luis

1. I'm between 2c and 3c, maybe 2c is ok since the suit is not good. 2. Depends on pd's cards :-) 3. 3s showing spade shortness and some doubts about 3nt, if pd can bid 3nt then it should be a good contract, if pd can't bid 3nt and chooses 4c then that should be playable too.

1s, what's the problem? I'd have never passed that hand, never never.

I think you have missread the topic Free. 4h is NOT a preempt, they opened 4d and your pd overcalls 4h so it's not a preempt since it's not usual to preempt over preempts.

I guess that 4n 5c and 5d can be used to show hands with support for hearts, either fit non jump or cuebids looking for controls. But I have several doubts about 4s, if the opponents open 4d and your pd has 6 hearts do you lose the chance to play 4 spades? If pd has a singleton or void in hearts and 6/7 spades why can't he bid 4s to play? 4s, 6s or 7s can easily be the best denomination for your side.

I have an intermediate point of view. If a hand is cold but a bad discard can win an overtrick or I have some chances for an overtrick then I play the hand until the end, sometimes I do get an overtrick worth 1 IMP and they do have to count and concentrate in the discards then getting tired. Have you ever won or lost a match by 1 imp? When I have all the remaining tricks or the remaining tricks except some obvious losers without a chance for overtricks I just claim, even at trick one or two since I feel it is unethical to play all the cards just to get your opps tired, you have to have a reason to play the hand.

I don't know if Richard will want to participate and I don't know if Rene is reading the forum and this thread frequently but I do think I can agree with Ron in a standarized version. I just wrote a first approach, let's call it version 1. Ron raised the following points: a) Opening bids I'll fight this :-) I think that the presented scheme is the more easy to learn version, transfer openings may be better but will have problems in some NCBOs. B) Relay structure Ron suggested symmetric relays instead of Neil's version, I can easily accept that. Just rewrite the relay structures and S1, S2, S3 schemes. c) 4d terminator In my opinion it is useless and adds something to remember to the system so I'd like to get convinced of the 4d utility (don't say many systems use it) before agreeing. But I'm not inflexible on this. d) Others? If there're other issues with the system let's discuss them. So we can have a standarized version and the personal versions also available just in case someone prefers on version or the other. As Ben said if there're concise notes on the system then it will be easy to learn and to play so we just have to keep working.

Ron, As I said this is just one version, we can easily take the document and modify it with your or Richard's suggested changes and produce another version, then players will be able to choose the system that they will play with their pd. As for me I can play and will like any version of Moscito. The reason why I used Neil's relays instead of symmetric is that I wanted the relay structure to cover all distributions including balanced 4432 and 4333 hands so there's less to remember, I also like to distinguish a minimum balanced hand from the rest of the hands, I find that important when the first relay can be invitational. Symmetric relays can be used (I guess) without any problems changing the way we handle balanced hands adding one step to show minimum if we want to. The point is that I think that this scheme is easier to learn as an introduction to relays and symmetric can be plugged without any problems. About the opening bids the 2c opening bid showing majors is one of the best aspects of the German Moscito variation, you can inmediately blast your side into any major suit game or 3 level contract and that makes thi ngs very hard to your opponents. Rene may be better prepared to explain the design reasons but in practice the 1s opening for unbalanced hands, 1n for balanced hands and 2c for both majors work very well together. The 4d terminator was left out just to simplify the system, I don't think it has any utility at all so why add yet another thing to remember? The best approach to the 4d utility I read in this thread was "it is widely used" I can't accept that as a solid reason to add complexity to the notes. As I said before 4d lets you play RKCB besides the control asking bid, after 2 years I never wanted to use RKCB instead of CAB + denial cuebids and I do like the ability to signoff in 4 of a minor when prospects for game don't look any good at all. I used that many times with great success.

If your psyches backfire frequenlty then you'd better bid what you have :-)

2) When you say 3S asks for controls, would you include a singleton or void? Of course, unless in pd's suit. Any A,K singleton or void would qualify as a control. It is preferred not to show a singleton/void in pd's suit. 3) If the bidding went 1S-2H-3C-3S-4C What is 3S asking for (since you don't have the slow arrival choice between 2S and 3S), and what is 4C showing? The problem with 3c is that responder will have problems to know if you have 4 or 5 clubs. That's why many 2/1 players play that a 3m rebid shows 5 cards. With 54 shape they would rebid the major and then over a 2n relay bid 3c to show a 4 card minor suit. This has the slight disadvantage that a 1M-2x,2M rebid is frequently bid with only 5 in the major. In both cases a 3M support bid would start a control exchange.sequence. If I were to be asked about preference I'd say that I prefer 1s-2h;3c to show a 5-5 black two suiter. Luis

You can post the hands as a way to start..... 3h should be showing a 5-5 hand then a subsequent heart bid can be used to show the hA or hK => a heart control. PLaying 2/1 after In this particular sequence the 2s bid is interested in "distribution" if responder is not interested in distribution but controls he can bid 3s Now any 4x bid by opener shows a control in the suit bid and denies controls in the suit below that one (4d shows d control and denies c control....). This is a common treatment that is worth a chat with pd, when slow arrival is on a 2x support bid is interested in distribution (show a fragment or rebid a suit to show 6-4 or 5-5) then 3s is interested in controls.

Thanks for the corrections and of course it is just a proposal, many will disagree with the principles that I applied. But at least we have a short summary of a system that can be used to play online without missunderstandings and the benefits of relays, light openings, 4 card majors, denial cuebids and so. I focused in minimization of misunderstandings, dual bids and other techincalities that can lead to problems. I'll be ready to practice this version online with you and others that may be interested. If you or someone want to add to extend the system you can do it and then agree with your pd on the differences over the document. Thanks for reading, let's see how it goes at the table :-)

Error, you guessed what was going on but bid normally. You said you would have passed the dbl so you are not fielding the psyche you are just guessing pd has psyched. OTOH this guy DID bid 2c so he fielded his pd psyche and is subject to an obvious adjusted score, and a likely procedural penalty. And I disagree that this is an obvious situation, a player opened 1c in third position and the other overcalled 1nt, after dbl and seeing your hand we can guess that one is lying but why it has to be pd? The 1c opener can easily have opened on 0 HCP or a weak hand with some clubs to suggest a lead. Pd psyche when his LHO is a passed hand is a bad bid, LHO can now easily double to show values and your side will be in bridge trouble and legal trouble. I don't like any bid at all. And finally the guy with 11 coud've just opened 1d.

Hi, I've created a set of system notes for a BBO-Moscito preliminar version, I think it's very easy to learn yet powerful. You can download the file (bbo_moscito.rtf) at this yahoo group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/moscito/file...System%20Notes/ Comments and corrections are welcome.

Nonsense, opener may have a semi-psychic 1c opening in third position, with lead-directional clubs. Something like a weak 2c bid which doesn't exist. North doesn't know and can't know what is going on, if he "fields" the psyche then you are subject to a penalty and an adjustment since that would mean you have an undisclosed agreement to psyche 1nt bids. The 2c bid is either illegal or terrible and can easily be both. If you want to make your psyche clear then you should run from 1nt doubled, not your pd. Anyway I don't see any value in this hand from a bridge bidding perspective. It's neither interest from a LAW perspective, you are fielding a psyche, adjusted score and procedural penalty, a visit to the ethics comitee and that's all....

Rdbl can be interpreted as SOS.

If you are concerned about a psyche you should assume pd has not psyched unless it is evident (example: he rescues himself after being doubled, or retreats from a supported suit when doubled, etc) But if you are concerned about pd "seriousness" the best option is not to trust pd nor the opps, trust the vulnerability. That can also be read as: if pd is white and they are red trust them, if they are white and you are red trust pd.

Ok now the revelation: Pd held: Qx, AJTxxx, A, AKxx The guy that opened 4d held 9 diamonds, his pd held 3 and decided to pass (can't argue with success). I passed 4h and we were cold for 7c. The spade finesse is on as you can expect and the heart finesse (not needed in 7c) was also on in case you want to play 7h. I don't know if reaching a grand slam is easy but we should have played 6. I thought for about 4 minutes over 4h before passing, I knew I had to do something but couldn't figure out a solid development for my hand. Are 4s and 5c cuebids in support for hearts? Why not? Or are they solid suits with a heart missfit (singleton or void). Is 5d a cuebid or exclusion RKCB in hearts. What is pd expected to do over 4s/5c/5d ? Everything was so unclear that I decided to take the sure plus in 4h. Wrong!

I can't understand this either, after they double 1NT we have a clear pass (assuming redouble is SOS) then you will play 1ntx making many or double any partscore that they may want to play. Pass and start to polish your red cards.

1c (1h) dbl I like to play that 1s is forcing and promises only 4+ spades. So I like to play this double as showing spades and diamonds or a balanced game forcing hand without a bidable suit.

East made two terrible bids: Double and 6d. Double is very doubtful with a hand that only has a bunch of diamonds, the nebulous 2d opening by the opps might lead them to a lot of problems if you can preempt. A 4d bid is clear cut and there maybe good arguments to a 5d bid by East. The other terrible bid is 6d in a hand that you know belongs to them after pushing them to the 5 level why force them to play the slam? This slam was bid by east not by North-South.

When not posted assume white all :-) Luis

Nobody vulnerable.

I held that nightmarish hand last night.... LHO opens 4d (preempt), pd bids 4h, RHO passes. Do you bid? What? Why?

3h, the most flexible bid. Hoping pd can bid 3nt or rebid spades to 3s. I'm not passing the 3nt level with 4c that will only endplay pd in the bidding. If he happens to have 4h then I have to decide between the 4h and 5c game.The 4-3 fit can be good.

This is the log of the training session, you can access the hands to see what happened using the www.bridgebase.com/myhands feature, use lrargerich or inquiry as usernames to get the hands. They were played the 3rd of August. 11:30 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3NN= 400 1.93 11:39 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3NN-2 -200 -6.80 11:43 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 1NS+2 150 0.13 11:49 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3DE-4 400 9.80 12:12 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3SE-1 50 -1.13 12:19 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3NS+1 430 5.60 12:28 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3SE= -140 -1.60 12:41 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 5DN-1 -100 -4.33 12:47 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3NNx-1 -200 0.40 12:55 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 4HN-1 -50 -1.00 13:00 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 2SE+1 -140 -1.00 13:04 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 5SS+1 480 0.13 13:09 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 4SN= 420 3.13 13:20 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 4SN= 420 6.33 13:24 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 1NW= -90 -1.47 13:31 inquiry lrargerich cupcup martujes 3NNxx+1 1400 13.67 It's interesting to see that nobody got beyond 4s in a hand where 6s was laydown if pd has the sQ or if spades are 2-2. Spades were 2-2 and we did make 6 but the point is that you must try for 6. Finally 3nxx making 4 on a fine endplay by Ben is always a nice way to end a session :-)