Robert

Hi everyone: Try the Kaplan inversion with 'transfers' by opener. 1H-1S*-1NT*=Cs, 2C*=Ds, 2D*=4=5=2=2 non reverse type values. It was in a recent(2006-2008?) Bridge World article. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone Mike Lawrence, "How the Experts Read the Cards" gave me a big step up the bridge learning curve. It is an older book, however, still very good. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone The transfer shows shortage. You will have 3-4 cards in the other major. I prefer to show the shortage and 3-4 in the OM rather than 'not show' the shortage. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone Blue Team Club used to open 4 card majors very often. They raised with 3-4 card support(three card raises tended to have Hxx plus a ruffing value) the range was @ 7+-10. The Orange(Black?) club played for several of the last decades by Bob Hammon also uses much the same bidding. With 11-12 dummy points and 4(+) card support they made a 3M limit raise. The Blue Team won buckets of IMPs by finding their 4-4 major fit and later playing 3NT. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone Ken thinks that his version of the facts in a 'blatant hitch' case was 'proved' by a TD ruling that was "overturned on appeal." If you lose in a higher court, your earlier victory does not count. I misrepensented? Ken is the one confused about the law. If you lose on appeal, your version of the facts was "not accepted." Gripe if you like, you still lose the appeal. The TD ruled in favor of Ken. The 'Powers that Be' overturned same. Ken wants the other pair 'punished' after 'winning' the appeal? They won, so they are not likely to be punished. Ken wants his version of the facts in this 'hitch' case to be excepted by everyone. The other side offered 'No.' and 'didn't notice.' Ken wants the 'didn't notice' to be a vote for 'blatant hitch.' The appeal was lost by Ken so his version of the facts was apparently not accepted. Ken wants his version of the facts accepted even after the powers that be decided again his version of the facts. He still wants the other pair punished after they 'won' the appeal. Ken thinks that the other pair is of a high level to 'know' the end position and still so bad that they discard a winning Club King in the end position. He wins no matter what happens? If they are so bad that they discard winners in an unforced end position, why does he still think that they knew what the end position was? Bad bridge players throw winners away in many end positions that they do not understand. On the facts presented the TD ruling appears wrong IMO and the final ruling of the appeal also agrees with this 'final' version of the facts. Ken might be right about the facts, however, he did lose the appeal. The TD ruling was overturned by a higher court and their ruling strongly suggested that the facts were not what Ken claimed. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone If they deny a hitch occurred, it must have 'occurred' because your pair says so. Why even ask the other players opinion 'if' your version is always right? You say that the hitch was 'blatant' and the other pair says, 'No.' and "I did not notice." If the hitch was blatant, why would both of the other pair not agree? The TD made a ruling and you still wanted more 'punishment.' Why did the TD not follow your instructions? Perhaps he ruled according to the law and what he believed had happened? A 'did not notice' vote is not a vote in your favor, a reasonable TD might consider that 'did not notice' very strongly suggests that no 'hitch' blatant or otherwise had occured. You want the other pair to 'know' about the end position and yet 'still be able to throw away a winning club King' to let you make another trick. Which way is it? Does their bridge level allow them to 'know' about the end position and still be unaware of the danger of discarding a winning club? I have seen many TD calls where the version of the facts was wide apart. The bid was, A. a few seconds B. in tempo C. 30 seconds D. a minute at least Is my version always correct or does the TD consider that my opinion might 'support' my version of the facts? Regards, Robert

Hi everyone I play both inv. and/or game forcing depending on the auction. 4th suit forcing at the three level is game forcing. I also play XYZ convention where 1 any-1 any-1 any-2C* forces 2D to invite and 2D* here is a game forcing 4th suit force type bid. How exactly do the game forcing players bid a hand with say 10-11 points after 1D-1S-2C holding 5=3=2=3 without a heart stopper? Jumping to 2NT with xx in the 4th suit is not really good. Raising clubs with 3 card support or diamonds with 2 is also not accurate. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone I have the 1958(1962 reprint) version of How to Play Winning Bridge A KS book by Kaplan and Sheinwold. Page 91 he bids 2D with a 4HCP 3352 hand and says that you need to get out of NT Jumps to 3m show six card suits according to his example hands. I do remember(page 92) that he jumps to 4S with AKQxx x xx Qxxxx opposite a 1NT opening. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone I use a mixture of bids after 1C*-1D-1S=4+ F1 and 1M-1NT=0-4 without 4M -2C*=5-7 with 0-2M -2D*=3M and 5-7 -2M=4 card raise @5-7 1C-1D-1NT=natural 18-20(I open 1NT=15-17) 1C-1D-2C*=diamonds 1C-1D-1H*-semi force to 1S-1N*=clubs, anything else shows hearts and the suit bid 1C-1D-2D*=strong 4441 type with 19+ 1C-1D-2H*=Kokish strong 2H or 25+NT 1C-1D-2S*=5-5(+)minors strong With about 16-19, you canape with 4M and 5m With 20+, you transfer into the minor and rebid the M Regards, Robert

Hi everyone Your partner made a takeout doubles with a singleton in an unbid major and 5 cards in the suit opened holding 12HCP? You held 2461 with KQ10xxx of diamonds and you did not bid after your partner make a takeout double? The other pair bid strangely, however, your methods also need a great deal of work. Regards, Robert

Hi Jillybeans2 You are using non standard bidding methods to make up for some partners lack of bridge knowledge. Beginning players do not know that reverses show strong hands and pass forcing bids. Better partners will not want to play with you when you use these 'jump to game' methods because a causal partner passed a forcing bid. You can use correct bidding and seek out better players or you can 'jump to game' and lose the chance at getting better partners. Regards, Robert

Hi shubi Didn't the world bank President just get replaced because of a non work related problem? The United Nations is not free of problems. When 7 trillion dollars suddenly appears, the problems will get even bigger. Your math does not make any sense. You just do not get anywhere near that amount of money using your 'facts.' You only have 672 billion dollars which is 'only' .672 trillion dollars. You cannot set aside 2.72 trillion dollars if you 'only' have 672 billion to start with. If you wish to change your facts and just decide that people are going to give you seven trillion dollars or so, that is fine. I would suggest that you start with say 999 trillion dollars and you could now not only end world hunger, you could also supply free housing and medical care to all that needed it. Why do something less when you could raise a mere 999 trillion dollars using the same method that you raised seven trillion dollars? Jerry Lewis set a new record for a charity when he raised 63 million this year. If you would contract him and explain how to raise trillions rather than mere millions, he could host one more event and fund the charity forever. Regards, Robert

Hi shubi Trillion=1,000 billion not 100 billion. Decimal points change the value by 10 times. Commas show 1,000 units. 7 times 12 is 84 billion correct. 84 times 8 years is 672 billion not 6.72 trillion(6.72 trillion=6,720 billion) You only have a small fraction of your claimed total in eight years 'if' you have 100% contribution from 6.5 billion people and you also manage to have 500 million babies that are 'yet to be born' contribute to your fund each month. How people that are starving will be able to contribute $1.00 each month to your fund is still something that I do not understand. I think that I was being quite generous in letting say 4 billion people give to your fund out of a 6.5 billion total. Many third world nations have people with little of no income. Babies might also find it difficult to raise a $1.00 each month if they are part of a family that is not getting the minimum food requirement to continue to live. How the unborn will contribute is a concept that I simply do not understand. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone The math is somewhat better now, however, the entire population of the earth is less than 10 billion so the idea of 440 billion people each giving a dollar a month is simply not possible. Change your idea to one dollar a month from say 4 billion people gives 4 billion dollars each month. Your ten trillion dollar figure now needs 2,500 months or something like 200 years to raise the money that you require. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone You can get additional information by reading the 10 pages of their convention card. 1D*-1H=0-9 negative 1D*-1S=7-13 invitational 1D*-1NT=GF Their 1NT opening 12-15HCP covers all other balanced hand types. What they open with 5M332 I did not discover. Regards, Robert

Hi Rob F You might want to get a copy of the Ultimate Club book. That system holds the BW record with 13 wins in a row. A record that it has held since the late 70s(?) and the number of wins 'in a row' has not even been approached. The scores were normally in the high 70s and some 80s. Regards, Robert

Hi sceptic Michaels is played a number of different ways. Some play that all michaels type shaped hands use a 2H bid here. I tend to play that michaels hands are either weak or strong, with intermediate hands I tend to overcall and show the second suit later. Pick the style that you like and play that type of michaels bid. With your start of (1H)-1S-(2H))-X I play that a double of 2Hs is a 'stolen bid' double showing a 10+ raise(they bid and raised their suit so you cannot cuebid at the two level 'unless' you use a stolen bid double. Intermediate varies with shape and texture of the suits. I play michaels as about 6-11HCP or something around 16+ 'which hand will bid again to show the extra values. A hand like Axxxx x AKxxxx x has 11HCP and I would upgrade it into an intermediate hand because of the extra diamond and the good controls. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone Before you bid the grand, you might consider that 3-2 breaks occur a bit less than 70%. How does your grand play with a 4-1 or 5-0 trump break? You might want to find an old copy of the Ultimate Club system. It could find out about jacks. Bridge World had a fairly recent article about asking for the trump Jack in RKC auctions. That article might be of interest. Over your 2NT* bid wouldn't exchanging the 'asking' suit save space? You could use 3C* to ask about hearts? Most modern relay methods show shape early and you might be better off than asking in every suit. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone You are playing fairly close to KS(Kaplan Sheinwold) type bidding ranges here. KS plays that the other minor(Om) is a one round force. 1m-1M-1NT=15-17 so you jump to 2NT with 18-19. 1m-1M-3M=18-19 'dummy points' since 1m-1M-2M=15-17 I remember one pair(not playing KS methods) that played 1C-1D-1NT=18-20 and 1D-1M-1NT=12-14 Regards, Robert

Hi gerry Several decades ago I designed a system that reversed the 'bid your better minor idea without a 5 card major' idea with one that opened your better minor with a five card major. Opening 1M showed an even odd of cards starting with 4. If you rebid the suit, you had 6. With an odd numbered holding in a major(starting with 5), you opened your better minor. Partner bid his 3(+) card majors up the line and opener normally only raised with 5 trumps. This was before support doubles, so using support doubles, you could show a 4 card raise or a 5 card raise in the modern game. :) Regards, Robert

Hi hrothgar That 1S+ 'showing' and 1H* starting relays is a nice idea. I also liked the chain breaks in Ultimate Club. How often does the other pair allow you to use your 1C-1D-relays? I use CRO Wonder with 4-4 or 4-5 shapes and 0+HCP over Big Clubs. The 5-5 shapes bid 2C/D/H as CRO. With a decent hand, I pass and decide whether to bid later in the auction. After seeing how good a forcing Pass player bid using his system, I did learn the Phantom Club system. You 'open' the bidding using mostly your overcall methods(opening 1C is a takeout double of a normal 1C opening) with partner assuming that (1C) was bid to your right. The other pair normally only gets to open 1C* if they are dealer since my overcall style is 8+ or somewhat less HCP if partner is a passed hand. The chances of 3rd/4th hand getting to open 1C* are fairly low. Regards, Robert

Hi hrothgar The 1C-1D=GF Moscito method starts relays doesn't it? I have played 14+ 1C systems with a 9-13HCP base. We played 10+ positives. I also played Precision "Two down and Two UP." 1st and 2nd seat 14+ 1C and 9-13 base,while 3rd and 4th seat used a 13-17 base and 18+ 1C. The positve by a passed hand was 7HCP. My forcing pass system used a 0-9HCP range for 1C* in all seats. Pass was a balanced 13-15 or 'any' 16+. The 13-15 balanced was used as an attempt to keep random bidding by the other side to a minimum level as they still needed to compete for the part score vs a 13-15 hand. I know about many of the 1C-1D auctions. My current system is a Big Club 16+ any or 18+ balanced. I am currently testing a 7+ positive 'when' vul. to try and narrow the 1C-1D=0-7HCP range and reduce some of the rebid problems that follow 1C-1D=neg. You bid 1C-1D GF and take your chances. A jump to 3Ss is not going to be a walk in the park for at least some holdings. I prefer 1C-1H-(3S) to 1C-1D=GF-(3S), but you appear happy with the 1C-1D=GF methods so enjoy playing them. I prefer to try and show my shape so that we have some idea of what strain and how high before the fireworks start. If you have off loaded some shape hands into the 2NT+ space, you likely have gained a number of advantages. I also moved a number of positive bids into the space from 2D upwards. I also do not use the methods close to Sonny S bidding. My current system started up as Precision, however, very little of 'book' Precision bids remain. I use a bunch of Meckwell type bids plus a number of my own toys(or others) in 1C-1D-? auctions. The double negative 1S bid is a problem in theory. In real life it is much less of a problem, I happen to play 1Red-(overcall)-1S*=shows a NT 'type' reply that might be unbalanced. :) One of the leading Italian pairs plays 1C-1S as balanced(minor?) with 1Red being a transfer to the ranking major(1C-1D=hearts) FN maybe? Big club bidders as a rule like to have the extra space to describe hands. In certain areas, I would kill to gain just one more bidding step. Sometimes I trade the bidding space for other advantages, you pays your money and you takes your chances. Regards, Robert

Hi everyone I used a K10xx standard with a range of 3-13HCP 'taken' directly from an Italian bridge system book(Blue Team?) several decades ago. We also played 'off shape' doubles in the Italian style. A 4 card overcall should be make on the same type hand when Vul. or non vul. playing my current style. It tends to be a good suit and an opening bid that has a 'flaw' for making a takeout double. If you play random 4+ overcalls in 4 card suits, that KJxx fills the bill, however, it is not my current style. Regards, Robert

Hi Sonny S I collect and build bridge systems myself. Precision 'two down and two up'(9-13 base in 1st and 2nd and 13-17 base in 3rd and 4th seat) gave me a lot of fun. The following are not negative comments. I bear the scars from building assorted 1C bidding systems over several decades so I have faced many of the same problems that you may also encounter. Do you open 1M with 6(+) Ds and 5 major? Your 1D opening says no 5M. That 3H opening showing solid spades or a weak 3H hand might go for a big number when partner does not hold a spade honor and he has to bid 3S to avoid playing a silly 3H contract. 4Hs opposite 0-2 hearts will often lose the board. Some of the same problems arise after that 3S opening. You force yourself to 4S opposite any hand that does not hold a diamond card. If these bids are legal, you might be able to play Bergen(?) 'two under' preempts? They allow you some space to sort out which of the two way meanings you do hold and still stop below the four level. The early replies to 1C take up a lot of very valuable bidding space. You are giving up your own bidding space to show 'weak hands' and you also are 'not showing' their shape. Your 1C-1D GF is giving the other side a lot of room to bid 'when you least want them to bid.' Blue Team used 1C-1D=0-5, 1H=6-18(not three+ controls) and 1S upwards to show controls. It was not the best use of bidding space. I think that hrothgar would agree that even a small amount of bidding space is very valuable to 1C bidders. Bidding 1C-1S to show a 0-5HCP range leaves poor opener to bid starting with 2x showing 15-21? and he is also forced to jump to the three level with 22(?+) opposite a 'known' weak hand. :) Hrothgar and I both shudder when your proposed bidding goes past 3NT to define the hand types. How do you find a decent contract after 1C-2H when opener has one(both?) of the three other suits? You are starting to find your fit/level with 6-8 opposite 15(+) at the three level. Partner has no idea which minor you hold and his hand is still unshown. Regards, Robert

Hi Apollo 81 I was one of the 2NT=Good Bad posters. Simply avoid playing with random players without some decent methods, unless she is good looking and you are playing ftf. If you do not have good methods, ignore the results and simply go by guess and by gosh. Third paragraph of my last post, "I play double=4 clubs(and a good hand and a direct 3Cs shows 5(+) and a good hand since I 'do play' Good Bad 2NT." The one suit double seems strange to me after one partner suggested it, however, it does make sense after looking at the alternatives. Partner denies spades with his 1NT bid so... Regards, Robert