Tomi2

Well it's quite right that the organisers (preferably using regulations determined in advance), not the players, should decide what happens. If I were in one of the other teams I woud not be complaining too much. Whilst all of the other teams take a well earned rest on Saturday afternoon, these 8 players will have to play another set. The cumulative effect of tiredness is difficult to quantify but the teams who do not have to pay this afternoon may gain an advantage worth more than 3VPs by being less tired later in the tournament. I think most teams will lose that advantage in the casino later this evening :D

this is incredible there are rules that say those matches end 12-12 - so why are they allowed to rematch? Will they also be allowed to rematch, when they misplay 3NT? or misguess trumps in a slam? This match is over, they have made a mistake and the people reasonable for this get 12 (thats a lot compared to pairs, who play 20 minutes too long [why no rematch Netherlands-Russia, they might play faster now]), pairs who are not reasonable get 18 with kind regards, Tomi, who played 12-12 twice himself and would have liked to replay those matches, but nobody offered him this!

since in poland direct x is 5m/4M x in balancing seat is "I think you had a penalty double but had no bid available"... this always works, sometimes even with screens...

is there no prediction thread?

It was suggested to me when someone asked whether we would cover all of their matches in an NABC event if they paid the cost of the extra operators, that that would be an advantage for the team always on Vugraph because their opponents would be either nervous or uncomfortable on Vugraph. I wondered what other people thought about that. I found your comment about Vugraph operator "tells" interesting - the first time I was an operator in a match with a well known player who thinks he's good at reading people, I noticed that he and his partner sat in the opposite seats from normal, so he could face me. In later segments, they didn't do that :P. But I'm sure you're right that operators have small "tells." That's why I try to avoid having a "significant other" as a Vugraph operator at the table where their partner is playing. you need to take care of two things here: 1)tells: once we played on vugraph my teammate made some "spectacular" falsecard http://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer...tch.php?id=5713 deal one, he pitched ♠K under ace to avoid a spade ruff in case lead was s aingleton the operator (inexperienced it seemed) then asked the table "did you realy play the king?"... there are of course less obvious tells, so it can be dangerous... 2)cheating: while everything is done to avoid cheating, I can't understand, why players aren't allowed to bring their mobile phone with them but they may have their own vugraph operator sitting one meter away, seeing all cards... Don't know how big the danger of cheating here is, but I am sure most teams would prefere a neutral operator doing this job...

2♥ and try for game, in my system 3♥ directly is nat and inv, maybe i might try this, jsut to prove that I do use tis bid sometimes, but here I go for game ince that scores 620

4♠ for me

nice thread about polish club, my solution would be: chance some minor parts about the system , let the good ones in and give it a new name, here is my "Prussian Club": 1) make the 1NT Rebid a bit more wide ranging (again)- its nonforcing against the weak variant, GF against the strong and with medium Hands partner can bid 2NT allowing you to stop in 3 clubs. the 1D negative has lots of advantages, like beeing able to force to game or bid game after a positive start... 2) include Forcing NT and gazilli, you will be able to show your hands now very precisely... 1M-1NT-3m is now invitational only on 5-5 etc. in natural systems you still need this as a force 3) open 1D on stronger hands than 18 and use the 2NT rebid as forcing for one round (since you cant be bal and strong). So with maximum for 1D opener you can rebid 2NT and then bid a game, with medium hands you can sign off in 3D 4)play 2Clubs as 6+clubs 10-14. There you can use transfers, since you dont have to look for 4 card majors anymore. Transfers give you one free bid, so you can bid nonforcing and forcing with one suit in the same bid etc. knowing about 6 clubs and no major makes it for PD easier to preempt to 4clubs or 3NT 5) play wilkosz when allowend and weak twos 6)be happy that you dont preempt yourself with strong hand. 2NT Strong is a very difficult start in natural systems. Add a relay after 1Cl-1M-2NT... 3cl asks about openershad type and shows interest in more, either finding a fit or more hcp, while a direct raise to 3NT is total bust for the 1M response 8)add transfers in competition, to be able to show invitational+hands and differ between balanced hands with 5 in a major and real onesuiters etc... and.. 7) add forcing NT and Gazilli :) 9) reverse 1Cl-2Di and 1CL-1Di-1M-2Di and 1Cl-2NT (now forcing) back to invitational... one bid with weak hands, slow bidding with strong hands, like it was back in 2000

So? 7nt is down, partner has akt9xx in dias, they split 3-2 (qx off), same as trumps and everything else

player lead chose a trump lead, that allowed to make directky - it loses tempo and partners j of hearts wonts score AC decided he was more likely to lead a spade after knowing about possible canape and gave some weighted score, and so some IMPs to the player on lead. This has decided this years German League, everything was close between the two teams involved and a third one [hv=d=s&v=n&n=skqthk52dqj98cqt6&w=sa62ha984daca9852&e=s8543hqt76dk75cj3&s=sj97hj3dt6432ck74]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv]

lightner double was psyched, unfortunatly player in this position saw no problem and passed without thinking one good player suggested xx= i have the ace of spades, do you have the tricks for 7N?

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sakxhktxxdxxcxxxx]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] 1♦-1♥ 3♠-4♥ 4NT-5♣ 7♥ - (double) - ?? 3♠ promised a void in your system 5♣ showed one keycard your opps are decent junior players

doesn't a takeout double also cover the msg that we have the point majority? and what do you do with 7 points 42(43) if they come to 2hearts and your double would be penalty... that way you also have no way to sho the ownership of the hand the information about the ownership can be send in both styles but both on only hands, that have the required shape for the ... double

the reason might have been, that the four involved players know each other for decades and basicly play the same system (at least until 1♥ the player on lead would have bid the same, even with only 4 hearts - but i don't know HIS follw ups)

I would also what to know what hand relays and then jumps to 4♥ especially if 1♥ can be a 4-card suit. This probably doesn't help you either! I expect that I will be considering leading either the ♠K or a trump. when you ask, you geht the answer "opener showed hearts and clubs" does your choice "spade or trump" change when you know it can be canape? are you more like leading spade or trump if it can be 4 hearts - 5 clubs compared to 5 hearts 4 clubs?

my calculations were, that the prob that in a partnership like bal / zmud the likelyhood, that the declarerplays are split so or worse is 1.8% and for Grue-cheek its 0.2% (for any 29%-20% or more extreme break of playing the hands)

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=skqthk52dqj98cqt6]133|100|Scoring: IMP[/hv] You (north) and your partner pass all the way, West, the later declarer opens a strong 1♣, alerted East bids 1♦ (negative), alerted West 1♥ not alerted East 1♠ alerted as a relay West 2♣ not alerted East 4♥ 1♣-1♦ 1♥-1♠ 2♣-4♥ now its your lead... pls comment on several possible leads... now you get to know that clubs might be longer than hearts in declarers hand! what leads are more attractive now, what leads are less attractive? Does this extra information change your choice of opening lead or at least your prefferences?

this was only a suggestion (the meckwell thing) - I just want to hear impressions how to read those stats another thing I saw: Balicki - Zmudzinski both win over 70% (thats great!) of their declared contracts but Zmudzinski has 0.3 imps per board more. Can this be, because Balicki makes more safetyplays that lose one imp each while his partner goes down in games 1 per 20 times but saves the IMP 19 times?

Hi, there have been two or three recent threats about the meaning of such statistics as: avg IMPs when declaring etc. I have started recording deals I played on BBO since february and try to add deals I play in live tournaments manualy (oh dear my last tourn will not improve my stats...) my aim was to compare the stats to JEC because he plays lots of boards, always timps and always vs reasonable opps. now I found this nice source http://www.rpbridge.net/9x65.htm made by Richard Pavlicek there you see stats for world class pairs but only from vugraph matches, so blitzes against weak opponents say in RR of Bermuda Bowl, do not improve the stats so much I want to start a new discussion on that stats, what is you opinion on these facts: Some players are more often declarers as their partners. What is the difference where you would say "this is not random, those two players try to make one declarer more often"? Duboin 26.35% / Sementa 22.28% on 520 deals Balicki 25.59 / Zmudzinski 20.92% on 1250 deals Fred is also 23.85/26.29 behind in his partnership, maybe he can answer from his experience then there are same stats about beeing on lead / not beeing on lead -do you think this is random? -do you think top players, who know their opponents well try to make one specific player make the opening lead more often? I can tell that in one mixed event, when I had a good partner, we found out, that the usual mixed strategy "letting the guy declarer" is not a good idea but "letting the woman make the opening lead" worked well, so the one who had a female oponent adjusted his play (sry if this sounds sexistic, but we played against lots of partnerships like Helness-Helness and we expected Tor to be stronger than his wife...) of course there are expected and unexpected differences in their avg. IMP stats Dubion playing with Sementa mas 1.1 IMPs per board declaring!! thats 0.6 more as playing with Bocchi, any resons? or just random? I would say on ~500 deals he was declarer ~150 times, so with his Bocchi stats Duboin should have made ~75 IMPs, now he scored ~150. 75 IMPs can obviously come from lucky slams / grands making 6 times, or does he really play (bid?) better now? Muller has +1.81 IMP/board on hands where he makes the opening lead, any ideas why? Meckwell are declarer in 53.74% of the hand and defendes in 46.16% (they passout one of 1000) but both players have better stats in defending than declaring - so should they change their methods and bid less often on borderline hands? Jansma-Verhees were declarers only 45.13% Brink/Drijver are better declaring than defending, should they practise this more / work on their defense agreements etc.? Chagas is defending (on lead) 2 imps better than declaring and 1.8 imps better than his partner on lead hope there will be some nice aspects that help me undestand my stats (beeing worse declarer than my pds but better on opening leads) better :unsure:

kjxx to atxx the queen is always onside!

partner discarded ♣2 ... if he had 6 tricks there, why would he throw one away?

now you know partner passed 1♦, that makes 3424 with AAK unlikely. i will not play him for 3424 aith aak your hands had other distributions or akk if pd has only one dia, he will be happy to signal me suit preferance in his discard

I think you should have ducked the ♦ and wait for good things to happen... -opp could use his entry to hand (if he has ♥A) to play dia one more time -you gain information on the layout now you know partner passed 1♦, that makes 3424 with AAK unlikely. if he has 3 dias opp has only one dia, what kind of hand does decl. have? did not check for ♠ or ♥ fits? maybe partner lead from AKx♣ ? think when you duck you will see how things develop. if PD had 3 dias, you can maybe take his spotcards as suit preferance, he started with the 8 and not the 4, so if he has J84, its a high one, with j8 only he could have played J first

I play transfers after every overcall after our 1Suit opener in Spades by opps from the next club bid = dias to the next heart bid = clubs up to 3 spades after 1m opening and jumps to 2 level as well starting with cuebid-1=ask for stopper after 1m opening and 1 level overcall 3 levels are transfers as well, cuebid -1= stopper? and in both cases 3sp=>3NT with my father I play transfers after doubles on our weak twos to be able to intodruce a new suit either natural or values with fit and have a constructive raise to 3M, don't know if thats better than standard... then I play transfers after 2Cl opener (6+♣, no 4 Card major, 10-15) hope I didnt forget some now :)

aus meiner Erfahrung ist es so, dass in Deutschland Gebote häufiger alertiert werden müssen, wohingegen X und XX und pass ohne Screens nicht alertiert werden dürfen. Allerdings wird in Bonn mit Screens gespielt, da zählt diese Regel nicht. Ich muss selbst vor jedem internationalen Turnier die aktuellen Alertregeln erfragen und bekomme jedes mal andere Antworten, dafür gibt es aber auch diese Captians Meetings... Meine Lieblingsregel war bei einem WBF Turnier: alertieren: Alle Gebote, die nichts mit der Farbe zu tun haben, die auf dem Gebot drauf steht 1Sa-2Tr Stayman = Alert 1Sa-2Co Transfer = Alert 2Pi weak two = kein Alert 2Pi Semiforcing = kein Alert das war wenigstens einfach zu merken, weil, egal, wie man es sonst handhabt, das Alert / nicht Alert einem oft nicht weiterhilft Beispiel aus der ersten Bundesliga: erstes Board 1Co-2Ka (alert, gefragt, Auskunft "natürlich aber GF") zweites Board 1Pi-2K (alert aber nicht wieder nachgefragt, 2Coe vom Gegner...) nach 1Pik Eröffnung spielen wir jedoch Transfers und 2Karo zeigte 5er+ coeur :)