luis

1) Pass I really don't think I have another option. 3h is against the LAW. And 3s is a wild shot in the dark. My three little clubs are a bad signal. 2) a) I'd have passed over 5h. B) Over 6h I play a convention: negative slam doubles. Pass shows 1 or 0 defensive tricks then pd with 0 defensive tricks defends with 2 defensive tricks passes with 1 defensive trick he doubles and then I pass with 1 or defend with 0 double shows 2 defensive tricks so pd won't defend. So I'd have passed showing 0/1 defensive tricks c) Over 7h I double that's for sure I hope they can't bid and make 7NT :-)

What about: Strong club / Natural club or / Multi club (polish, etc) Position depending 1NT (9-12 not vul, 15-17 vul vrs not, etc)

I don't think that a balancing double of a supported suit at the 2 level can be a succesful idea. Let's discuss three frameworks for 1s-p-2s-p-p balancing: Framework a) by Junyi: Dbl = penalty 2n = takeout 3x = natural Framework B) Dbl = takeout 2n = 4-4 in the minors 3x = natural Framework c) Dbl = takeout 2N = natural and to play 3x = natural Framework d) Dbl = takeout with 4 hearts 2N = takeout without 4 hearts 3x = natural Framework e) Dbl = Strong penalty double OR takeout with sp shortage 2N = Takeout with 2/3 spades 3x = natural More options? Which one do you think is better and why? There're many advantages and disadvantages in each option. Thanks to Junyi for the subject it's very interesting.

For some reason "Naturalists" tend to decline studying opponents system and claim that they don't need any specialized defense. "Scientists" on the other hand are generally players that like to study and carefully prepare defenses for many situations even in competence, they like to analize the opponents systems and find weak spots where a particular bid may disrupt the whole sequence etc. I think studying and preparing defenses and pre-arranging some conventions is an important phase of a team match specially when the match is long.

Hi, I want to request a text-based way to browse or download played hands. txts are easy to comment, archieve and send to students and friends. The myhands feature in the web should have a link to get the hand in text representation and a link to get all the hands in text representation (maybe checkboxes can be used to check what hands you want) Thanks for the great work!

2/1 is based in the idea that a 2 over 1 bid is forcing to game. Examples: 1s-2c; 1s-2d; 1s-2h; 1h-2c; 2h-2d. Some players also agree that 1d-2c is forcing to game but this treatment is not universal. Some players play that a 2/1 response is an absolute game force, others play that a rebid of the 2/1 suit is non-forcing (example: 1s-2c;2d-3c). So as usual there're many "flavours" of 2/1 2/1 uses 5 card majors, with a specialized "forcing" 1nt response as a catch-all of non-game forcing hands without support. The 1M-2NT response is generally used to show 4 card support and INV+ values, using Jacoby, Stemberg or something similar. So the 1M-1NT (forcing) response normally encloses: - Weak signoffs - Limit raises with exactly 3 card support - Balanced hands with invitational values Bergen raises are frequently used to complete the major-raises structure. Some players play 1NT forcing even in a passed hand, others don't (more to agree). Some players also reverse the meaning of 1s and 1NT when opening 1h: 1s = A forcing 1NT bid 1N = 5+ spades and forcing. This treatment allows the 1h opener to rebid 1N with a balanced hand so you can play 1N when opening 1h. An inmediate side effect of 2/1 is that you can't play 1NT when you open 1 spade. The 2/1 sequences have variations too, the most used principle is "fast-arrival". Once you are in a game-forcing situation use cheap bids with powerful hands to get more bidding room and explore slam chances and blast to game with minimum hands. Example: Kxx, xx, AKxxx, Qxx (1s-2d; 2x-4s) Describind a minimum hand with diammonds and 3 card support for spades. After a 2/1 response opener rebids are: Support pd suit with Hxx or 4 cards (only) Bid a new suit at the 2 level with 4+ cards Bid a new suit at the 3 level only with extra values Bid 2NT with stopeers in both unbid suits So opener frequently rebids 2M even with 5 cards if none of the above rules apply. It's very hard to describe 2/1 since there're many variations and posible agreements. Hope this helps.

Hi, This is just the beginning of a list, please feel free to add pairs/correct my errors and comment if you want. If there's some way to make this post editable by everybody (Hi admins!) then that would be ideal. Meckstroth - Rodwell: 5 card majors, strong club, many gadgets. Mini-NT. Balicki - Zmudinski: Polish club, 5 card majors. Strong NT. Specialized 2s. Hackett - Hackett: 4 card majors, natural methods, light openings. Weak NT. A system usually called "the science" Blaskett - Bruun: 5 card majors, dual 1c opening (nat or 15-19 bal). Weak NT. Bochi - Duboin: 5 card majors, NT range upon vuln (9-12, 12-14 or 15-17). Artifical responses. de Weis - Muller: 4 card majors, Strong NT Gromov - Petrunin: Precision, 5 card majors 12-15 or 15-17 NT Lauria - Versace: Natural with 5 card majors and strong NT

I want to share a partnership arrangement that paid a lof of IMPs in a recent hand at BBO. First we agreed to play Ghestem since showing specific two-suiters is better than showing one suit and another in terms of hand evaluation. So when they open and we show a two suiter how do we use the remaining suit? We agreed that a bid in the remaining suit was going to be used to show values in that suit and a good raise of one of pd's suits. Then this hand appeared: North: Void AJxxx AJx KJTxx South: 9xx Kxxxx KQxx x LHO opened 1s, North bid 2s showing hearts+clubs. RHO bid 3s. And applying the convention I bid 4d (values in diammonds plus support for hearts or clubs) Now my pd has a "dream" hand. He cuebid 4s and I bid 5d showing a second diammond honor. He then bid 6h Wanting to play 7 if I had support for clubs. I passed and we collected 12 easy tricks +1430. 22HCP combined produced a slam swing just because we spent some time on the meaining of the remaining suit after Ghestem.

>1) Neither vul, IMPs: KJ10, 10x, 9xxx, Axxx >RHO opens 1S, pass, pass, partner doubles, RHO bids 2S and you? I'm very tempted to bid a "natural" 2NT but I'm afraid if can be taken as "pick a minor". Since 3NT is too crazy even for me I'd pass. If he doubles again I'll bid 3NT very very happy. I'm just slightly afraid pd might pass 2s with a balanced 16/17 and we can lose a 3NT game but what else can I do? >2) Both vul, IMPs: xx, xxx, x, K9xxxxx >Partner opens 1C, RHO doubles, and you? 5 clubs, before they have the chance to know whats happening. Now if LHO has values he has to take a decision at the 5 level. I know the bid is not what others would do but I've bid exactly 5c with exactly the same holding in exactly the same sequence at a South American juniors championship and after 5s double by my pd we got a bunch of IMPs :-)

Hi everybody. Soon World Class players and some lucky others (hope to get in) will play a rematch of the "Naturalists vrs Scientists" classic. This time Scientists will use "Moscito" a relay system based on 4 card majors that was created by Paul Marston (Australia). A german team leaded by Rene Stainer created a version and GIB (the leading computer bridge software) played a version called Moscito-Byte to win the computers bridge championship many times. I'm not a super-expert but I'll try to introduce the ideas in Moscito and present some of its flavours. MOSCITO (Majors-Oriented-Strong-Club = MOSC) is a system based in a strong club opening and 4 card majors. The system tries to open as many hands as it can to get into the auction frequently trying to find if possible a major suit fit at the safest level as soon as posible. Light openings are the key to the system, the "oldets" version of Moscito used 10-14 openings and the modern variations tend to allow 8-14 openings where 8/9 HCP hands with good distribution are opened (Example 5431 hands). This means that almost all 10HCP hands are opened by rule. The opening bids depend on the "flavour" of moscito being used, some variations are: a) Modern variation 1c = 15+ any 1d = 9-14 with 4+ hearts 1h = 9-14 with 4+ spades 1s = 9-14 with 4+ diammonds 1N = 12-14 balanced without 4M B) Modern variation b Same as before but 1s can be any unbalanced hand without 4M c) German variation (this is almost natural and ACBL compliant) 1c = 15+ any 1d = 10-14 no 4M 1h = 10-14 4+ hearts 1s = 10-14 unbalanced with 4+spades 1N = 10-14 balanced with 4 or 5 spades 2c = 10-14 5+/4+ or 4+/5+ in the majors Two level openings depend on the pair playing Moscito and the version being played. Once the bidding starts Moscito uses "relays" to find out the distribution, controls and location of honors in pd's hands, the relay principle stablishes that one hand "asks" while the other "describes", if the hand being describe ends being the dummy the defense is blind with zero information about declarer's hand. If the inverse occurs: delcarer hand being known then you are playing an open hand. Most versions convey that a relay shows an invitational or better hand and a second relay is game-forcing. Thus Moscito is in GF situations at very low levels of the bidding so forcing passes are very frequently and penalty doubles start very early (if GF then passes are forcing and dbls are for penalties usually). Moscito can describe accurately almost any hand from the common 4-4-3-2 patterns to the wild 8-2-2-1 patterns. You just have to learn the proper structures to use in relay sequences. Denial cuebids and asking bids are used after the distribution is know to get the number of controls and specific location of honors to know if you have to play game, slam or a grand. Luis

Hi all, I started the thread so I'm very very happy to see the idea was widely accepted. I hope to play for the "scientists" playing Moscito with one of my reg pds. If not then I'll be happy to comment the match for the kibitzers. This is not a crusade, the idea is not to prove that Moscito is better than 2/1 or than SAYC is better than Moscito. The idea is to show how radically different bidding systems bid the same hand, to show beginners and intermediate players that artificial systems are not satanic just another side of the same coin and that you are not losing just because their methods are mor complex than yours. The first match of Naturalists vrs Scientists was organized by Bridge World, the naturalists played Standard american + blackwood and Stayman while the scientists used complex methods. If I remember well Mathew Granovetter was playing with Rubin a complex relay system they used to win the challenge the champs section of BW for a record number of times. Anyway this matches are a lot of fun, there will be "Natural" supporters hoping for a relay misunderstanding to go down 7 in a 2-1 fit and there will be "Science" fans hoping for the perfect grand slam where you have to know your pd has the singleton dQ and the club J. :-) The important idea in my opinion is to show that natural systems can be as good as complex systems and that artificial systems are not satanic nor designed to destroy the game. Many players can learn a lot and have a lot of fun watching players like Fred and Paul Marston playing. I'm happy to announce that Fred will be playing for the Naturalists. The "Scientists" will use Moscito (we don't know the flavour yet since there are MANY variations) but I'm very happy to announce that Paul Marston the inventor of Moscito and a remarkable Aussie player will be playing. I'll post a thread "Introduction to Moscito" in this same forum so you can read something not-so-technical about the system. Enjoy! Luis.

We use the 2/1 responses to show constructive hands with less than invitational values. With an invitational hand we relay 1 time and then bid naturally. (2 relays are GF) So with something like AQxxx and a side queen or similar we bid 2/1. A friend of mine deviced a better set of 2/1 responses over a 1s bid which is never balanced and can be a canape. He plays 2/1 as pass/correct trying to bid his pd canape suit with a weak hand. This has the advantage of showing a good fit if the opener actually has any other hand and stopping low without opener showing his canape too high. I'd like to read other structures over 1M and Non-inv 2/1 responses. Luis

Well, What a nice match. After starting the theread I expected to play :-)) Can I? I can play Moscito with my mother (Ana Alonso) or Garland Foster. Maybe we can have 3 pairs in our team. The 2nd week of June is ok to me too. The version of Moscito that I can play is legal under most ACBL and WBF regulations (what do you think Fred): 1c: 15+ 1ny 1d: 10-14 4+h 1h: 10-14 4+s 1s: 10-14 no 4M unbal 1N: 10-14 no 4M bal 2c: Wildcard opening (depending on partnership/tournament, etc) 2d: 10-14 three suited hand with 4+ clubs 2h: Weak 2 in hearts or three suited hand with short clubs (always 4+h) 2s: Weak 2 2n: 8-11 at least 5/4 in the minors. Luis

Another vote for Swiss movement pls.

Well, I didn't understand your last post Inquiry but if the conditions are ok then we just have to arrange the players and a date for the match. Pls post proposed dates for the match so we can coordinate the availability of the two teams....

And how can we make both tables play exactly the same 20 deals? If we can do that then manual scoring and we are ready. Can I close the Scientific team with you and your pd Richard?

>1) How popular are strong club systems in the U.S.? My impression is >that a significant minority of top U.S. players use strong club systems, >but that the popularity drops quickly after that, and that few >non-experts play them. My impression is that they are very well accepted and popular at expert level, back to club level SAYC has an almost absolute 100% of the market. >2) What are the systems played the most in the U.S., besides Precision >(including its various flavors). Do any besides Precision have a >significant following here? I think SAYC and 2/1 get 99.99% of the market, precision the remaining 0.01% and there maybe some foreigners playing other systems. >3) Specifically - I haven't been playing long, and have only played >online (except for a bit 30 years ago), so I don't know the local bridge >club scene - I live in suburban Connecticut, about 60 miles from NYC. >What would your guess be about the likelihood of finding a partner >who was willing and able to play a strong club system in a non-urban >environment? I'd say you'll need a lot of luck. >4) How difficult is it to find partners to play online? That's easy. >5) Are strong club systems subject to interference by narrow-minded >club tournament directors (I've read about the ban of the Strong Pass), >or would I be likely to be able to play Precision, say, without any official >problem. Yes, my experience playing precision in the US is that you are considered a) Satanic, a guy not playing SAYC just to confuse other players B) A semi-god that can play a system nobody understands. Directors tend to exert "pressure" on pairs playing big-club systems because they "scare" normal players (mostly old-ladies) and they are the precious clients :-) > 6) Which strong club system do you prefer, and why? Moscito (I play a version that is perfectly legal in ACBL mid-chart conditions). Moscito is precise, agressive and makes bidding easy. It's also a lot of fun. Then I like the magic diammond (ok not a strong club system), and a system called "unassuming club" based on Polish club. >7) Since you have played your strong club system, do you find that it >has significant practical advantages over natural methods, or do you >play it more for reasons of intellectual and aesthetic gratification? >How good a player/bidder do you have to be to get an advantage >playing a strong club versus a natural system? I do believe a big-club system has advantage over natural methods. You find slams that others can't and you can play games where others can't do it. The better the opps the narrower the difference is because exp partnerships have specialized understandings to solve weak spots in natural methods. >9) How difficult is it to learn to play Precision? It seems to me that it >isn't that much more difficult than natural systems, for someone with a >good memory, who is willing to hit the books for a bit. Do you agree? It's VERY easy. In fact I learned to play bridge learning super-precision, it was my first system. >10) Bonus question (thought of when writing #1) - is there a generally >agreed definition of what constitutes an expert versus an advanced >player. Do they both play in the A flights, but the experts win, or win at >a certain level (i.e. sectional or regional)? I hope you all have fun >answering this one! Easy answer: Do you know what an intra-finesse is? Have you played one recently? If the answer is yes/yes then you are an expert :-)

I agree we should wait until TEAM tournaments are "on", a 20-board match between the two teams seems to be fine.

At my club the director was called once after the following sequence 1d 1c p p 1d 1c p p 1d 1c p p He was asked to rule something because the bidding went into an infinite loop, each player decided they don't have a reason to change his previous bid.... How would you rule? :-)

Hi, I'm proposing a rematch of the famous Bridge World "Scientists vrs Naturalists" match. I can play Moscito with my pd Garland Foster and I guess The_hog & rwilley can also play moscito for our team. Do you want ? Now I invite inquiry & pd to choose another pair for the "Naturalists", does BBO have a "way" to play a teams match ? This re-edition of the faous match will be a test for the new state-of-the-art "natural" bidding: 2/1 and one of the most "advanced" relay systems with very light opening bids and so (Moscito) Do you like the idea? I hope to arrange the conditions/format and players using this thread. Luis

Since I do play and know Moscito and 2/1 I'm offering myself as a commentator for the match. Contact me if you want to schedule this match, it can be a very nice online demostration of bidding systems. Luis.

Hi, I just finished playing the Argentinian Mixed-Pairs national tournament and finished 2nd playing moscito. Some highlights about the system in the tournament: 1) Our "beloved" 2NT bid 8-11 at least 5-4 in the minors failed for the 1st time and 2nd time! a) We played 3d with x, Tx, A972, AQ8742 opposite QJ87, A872, JT3, 65 (2nt opening, 3d bid all pass) The result -150 was a complete zero, there's a double dummy play for down 2 but I didn't play it (duck a club, and then drop the doubleton K!) B) We played 2NT with AQ32, AJ76, JT, J92 opposite J4, 3, 8765, AKT643 (2NT opening all pass -is 3c better?-) They lead a spade ducked to the J and now how would you play at MPs? I decided that a 3-1 club break would be devastating so I played cA and a low club... Of course clubs were 2-2 and +120 was a zero against an "absolute" +130 from the field. 2) Prepared openings for 3 suiters are fine a) Axxx, x, QJT9, KT82 opposite Kxx, xxx, xx, A9765 Our bids: 2d (Three suited with 4+ clubs) - 3c all pass Making 3 on the cQ lead (would you have played the leader for QJ or stiff Q?) A top since everybody was playing 3h making 3) Relays are fun a) AT932, A93, AK2, 54 opposite 64, 7, JT8763, AKJ2 Our bids: 1c (15+) - 1N (4+d no 4M 9+) 2c ® - 2N (d+c d>c short hearts) 3c ® - 3h (2-1-6-4) 3s ® - (Dbl) - Rdbl (3 controls) all pass Result: 3sxx making 4 for +960 (pretty isn't it?) As a side note we win 6d with extreme careful play (can you discover the best line for 6d -or 5d+1 for a top-) The field was playing diammond partscores so a 5d game would have been a top for Moscito anyway 4) Wild wild west a) Your pd opens 1NT meaning: 10-14 with 4/5 spades and a balanced hand. You hold: KQ2, AJ6, A876, AQ4 (20 HCP 3-3-4-3) I can use a dozen of relays to reveal my pd hand and ask for controls, but I don't have a range-asking bid (is this a dark spot in our system?) maybe not since I jumped to 6N because I didn't want to be asked how I played a game holding 20 opposite an opnening hand :-) My pd hand: AT42, T973, KJ, K86 ah.. yes.. she opened with 11 do we hate the system? No! Now play 6NT on a club lead.... We make it for +1440 and a huge top (quiz: find the line) :) AQ652, Q72, Q4, AKJ opposite - , AKT64, AKT64, Q42 Our sequence 1c (15+) - 1s (4+h GF denies 4s) 1N ® - 2c (h+d) 2d ® - 2s (h=d) 2n ® - 3c (short clubs!!) 3d ® - 3s (3-5-5-0 exactly) 4c ® - 5c (6 controls) 7N (!!) Lead: sJ into the AQ, hearts were 3-2 so +1520 for a top. The leader protested the hand (pd misbid but he was correctly informed what the system said) the director ruled 7nt -1 (in an amazing ruling since he played the hand for me deciding I was playing on diammonds 3-3 instead of taking the winning d finesse against the guy with 2h). We appealed the hand and the AC ruled 0 for them and average for us.... Note: The leader had JT32, J2, Jxxx, xxx after 3 clubs and 5 rounds of hearts he Must discard 3 spades now diammond to the Q cash the sA and since the SK does not drop the diammond finesse is marked so I was always making 7.... The field played 6h making or 7h (half making it and half down 1) you have to cash exactly 1 trump and ruff a diammond (is that the best line?) 5) What would you lead: AJ, 62, T987432, 42 Your pd opens 1h (10-14 4+h) I quickly passed (2d is constructive and 3d is a mini-splinter in our system). LHO reopened with 1s and RHO jumped to 3N, your lead. 6) How? Can any system avoid this? 95432, A43, A82, Q2 opposite Q, KQ, QJ2, AJT9873 Bidding: 1c(15+) - 1h (4+s GF 9+HCP) 1s ® - 2d (spades only) 2h ® - 2s (some 6322 or any hand with short clubs) 2N ® - 3d (5-3-3-2 exactly) 3N all pass Lead: small diammond (low = interest) ducked to the Q. I overtook the hK in summy and played the cQ LHO took the cK and played.... the sJ! His pd held exactly AK98 of spades for down 1..... Would you have reached 5c at MPs ? 7) Danger, danger! xxx, A43, AJ5, AT42 opposite Q2, KJ92, QT32, K73 How would you have bid (the 3-3-3-4 hand is dealer?) Our bids: 1d (10-14 no 4M) (1s) pass (inv+) 1N (10-11 bal!!!) all pass Result down 1: I just got inspired and bid 1N with 13 The dK was offside the leader had 6 spades to the AKJ the hK was offside....

I got one right :-) It was clear to me that the sK asked for a spade continuation promoting a trump trick. So I guess I can play with the guy who signaled with the sK :-)

An interesting defense against a strong club: Playing a string club system myself I know that the best way to press is to reach the maximum total-tricks safe level we have before the 1c opener rebids. So we deviced this defense: Double: 3+ cards in all suits but spades 1d: 3+ cards in all suits but clubs 1h: 3+ cards in all suits but diammonds 1s: 3+ cards in all suits but hearts Pd then bid using the "LAW" IE: 3 level with a 6 card suit, 2 level with 5. 1N: Any two suiter with 5-5, 6-4 or similar (never 5431) 2x: 6+ one-suited hands 3x: Preempts When NV I play that pass is a hand with good values interested in maybe a game contract. So the other bids are obstructive. When V the defense is just sound, we pass with bad hands. (No more 800 in 1sx please!)

1s - 2d 2h - 3c Playing 2/1 this is an interesting sequence. It should be taken as showing at least 5/4 in the minors AND - 5+ diammonds - denies 3 spades - denies 4h - Maybe 5-5 in the minors - A hand that is not interested in 3NT Now opener options are: 3d: xxx in diammonds, maybe Jxxx 3h: 5-5 in the majors, looking for a heart fit denies 3 diammonds 3s: 6 spades and 4 good hearts denies 3 diammonds 3N: Balanced hand 5-4-2-2 or 5-4-1-3 stoppers in both majors. 4c: This can only be interpreted as a 5-4-0-4 hand