coyot

I would agree with the 1♠ bid - under the condition that you play something like Checkback Stayman in order to establish gameforce. What are the possible auctions after 1♥-1♠? 1NT - with 2♦ GF, you can then support hearts and use RKCB, absolutely no problem in bidding 2m - gives you 4th suit to use as GF (and learn whether p has wasted values against your singleton or not - by his NT or other bid on FSF) 2H - 4NT RKCB, easy 2S - 4NT RKCB, even better, spade king will be a crucial card (Any other bids are stronger, so 7NT is cold :rolleyes:)

Not to mention that the whole problem was created by West opening 11HCP aceless 5332 hand :-(. If he keeps his mouth shut, the auction will proceed 1♠-1NT(F)-3♥- and then probably 4♣-4♦-4♠-5♥...

Eh? That's confusing. You say a diamond and 2 spades, but your next sentence ruffs 3 spades... What did you actually mean? Oh, sorry :lol:. It does not really matter what you ruff from the table. - 3rd spade is perhaps a little less safe than a diamond, though.

My perception of 4NT quantitatives is: If you have the upper half of your point range and a good shape (not 4-3-3-3), answer positively. A good idea is to actually RESPOND to blackwood - because you will be able to bid 6NT with good 32 HCP hands (i.e. with minor 5card) with the safety of avoiding those contracts without 2 aces :lol:. If your range is 12-14, you'd generally answer with any 14 and good 13 (any 5332, 4432 with a few extra 10's or working values (i.e. not QJ doubleton...)

Depends on what your agreement for 2♣ is. If it shows spades + another, 5/5 or better and any strength, then it is ok. I think this hand would even qualify for Unusual CB when you play it weak/strong only. I would, however, bid 4♣ instead of 5♦ - you have a great hand after all.

For starters, intermediate players would be better off with splinters (Strong jump shifts? Never heard of... <_<). To waste 3♦ on a conventional raise instead of showing a limit raise with a simple meaning (and partner knowing to de-value his wasted points)? I've played Bergen raises, they're not really hard, but you'll have a lot of far from natural bids. I mean, splinters are really EASY to understand - you basically only need to be taught to use them with with 4+ trumps. If you agree that splinters are significantly simpler than Bergen, reversed or not, either Bergen goes to advanced or splinters go to beginner - what's your choice? :)) beginner/intermediate forum would then at least deserve a proper explanation of the Reverse Bergen raise in the original post. If the beginner does not know what the limits of the bid are (and what other bids would promise), he will hardly recongnize where the errors were in the bidding.

diamond and 2 spades. If clubs are 3-3, you're safe on crossruff. Take d in hand, cross in d to table, ruff spade. Club ace club ruff, ruff spade, club ruff, ruff spade. You will make AK♦, A♣, A♥ and 5 ruffs.

I disagree Jack. It is no weakness of precision but a strong argument for playing solid versions - and that only. The question is: Will you be able to come up with a good and solid enough system to handle all types of artifical interventions, WHILE keeping this system simple enough to be usable by intermediate players? The strong club, being the supposedly best thing about the system, needs to be protected and once it becomes popularl, people will play a ton of psychic defenses against it. Disrupting the club is so important that I will put my favorite gadgets against it into profile :-)

You would need to keep the statistics individually for each player - and when playing against a pair, view their individual statistics and go nuts trying to figure out what will happen :-).

Let them start adding gadgets as they want - but don't call it Beginner and Intermediate Bridge. What I mean: Bidding 6♥ on 27-28HCP with no likely source of extra tricks sounds to me like a beginner/intermediate problem - i.e. learn how to count your tricks and what you need to make n tricks. If you're having problems with those concepts, adding gadgets will likely make your bidding worse, not better. I'm talking from my own experience here. Every gadget is a possible source of extra problems - and if you can't bid right against natural bids, you'll hardly bid right against gadgets B). sceptic: For me, the classification of skills would be: Novice: understands the concept of "trick", "book" and "bidding" in general, has absorbed the basic rules (leads, following suit, taking tricks, ruffing). First month or three, mostly spent by minibridge. Beginner: The basic bidding system (up to Stayman, maybe transfers etc.). Starts playing in a local club and later adds Jacoby and Blackwood to his conventions. Signals are something scary and distant at first, a mountain about to climb later. Succesfully struggles with Lavinthal. Takes a few months to get to next level, half-a-year for slower folks. Intermediate: Learns advanced signalling, importance of count, hold-up play. Discovers that sometimes Third hand high is not right. Learns that it's not the HCP, it's the tricks that count. At this level, he should be into competitive bidding, LOTT, Jacoby 2NT, inverted minors, RKCB. So, from my point of view, artifical raises such as Bergen are definitively advanced bridge... (Note that some people will spend most of the time in the "advanced" level. I doubt if I will ever consider myself an expert :)). So, if someone comes here to read about beginner and advanced bridge, he'll be baffled. 3♦ is Reverse Bergen? WTH is that? OK, I see he has some hearts, but what does it mean? Is it 8-12, if his partner ended up in 6♥? If this is beginner to intermediate, then my "bridge in 21 days" must be about some other game!

If diamonds are 4-2, I can discard both spade losers (one on diamond honor, one on 5th diamond) and ruff 2 hearts. If diamonds are 5-1 and spade lead does not give me a trick, I don't see any squeeze position there (but then, that's just me being blind, I discover most squeeze plays when opponents tell me afterwards that I played it well B))

100% agree. You know that you're willing to bid 5♦ over opps 4♠ in any case - but it might be very important to show find the 4-4 hearts as well. You might end up playing 4♥ (if partner happens to have 4-4-3-2) and be better off than 5♦ - and if opps find the 4♠ save and you bid 5♦, your p. will be able to visualize your hand.

Nice rules. How do you deduce that 4♣ is splinter? It is just a matter of agreeement. If you play 4th suit as GF and partner shows stopper, 3 any of previous suits IS a suit-slam attempt - therefore 4NT can be quantitative and 4♣ might as well be Gerber, if you and your partner like it. I have had hands that needed direct ace ask below 4nt much more often than I had hands that needed a club splinter. BTW, why are you talking about 18 opposite 15-17NT? 1) This is one of the typical Gerber situations 2) We were talking about the auction below, where opener did NOT promise 15-17NT. Anyway, if I have 18 opposite a 15-17 NT, I need a direct Ace ask (even though I will know the answer) because I will then have a direct king ask and still be able to park in 6NT if I hear bad things. There might be hands in which you want to find out whether the 9 HCP you miss are 3 jacks and 3 queens or three kings. There might be 33 points in your example - and I want to play 7NT on a longish suit, unless we're missing two kings. Without Gerber, this is hardly possible (unless you replace Gerber with something other and more complicated.)

I think I've used the full installer a couple of times. So, you could say, my bad - but nevertheless, even full installer should treat existing data in some way... BTW, I would strongly suggest changing the "default" sound settings to include only events that are necessary for speedy play - and provide some "low noise" sound scheme. (I think that "your turn to play, your turn to bid, explain call, call explained" would be the good minimum.) There is another feature that I really miss - and that is Volume control. I don't know how is BBO playing sounds, I assume some API calls. Maybe those don't allow you to specify volume (for the individual sound you're playing).... Could it be possible to use DirectX calls if available? Those would surely allow volume control. (That is, i.e. I want to listen to some music while playing - and I can't possibly tell BBO to be quieter without turning the "wave" playback volume down, which affects the music as well).

To avoid the autosplinter problems, a good agreement is that a new suit bid after opener accepts your transfer is at least seminatural and serves to show that you're interested in suit-contracts. So if you have short clubs, bid your closest honor control or longest suit... then you can have 4♣ in these situations 100% Gerberish. Similarly, if you use FSF and partner bids 2NT, any suit bid after that prods to suit contract (and shows that your FSF was mainly to establish forcing situation, not because you wanted to play NT.) This gives you the option of having 4NT invitational even in those auctions.

Pardon me, but the self-explanation WAS correct :). South indeed HAS club controls and is bidding slow to show extra interest. If he had mere club support and decided to not play 3NT, he would likely jump to 5♣. It would be much harder to solve if he bid 4♣ on Qxxxx and self-alerted THIS as cue :D. But, then, in self-alerted world, you're supposed to tell your opponents what is your partnership agreement, NOT what you have in hand. If I decide to psych, I will still alert my 3rd position 1♠ as "may be about a king weaker than standard opening", not "Psych".

Redouble is for business. Should promise 10+ HCP, deny support and show interest in doubling whatever contrat they run to. [Noone I know plays SOS redoubles against a suit opener. Maybe against strong NT, likely against weak NT.] That is, I would never redouble with 3card support. I know they have an 8card with which they will be most likely safe on 2nd level. So, the opening hand is 100% pass, because I have an excelent double for another suit and expect partner to double clubs and hearts for penalty. If he fails to double them, I will have to show my diamonds (but then I know that we have an 8card fit there as well). This is the downside of shape-based one level openings. You should be prepared to risk the occasional disaster in the form of 2♥x= or even +1. You would need an explicit agreement that a freebid (instead of giving your p chance to double their suit) indicates weaker 2-suit hand. Without that agreement, this bid could be taken as constructive rather than escaping.

Double. Direct 4♥ could be bid on much more garbage - p will never know how high to preempt. I need only one ace to make 5H - so I can afford to double and then bid 5♥ over 4♠. I can't afford to bid 4♥ mainly because I'd be willing to bid the same 4♥ with KJ10xxxxx and a side honor as well - that's 2-3 tricks difference. How is my partner to know whether he should double 4♠ with heart void and a side Ace? If you're willing to give your partner this wide guesses, then there is another look... Will you pass 4♠ by LHO or will you bid 5♥? If you're willing to bid 5♥, you can as well start with the double. This will both tell your partner that you have a good hand (losers-wise) and give you some chance for extra information from the bidding (as the opps may not use a direct jump to 4♠ and may tell you something using some artifical support bids.) Plus, there is the option of bidding 5♥ straight away :) - but maybe your hand is too good for that (as 5♥ would be aimed at giving the opps a HARD guess whether to bid game or slam)

This is how Bridge World Standard plays it. Personally, I don't like it. One big benefit of playing 2/1 is that I can have the auction such as 1S-2D-2S-3D to show a very good diamond suit and a strong hand. If 3D is non-forcing here, then I have to invent something after 1S-2D-2S and I've lost half the benefit of playing 2/1 in the first place. Ditto. the big advantage of playing 2/1 is to set a GF early without having to force with cumbersome bids. Resorting to "quasi/GF" means losing 75% of this advantage Well, quasi GF can produce nice results (3NT on 22 HCP ;)). It basically tells partner: I have quite a good hand, if my suit is to become trumps or pull tricks in NT. If you can't support partner's spades even after his 2♠ rebid, you either have a side 4card to bid now, or a hand good enough to use some 3card forcing (to try and get diamonds supported by p or his stoppers shown) or bid 4♦ (setting trumps). Been playing this quasi-GF for a few years and I really don't recall any bidding disaster. Anyway, partner has shown you good spades and you want to show him good diamonds? What for? If you have remaining suits stopped, you bid 3NT with minimum, 2NT with a good hand - and expect partner to bid 3♦ on 3card. If you have only one suit stopped, you bid it and p will either bid 3NT or support your diamonds or repeat his spades... And if you bid 4♦ over his bid, that will certainly show slam interest with good suit. wtp?

Yep, that's what I had in mind. If you don't consider your defense play, declarer play and natural bidding (and understanding natural bidding) advanced, you should forget about Reverse Bergen raises and get back to the first bridge book. I know of many supposedly talented players who took serious damage from not playing simple enough system. (I'd be the first, having started with a condensed 8page 2/1 Standard... and having fully understood it after about 2 years... (that is, having understood WHY ;)) I think that for the benefit of readers of this forum, sceptic should take similar problems to advanced/expert forums in order not to scare the beginners :)

If we play 2/1 GF, 2♠ 1) denies balanced hand (2NT and 3NT rebids no matter what stoppers I lack) 2) promises stopper (If I happen to have very long diamonds, I will run from 3NT later) 3) does not necessarily deny heart stopper (4-3-5-1 or similar) 4) does NOT promise any extras. I don't ever play 2/1 as 10+, but I would probably treat it the same way.

Imagine the bidding: 1♦-p-3♠-4♠ p-p-5♦-5♠. Now the opener faces a complicated situation. For LOTT purposes, the existence of a side suit fit is critical. If you bid 1♥ instead, no matter how quickly the opponents arrive at 4♠, you can then bid 5♦ and your p sees 9-10 of your cards (instead of having to guess how many clubs and hearts do you have.)

If you play any sophisticated major raises (i.e. Hardy), 1NT could at worst (from the "missing the game" point of view) cointain 3card trump support with no singleton or void and 11 HCP. (And that only against 1st,2nd seat openers as you'd use Drury 2♣ for a 3card limit raise with a passed hand) Under these conditions it is safe to play 1NT as semiforcing - i.e. a player that would not want to play a game against the above may pass. He will hardly pass with any good rebid available (6 spades, side 4card) - so it is really safe even with some spade support. The only problem hands are long suits of your own - where you might expect a game on 22 HCP. A good workaround is to bid 2/1 as either GF or 9-11 HCP with a good 6card. (Good meaning that if partner has doubleton honor, you have 6 tricks in NT, if partner has a small doubleton, you're willing to play at 4t level in your suit.) If the immediate rebid by responder is the 2/1 suit, it shows this type of hand - and p will pass or offer a game contract.

In our 2/1 1♥-2♦* 3♣-3♥ 4♣-4♦ 4♠-4NT 5♦-6♦ 6♠-7♥ * I will hide the 4card support, because my side suit is a good source of tricks AND I don't have a convenient bid with singleton ace. 3♥ shows full support AND good diamonds (otherwise I would have used a conventional raise) After cuebids, 4NT is RKCB, 5♦ for 3. 6♦ would be Doroszewicz, asking about ♦ honors (and 6♠ response showing either Q or AK) - and we're up there (but it's still not a fine slam, because without the ♦J it still needs club finesse.). But, with a good partnership agreement and experience, you would "know" that partner is NOT promoting AKxxx as a good source of tricks. At least the way I'm used to play, these bids would show VERY solid suit - AKQxx, AKJxx, KQJxx. If I weren't sure about the diamond jack, I could bid 6♣ Doroszewicz instead - and finding out that partner has Q of clubs, decide whether I want to play 7 on finesse or not. Alternative bidding, if you opt for Jacoby 2NT: 1♥-2NT 4♣-4NT 4♣ shows 5card (IMHO better to show 5 cards than to show one of two singletons). P can assume the club suit stopped and use RKCB again - and we will get to the same conclusion - that we're missing club king - and stop in 6. I don't know any system that could reliably show a singleton gueen and find the 4 discards for opener's clubs.

The concern about fairness is why I started this thread... :rolleyes: For your numbered points, (1) even with a prescribed bidding system (sayc only or whatever) player notes would still influence my bidding, as I gave some examples of (accepting/not accepting game invitations, overcalling vs. cuebidding, etc.); (2) seems fair; (3) aside from the privacy issue, my comments about some players should not be shared (e.g. "Rude Moron!!") if only due to concerns about defamation, and I assume others have a few comments like this... :D (4) my concern is not about damage, but ethics -- my point being that if I know because of my player notes from past behaviour that partner X is an over or underbidder, that influences my bidding in a way that opponents probably won't and can't know unless I tell them. I agree completely :)) I didn't mean the numbered bits to solve this issue... 3) I wouldn't probably have problems with player notes, because if I think that somebody is a rude moron, I put him to my enemy list. I make only positive notes :). 4) Cyclic seating would solve the problem of "fresh" information effectively. Both defenders would have witnessed your partner's bidding from the previous board or two. The only problem with this system is that it will produce strange results for small tourneys. 2 boards per round means that you will spend 3 rounds with the same folks at one table. Then you get 3 new faces for 6 next boards... so, after 12 boards, your score is determined by performance of 6 other people only... whereas in random seating, you get close to 18 variables.