luis

With 4 or 5 cards overcalls I'd bid 2d on your three examples. 4s would never cross my mind after 1d(1s)pass.....

I like to play 4 card majors. It's the best way to quickly find a major suit fit if you have one and that may be a competitive advantage. About overcalls sometimes I do overcall on a 4 card suit, like most normal players, I don't take that to a extreme where you frequently or always overcall a 4 card suit. As my cc says "maybe more frequently than the field"...

Hi, Can we do something to prevent posters from changing the font size or font face in postings? Would you agree on that? When you read a thread it's really ugly (to me) to see some phrases or portions in a huge font as if they were incredible important. Let the reader decide what is important and how important it is, we are not idiots. Colors, italics, bold and underlining should be enough formatting to "suggest" the importance or relevance of particular phrases or words without making the appearance of the post weird. A particular bad example of using font sizes is when the signature of a post is a lot bigger than the message. I found that particularly annoying. Maybe it's just me but I think that keeping all posts in the same font size can be more readable and nice to the eyes. Maybe I'm the only one with this problem so this is just a suggestion/proposal.

If you play leb you lose the invitational hands, in this particular case I think that a forcing 3h bid is fine. I wish most of my games would feature 24+ combined HCP :-) Tip: When they bid 2c over 1NT you can just ignore the bid and play "system-on" many times it's rewarding. Use dbl as stayman, 2d transfer etc etc etc. This is one flexible approach.

Just some random comments that may or may not be useful or start a series of questions or explanations from other players. 1) When do we use Leb? a) When we open a strong NT and they bid 2x B) When they open a weak 2 and pd doubles c) When we open a strong club and they bid 2x Other situations can be added per partneship agreement, a) and B) are the more common but not many players agree to play Leb after the opps open a weak 2. I think it is a valuable treatment. 2) Weak NT and Leb Playing a weak NT there're some arguments IMO to use a takeout double if they bid 2x, a trap pass should also be used with opener encouraged to reopen with dbl when he has 2 cards in their suit. This takeout DBL may or may not be combined with LEB upon partnership agreement, IMO a TO double plus Leb is a good scheme for weak NTers. 3) Exotic 2x bids over our 1NT It is worth discussing the meaning of our bids when they show a two suiter over 1NT or when they bid a two-way bid for example playing SUCTION. There're four common situations: a) 2x: Shows only one suit (the suit bid or another, maybe a xfer) B) 2x shows 2 specific suits c) 2x shows 1 specific suit and promises another (ex 2h = h+ m) d) 2x is multi (ex 2c= d or h+s) I don't think that regular Leb can be used succesfully against the 4 combinations. IMO each of these 4 situations has to be discussed in your parnership if you plan to play Leb. I won't recommend a meta-defense here. 4) Finally Rub or Leb. IMO Rubensohl is as easy (or as difficult) as Leb and has some advantages so I generally prefer to play Rubensohl instead of Leb, but maybe this is for another thread.

I guess that cashing the cA and cK is a better like than the c finesse. Because the c finesse is just 50% and the combined cA-cK or spade finesse is better than 50%.

Cmon guys stop fighting, this is not good for me nor for you the forums the system or the world. I think Richard made a rather harsh post and everybody is entitled to write something not very polite in a bad moment. Fundamentalism is bad, it goes nowhere. About Moscito I want to note that I played the original German version (1n=majors), I played the new German version, and I also played the modern Aussie version. If I were to play or teah Moscito to a new pd interested I'd just start presenting options and let him choose what he likes best. I'm sure you can have great results and enjoy very much competition with any of the mentioned versions or even a mixture. In fact the basic points of the system have already been explained and discussed and many readers will already have a good understanding on general philosophy and variations that can be played. Do you like AKQ slam points? do you like CAB? Would you like to play 4d as a terminator or "to play" ? Just discuss it with your pd, modules are exchangeable. If you guys cool down I'm still here and I'm still offering my help to write notes, give some online lessons, practice and play with any of you any version of the system. I'm flexible about systems I just load a different system for each of my pd's and everything goes fine. Many times my humorous comments can be misunderstood but I'm generally a good pd and I like to keep my pd happy. I've played Richard's system with him and it is a sound system and a lot of fun, I've played the modified German version with Ana for more than two years and it has been also a sound system and fun. I've even created a modified version for Ana and her female pd here in Argentina and they like it too, I just adapted to parnership style. You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand - You must open this hand, until they got it :-) Cool down, write ideas, play them and have fun.....

From trefl's post we can use "yet" another structure that can be as good as the one I proposed or better: 1c: 15+ 1d: 10-14 no 4M 1h: 10-14 4+h 1s: 10-14 4+s 1n: 11-14 BAL no 5M 2c: 10-14 Majors Then all the balanced hands are dumped into the 1NT opening, this ensures that the 1d opening is unbalanced and 1h/1s if balanced are 5332 with 5M. Parnterships will be allowed to use their favourite weak NT approacj (or strong NT approach) to deal with the 1NT opening and the relay structure over 1x will be simpler. What do you think? Luis

Why did you get sooooooo mad? Rich? Pls cool down, we are just trying to figure out an easy scheme, a compromise between an optimal version of moscito and an easy to learn version. I think that the first thing that we have to admit is that neither of us is the owner of the truth. I have my personal opinions about what is best for the system and what is best for newbies to the system but as I posted I can set aside many of my ideas if we agree on a different approach. But we'll need a lot of patience and opinions should be allowed since we are all equals. Besides that once a basic way to start learning the system is defined each student or partnership can change or evolve the areas of the system that he wants, IMO a system cannot make a parnership do better unless the system is adapted to the players styles, what they like to do, what they don't like, etc. That's why there're so many flavours and conventions of SAYC and that's why there're so many versions and approaches to Moscito. We are only trying to agree on a standarized version that will be used to LEARN moscito then is up to the players and their partners. I can't see why we can't keep posting and discussing without fighting, we are all civilized bridge players I guess....

Maybe this structure can work: 1c 15+ any. Responses as in German Moscito (2c=9-11 balanced) 1d 10-14 no (no 4M or three suited) 1s = positive INV+ relay 1N = Balanced 2c = relay 2d = minimum 2h = relay 2s = 4-4 in the minors 2n = 5332 with 5 d 3c = 5332 with 5c 3d = 3-3-4-3 3h = 3-3-3-4 2h = 4-4 in the minors (r=asks for doubleton) 2s = 5332 with 5 diamonds (r=asks for doubleton) 2n = 5332 with 5 clubs (4=asks for doubleton) 3c = 3-3-4-3 3d = 3-3-3-4 2c = Clubs one suiter or three suited with both minors 2d® 2h = Three suited 2s+ = S1 2d = One suited with diamonds 2h+ = S2 (both minors) 1h 10-14 4+h no 4s 1s = relay INV+ 1n = balanced or three suiter with both majors 2c® 2d = minimum balanced 2h® 2s = h+d 2n = h+c 3c = 3-4-3-3 3d+ = 5332 show doubleton 2h = three suited 2s = h+d 2n = h+c 3c = 3-4-3-3 3d+ = 5332 show doubleton 2c = h+d 2d = h 2h+ = h+c (s2) 1s 10-14 4+s UNBAL 1n (relay INV+) 2c = s+d 2d = s 2h = S2 (s+c) 1n 10-14 balanced with 4/5 spades 2c (relay GF) 2d = minimum 2h® 2s = s+h 2n = s+d 3c = s+c 3d = 4-3-3-3 3h+ = 5332 show doubleton 2h = s+h 2s = s+d 2n = s+c 3c = 4-3-3-3 3d+ = 5332 show doubleton 2c (10-14 both majors) 2d (relay INV+) 2h+ = S2 (h+s) Symmetric relays used: S1: 2s = high shortage or 6322 2n = mid shortage 3c = Equal shortage (7222 or 10-1-1-1) 3d+ = S1 list S1 list = 5332, 6331, 7321, 7330,.... S2: 2h = reverser 2s = equal length 2n = r 3c = high shortage 3d+ = low shortage S2 list with equal length 2n = high shortage 3c = equal shortage 3d+ = S2 list S2 list: 5431, 6421, 6430, 6520, 7420..... S2 list equal length: 5521, 5530, 6610...... S2 list equal shortage: 5422, 6511, 7411.... After shape is known: 3n = to play 1st non 3nt bid = CAB 4d = terminator Others = RKCB setting trumps using rr suits in length order After CAB denial cuebids are used Feedback? Luis

Well I'll try to produce something for our fellow students/friends. Can't promise anything but I will try.... Maybe the basic structure....

I agree let's see how can we start this, Richard if you are reading would you like to write some basic notes ? I think the base is: 1c: 15+ any with 1d as negative and 2c as balanced 9-11 1d: 10-14 no 4M 1h: 10-14 can be bal 4+h 1s: 10-14 no 4M UNBAL 4+s 1n: 10-14 bal with 4/5 spades 2c: 10-14 Both majors 2d+ whatever you want to play with your pd Symmetric relays "on". I agree protability to other systems and standarization are important. CAB + Denial cuebids + 4d terminator + RKCB for slam investigation Non-relay responses based on Richard's notes Now we should re-write the relay structure based on symmetric relays for the German-style openings...

I have no problem using the symmetric relays approach in BBO Moscito but we'll be losing some precision. We can work on the details and produce the material quickly. About Slam points my experience is that AKQ slam points are not as good as AK controls followed by denial cuebidding. I think that CAB + 4d terminator + Other bids = RKCB is a nice approach but it is not a must-have to start. The general CAB + denial cuebids + other bids= to play works almost as fine as the super-efficient approach. After playing Moscito for 2 years we never found the need for RKCB instead of denial cuebidding and we did find some hands where we just bid 4c or 4d since there were not enough controls for a minor suit game and 3nt wasn't an option (they run a suit). IMO it is better to have 4d (sometimes 4c too) as a signoff than to add the 4d terminator to be able to use RKCB. But it is just my opinion and I'll be happy to see this overruled by the majority :-) Luis

I agree with Ben 100% offshape doubles are not bid with 6-4 hands. An offshape double can be a double of 1c with 4-2-4-3 or a double of 1h with 3-3-5-2 or a double of 1s with 2-4-2-5.... etc.... Maybe somebody from Italy can elaborate on the famous italian offshape doubles. Do we have an Italian in this forum?

In this particular hand I'm between 1h and 1s :-) Maybe many players bid 1h because of the AK lead directing value and they were lucky to find support. Others may have started with 1s and rebid 2h over pd's 1nt or 2c response. I think 1s followed by 2h if we can do it is what I would have bid at the table. About doubling. It depends on partneship style. Italians are very fond of unshaped doubles and we can say that they have done fairly well with their methods... They will double 1d with 2-4-3-4 or similar hands. They won't double with a 6-4 distribution, so I think that this hand is a 1s bid. You can research many bulletins and identify a lot of offshaped italian doubles. Interesting stuff they always work for them.

In my country we use the WBF regulations (sortof orgnization is a disaster) so rewriting... we are supossedly using the WBF regulations. Under WBF regulations German Moscito is a "BLUE" system because 1c is not dual and we don't have any "red system" treatment. So it is categorized in the same way as precision. For the ACBL this should be a mid-chart system because of relays I think that no relay system can be GCC (absurd ins't it?) Note that this version is just a 4 card majors and strong club system with relays used only with INV+ hands so I think it is perfectly legal under mid-chart conditions and in any WBF tournament where BLUE systems are allowed (meaning: all tournaments). I only used the system in my country and here if precision can be played then this version of moscito can be played too. Maybe René can have a mor authoritative opinion on this. René?

1h can always be balanced because you have the 1h-1s;1n sequence to show a balanced minimum. 1NT always shows 4s or 5s, and can also have 4h if 4-4[32]. The 1s opening is always unbalanced and that's really good since you can preempt with a lot of hands once you know your pd has an unbalanced hand, it is safer and it is wiser to do it and makes life harder for opps. About the relay structure, why do you say it is not symmetric? I think it is so easy to remember and to play that I have succeded teaching it to some players in about 2 hours. I can't see why the 4d terminator can be useful if we use CAB+denial cuebids. It's not logical to put something into the system just because others use it :-) it has to have some purpose. If you add other options to the CAB + DC scheme then 4d is needed 'cos 4h and 4s would eventually have a different meaning but that is hardly needed and makes the system more complex. About 5332 and 4333 hands in the S1 scheme it is good because when you deny a balanced hand those distributions are usually pulled from S1 and if you denied a balanced minimum then a 4333 or 5332 hand shows a good 13-14 hand, that is good knowledge for pd because he can know you have some fillers. Same when you respond to 1c, if you have 13+ it is better to describe since a game contract is almost always cold but with 9-11 a 2d response with balanced hands is perfect, opener frequently bids 3nt and the defenders know almost nothing. With a 5M on the other hand many times opener will prefer a 4M contract and that's why 5332 hands with 5M are not included in 1c-2c. Please notice that I think Aussie Moscito is superior to German, I play both versions and prefer the transfer openings and I also like the 1c-1d GF scheme but the German version is as legal as precision and it is very easy to learn and then switching is easy that's why I think we should put some efficiency aside and build something very easy and very playable for newbies. Luis

The problem with this approach is that you completely lose the 1nt contract, playing precision a normal 6-10 or 7-10 1NT bid is very useful since pd can pass 1nt or bid on with a suitable hand. If 1nt can be 0HCP it becomes "forcing" so you are losing the 1NT contract. Sometimes even after a limited opening showing 11-15 hcp pd can make a game try if you have 7-10 HCP, if your 1NT bid can be 0 pd won't be able to judge what to do when he has a good hand, you will be a candidate to miss a good game or overbid to 3x in a hand that you wuld have passed 1M.

I disagree, I don't like doubling with a 5 card major unless the hand is just too strong to bid 1x or 2x. Why? Because first of all pd will not compete with 3 card support unless you bid your 5 card suit. Pd will miss-use the law and compete to 3h on a 4-3 fit or let them play the hand bypassing a 5-3 spade fit. If my suit is a minor I can either double or bid 2m depending on the hand. With 2-5-3-3 I prefer to bid 2h rather than dbl 1s but with 2-3-5-3 I can either double 1s or bid 2d depending on the hand. With 5 spades is when doubling is worst in my opnion your are likely going to be letting them play 2m or 3m without discovering a 5-3 spade fit.

Remember that EW were playing precision, that's why I think that 4d by North is a fit jump. The 1d opener can have only 2 cards in diamonds and in some versions even 1 card or a void. In that scenario I think that it is a good idea to assume that nobody holds diamonds yet or they can steal your suit each time they open 1d.

My comments: What is North smoking? his pd bids 1h and now he proceeds to bid 2h, 4h, 5h, that's really horrible. He has a clear and good 4d fit-showing bid or if he doesn't want to let east double 4d he can bid a direct 4h. 2h is terrible. East pass is not forcing, he has a limited hand, limited hands usually don't bid forcing passes. 3h is a general cuebid. Nothing specific to me. I think that both east and west have good reasons to bid 5s instead of doubling 5h. They have really offesive hands not suitable for defense.

Let me disagree :-) Maybe you can convince me after all Opening bids: A 1s opening that can be balanced is bad because over the 1N relay you can't bid 1N and many times with a balanced hand the best spot to play is 1N, I strongly suggest to use 1s as 4+s UNBAL, 1N= balanced with 4/5 spades, 2c=Majors. This is what the 1993 and 2000 versions of German Moscito recommend and I can't find any reason to change it. About responses to 1c: I really prefer: 1h = 4+s 1s = 4+h no 4s 1n = 4+d no 4M 2c = 9-11 balanced no 5M 2d = One suited with 4+ clubs This perfectly matches the S1, S2 schemes used by German Moscito. About shape resolution: I have no problem with high shortage first or last, it's the same to me. It is important to keep the relay structure easy to learn and based on rules not in memorization. Slam tools: If we use a CAB followed by denial cuebids then a 4d terminator is not needed (and adds extra complexity to the system) once shape is resolved a relay (not 3n) is a control asking bid while all the other bids are to-play. Then denial cuebids are used being all non-relay bids to play. This is simple, automatic to remember and works very well.

Excellent start Ben, Continuing your comments about penalty doubles I want to add some tips: - When pd makes a penalty double in a competitive auction where both sides have a fit you are allowed to pull the double if you have a void in their suit, pd usually expects you to have 1 trump. - In the same way when pd pulls your penalty double in a competitive auction you should expect him to have a void in the opps suit or unexpected trump length. - In missfit situations doubles are always for penalties. And never lead a trump vs a missfit even if they end up in a doubled partscore. - Doubles of NT bids are always for penalties. Exception after 1M-1NT or 1m-1NT where double is usually a takeour double of the opener suit. - Double of a bid that shows a two suiter (example unusual NT) shows a hand that has 1 or 2 penalty doubles against their suits, pd is invited to cooperate doubling their suits if he has values in the suit or passing to see if you can double for penalties. - Don't double a partscore if you don't have a good trump stack when the opps are likely to hold a two suiter with a fit in one of the suits, two suiters usually produce a higher number of tricks than the expected number for the combined HCP holding. - When pd makes a penalty double at a low level lead a trump (another reason to pull the dbl with a void). If they are in a missfit this tip is cancelled. - A hand that passes after an overcall and then bids something unexpected usually shows an original penalty pass of the overcalled suit. - Doubles of artificial non-suit bids are usually bid to show the suit being bid by the opps so they are in principle penalty doubles but most likely lead-directing, expect pd to have 4 cards in the suit being doubled not 5 to make a competitive decision.

Rene, Nice to see you here :-) we've been playing a modified version of German Moscito in Argentina for two years. We changed a lot of things and maybe that's already changed in the 2002 version but I can't read German, do you know any volunteer that may want to translate the 2002 version into english? Maybe then we can start discussing and improving to reach the BBO German-Moscito standard that Ben suggested :-) Luis

We quickly dumped the impossible negative to the trashcan :-). As I mentioned we mantained the opening bids because they are legal under our local regulations and because I specially like the 2c opening with majors. We mantained the relay structure pulling the three suiters away. Then we changed all the asking bids by a generic CAB followed by denial cuebidding. And we modified all the 2d+ openings too.