. Partner promisses a GF in ♥, RHO did bid 4♠ so you will probably add two more ♠ tricks and that makes 12?

We were Red, don't remember opps color

It is always down if RHO started with 2 small ♣'s and keeps one in the ending, but then you can probably never make?

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=saqxh98xdxxxxcxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP[/hv] P-(P)-3♣!-(4♠) p-(p)-5♥-(p) ?? 3♣ is preempt ♦ - OR - GF ♥ - OR - GF minors - OR - GF majors 5♥ : GF ♥ (4♣ Namyats opening was also available) 6♥, Pass or anything else?

[hv=n=saxxxhaxdqxxxcktx&s=sxxhdktxxxcaqjxxx]133|200|[/hv] (2♣!)-4NT-(5♥)-6♦ All pass ♦'s were 2-2 and 6♦ made. Partner thought I was too weak for 4NT and you seem to agree B) It would have been more clear over a 2♥ opening, but probably I was too much influenced by the first sight of the 2♣ opening...Or is it also no 4NT over a strong 2♣ opening?

[hv=d=e&s=sxxhdktxxxcaqjxxx]133|100|Scoring: MP (2C)-?? 2C=Weak with 6cH or any GF[/hv] What do you bid? (Your partner will take the 2C bid as a weak Heart, and take 2NT as 15-17 with stops, 3NT to play, 4NT as minors...)

X and I pass now.

I think I would bid 3H at MP's.

Great news. Congrats Frances!!

It sounds like ♠ are not strong enough. ...Is that what you meant?

Thanks for the answers. I remember: Try always the max. ..and stop alcohol B)

Probably the best I can do to improve my bridge is concentrating better (especially during defence). e.g sometimes I don't know what card my partner played or what card opps have played. Or when declaring and running a long suit a miss some of the discards - especially the first ones - and don't know what is high at the end. Concentrating better should after some time also help to better visualise the other hands and distributions. Any tips would be welcome! (My technical knowledge about safety plays, .... is certainly not good but I think that improving the concentrating part is much more important).

thanks all for the replys. What are the (dis)advantages of kickback vs minorwood?

I agree. Those who DBL seem to imply that DBL promises less then 2H. I don't have that agreement.