Rado

Hi all, my top's: 1. Partnership bidding at bridge - Robson/Seagal 2. To bid or not to bid + Following the law - Larry Cohen 3. Better bidding with Bergen - Marty Bergen

Hi Ben the answer to the poll is ALL Rado

Hi Jilly and all, Interesting position you've posted. First of all after 1♦-DBL - 1♥/♠ remain 4+ cards and forcing 1 round:-) Back to the topic if no other forcing bids agreed better start with RDBL and next bid 2/3♦ to show FG values with ♦ fit. This sequence will place the NT right side and/or will discover possible slam or 5♦. Jumping directly to 3NT seems acceptable but sometimes might be wrong. In case you play 1♦-pass-2♦ as F1 (inverted) there is much to say to keep same after 1♦-DBL With some of my regular partners we play 1m-DBL-2m as F1 which fits perfectly for such situations Best regards Rado

Hi all, Just not to forget that defenders are also allowed to claim, not only declarer Rado

Hi Jilly and all 1. The KISS (keep it simple and smile) way is just to use 4NT and if 1 Key card bid 6. Yes there is a risk 2 quick ♣ losers, or to have ♣ control but dead 2 losers. Anyway statistically for the limit raise partner will have suitable cards most of the cases 2. The "Science" way (but not too complex) is to bid 4♦ showing ♦ control (A or K, or singleton or void) and denying ♣ control. Now it's partner's turn to bid asf: -----if no ♣ control in his hand = 4♠ pure sign-off -----if ♣ control available, but ♥ control not then he bids 4♥ so called anti-cue, whick conveys following message to the opener: "Dear partner I have ♣ control (the questionable suit for the moment since opener had already denied control there) but I do not have ♥ control, so please take the decision!!!!!!!!!" -----if ♣ and ♥ controls then simply 4NT RKCB The main idea of "mixed" cue-bids is to check whether all suits outside trump guarded by some kind of 1st/2nd round controls before asking 4NT for KC and when founding quick 2 losers in 1 suit to retreat peacfully at 4 Major level not risking 5 where may go down due to some surpisingly bad breaks Regards Rado

Case 1: S ... W ... N ... E 2C ..2D ..?? Case 2: S ... W ... N ... E P! ...2D ...?? So, which of Case 1 and Case 2 provides North with more bidding space? The Pass or the 2C opener? YOU may wish to consider the possibility of intervention as a "separate theme to discuss". *I* say there is no justification for separating the themes. Thank YOU very much for your mentoring tone Will try to follow always ONLY your advices Rado

You may be right. An alternative viewpoint is that the amount of bidding space available to you is only that much space that the opponents allow you. Extrapolating the consequence of that it MAY be better to ensure that your bid definitions are evenly divided between the bids available. To Eye: I mean that opening PASS (13+) saves some space than opening 2♣ FG for example. Opponents have the right to interfere always (it does not matter what system you use) and Opps overcalls are seperate theme to discuss. to Luis: You are absolutelly right about the probabilities of 0-7p, 8-12p, and 13+ and thats one of the major advantages of FP sys: the most probable range 8-12 is described immediattely with picture opening Regards Rado

hi all When gunpowder was invented there was not available any defence. After that armour was invented. All progress of Humanity is similar and I believe new conventions and defences are good for the development of the game Rado

Hi all, Having in mind the rules of bridge (allowed bids, methods of scoring, vulnerability) Forcing Pass proved to utilize the bidding space to supply the mathematical maximum (or near it) information available for description of the hands. I strongly believe that Forcing Pass will be the future of the bidding in our beloved game called bridge. I have some experience playing Lambda, Beznazvy(No name) and Rozkladowy system in the early 90's. It was really exciting especially when both pairs used similar methods:-) Rado

Further to Marc's nice words I want just to add that most of us (who love bridge) were juniors at some time :-))))))))))))) Rado

seems different schools Flame:-)

Hi all, Please correct me If I'm wrong: "when I learned natural methods with 5 card Majors it' was GENERAL rule that new suit is forcing 1 round" NMF is just a nice continuation of the above. Sure simple 2♣ (Roudi) or 2 -way checkback are further improvements of the above idea. Rado

Hi Ron, seems quite comfortable for most BG players :-))))))))))))))))))) Rado

Hi all, the easiest way to store 1(one message) without jumping to other products: 1.click "chat" 2.write the message, without sending 3. with mous mark the message 4. click "Ctrl+C" buttons together (copy to clipboard) 5. send the message ( or not send anyway it's stored) 6. next time you want to say same, click "chat" 7. click "Ctrl+V" and the same words appera 8. click send Regards Rado

Hi all, Sorry to disturb some, but in my view BBO forums are mainly for posting bridge problems/questions/cases/funny moments and everyone is welcomed to share her/his opinion on the theme. Typing longeous posts to explain someone's feelings maybe should be redirected to another forum. Greetings Rado

Hi all My choice (not sure for the ranking anyway) To bid or not to bid (by Larry Cohen, and 2nd part "Following the law") Partnership bidding at Bridge (the contested action) by Robson & Seagal (btw never heard of non-contested edition of the book) Notebook on Overcalls - by Mike Lawrence ( that's just BRIDGE) Better bidding with Bergen part II (never saw part I) by Marty Bergen CC of Bocchi-Duboin (especially the transfer ideas) Rado

Hi all, It's usefull agreement to bid 1NT in similar positions showing shape and range nevermind stopper. There is enough space to check for stoppers if we belong to 3NT and the risk of wrong-siding the contract is fairly low comparing with simplicity of the next bids (if any). It's your P behind the overcall so if he has any stops they are well placed. I've using such methods for the last 10 years and the results seem fairly normal without any tricky bids and misunderstandings. Regards Rado

Hi all, As many kibs will confirm my usual fee is: for ladies - 1 smile for gentlemen - 1 beer Cheers Rado

Hi all friends, I was surprised to see how different reactions received on simple bridge questions. The goal of my post was to see different opinions/schools on some basic bidding situations. Everybody is welcomed to reply (BBO forums are FREEEEEE) and I posted in Beg/Int trend just because I was sure all BIL friends regularly check it and they will learn new ideas when discussing these 4 bidding sequences. So please do not argue who must reply and who must not. BBO and forums are for all of us!!!!! Back to the bids:Have to add that we suppose 5 Majors and 15-17 NT with a small set of gadgets (science) 1. 1♣-pass-1♥-pass ---4♥ Let's see the other available bids for strong raise of partner's 1♥ bid 1.1. 3♠ and 4♦ should be considered as Splinters promising abt 17-19(20) HCP , 4+fit and singleton/void in the suit bid e.g. ♠x♥AQxx♦Axx♣AQJxx - bid 3♠ -----♠AJxx♥KQxx♦x♣AKJx - bid 4♦ -----♠Ax♥Axxxx♦-♣KQJxxx - bid 4♦ (here may see next topic too) 1.2. 4♣ shoold be considered as concentrated 5♣4♥22 or good 6♣4+♥ without much strength outside (again around 16-19 HCP) e.g. ♠Qx♥AKJx♦xx♣AKQxx - bid 4♣ -----♠x♥AKxxx♦x♣AQJxxx -----♠Kx♥KQJx♦x♣AKJxxx Here the message "SENT" to partner is not to worry about our 2 suits, while when splintering we tend to show values in all 3 suits 1.3. If we have the above bids available, then 4♥ simply remains to cover all other max(18-20 hcp) opening hands with 4fit in ♥ balanced 4333, 4432, non balanced 5422 with scattered values or 5+4 with singleton Honour" (general advice is to avoid splintering with singleton A,K or Q because partner will treat as wasted values his KQxx vs your singleton A for example) and 1 suggestion: "SCIENCE" 1.4. In part of the standart systems 1m-1M-3NT is to play based on long minor and abt 8-8,1/2 tricks, other have some gadgets to handle such good long suited minor hands and this 3NT bid becomes free. So just an idea : 1♣-pass-1♥-pass 3NT = ballanced or semibalanced hands 18-19 HCP with 4 fit 4♥ = agressive distributional raise to 4 (hoping P to have the minimum right cards and/or distribution - again promising values in ♥/♣ only but weaker than 4♣ bid as mentioned above. ♠xx♥AQJx♦x♣KQJxxx - bid 4♥ (all we need is an Ace + 5 cards in ♥ to have playable game, and opps' silence is suspicious that partner has something:)))) I've seen at live top world players to bid this even with x-Axxx-xx-AKxxxx 2. 1♣-pass-1♥-2♦ ---4♥ here the overcall does not steal space for our ♥ raises so keeping it simple and smile (KISS) we may proceede as in case 1. Even that following the general idea in competitive bidding that direct raises to game in Major are not encouraging for further bidding, the cue 3♦ might show: 4fit, balanced and max or stopper asking for 3NT based on long ♣. The threat of further Opps preempt exist, but often it's overestimated, because when stopper ask we do not have fit for Partner, and only "might" have fit in our minor. Another problem hand may appear 18-19 balanced without fit for Partner's M and no stopper in Opps overcall - here simple DBL helps (even if we use fit showing DBLs.... but that's another story) 3. 1♣-pass-1♥-3♦ ---4♥ Here things dramatically changed since opps steal our simple 2♥ support bid, and we have to stretch a little the 3 and 4 level support since if we just PASS keeping the non-contested scheme, partner often will be stuck with invitational hand not knowing about our fit. 3.1 - 3♥ - includes all fit hands good 11 to 14 (which normally we should raise to 2♥ only) plus some bad 15 (of course some dead minimum balanced (12-13 HCP and 4♥333) might pass) 3.2 - 4♥ - showing the middle range abt 15 good to 17 bad points with fit (which normally should have bid 3♥) 3.3 - 4♣ showing max hands (17-19) with good ♣ suit 3.4 - 4♦ showing max hands which cannot apply for 4♣ bid - e.g. balanced, semi balanced, non balanced with not good ♣ etc. Note that here 3♠ is natural and forcing, denying ♥ fit 4. 1♣-pass-1♥-4♦ ---4♥ Here the opps put max pressure and we have only one support bid available - 4♥ starting from some 15 very good non balanced to 19 dull 4♥333 Some might disagree, but I believe the above is a good way to introduce the differences in "straight" and "competitive" bidding using naturally based methods Regards Rado

Hi Chamaco, interesting theme to discuss:-) 1. NT overcall - in OS its pure T/O 3+ cards in unbid, in Raptor may have 5-4 two suiter without support for 3rd unbid suit disadvantages: --1.1 placing probable 1NT contract wrong sided (and usually 1 down due to lead through the stopper) --1.2 getting level too high when partner is weak (1♥-DBL in standart vs 1♥-1NT in OS) --1.3 - missing the opportunity for penalty pass to the standart T/O DBL (this one I may accept if to be honest) advantages: ---1.1 free to bid 1NT (OS) with void ( std T/O dbl might be passed with dubious result when bettter place available) ---1.2 after further preempt e.g. 1♠-1NT-3♠-? responder knows the shape (3+ unbid) while after std T/O there are different possibilities next questions tomorrow since time to sleep here:-)))))))))) Rado

Hi Tim and welcome to BBO forums! Some history hints: - there was a long discussion at the beginning of tourney feature at BBO. There were unlimited time, 8 minutes per board (16 for 2, 27 for 3), "speedball" tourneys (5 minutes per board). Passing more than year from the first BBO tourneys it appears that the "live" formula 15 minutes per 2 boards round is the best fitted. - many of the BBO tourneys (of which ACBL are small part) have barometer scoring - section awards? in WBF championships this feature missing usually, in my view no need to implement at BBO:-)))))))))) Regards Rado

Hi all friends Suppose using natural methods ( 5 card Majors), what about these often seen bids: 1. 1♣-pass-1♥-pass ---4♥ 2. 1♣-pass-1♥-2♦ ---4♥ 3. 1♣-pass-1♥-3♦ ---4♥ 4. 1♣-pass-1♥-4♦ ---4♥ :-))))))))))))))))) Rado

Hi all friends, Just note that "cheating" just cannot be tottaly deleted. Every human being activity proves that "cheating" or "crimes" are always one step ahead of the "laws" or "police" So in my view keeping BBO free of rankings or pay competition is the right way Regards Rado

Hi Hannie and welcome to the BBO forums! The idea of 1M - 2♣ some kind of relay FG is one of the modern trends in world top partnerships. For further information you may check the convention cards of Italy's top pairs (Bocchi-Duboin for sure) Regards Rado

Hi all friends from BIL and BBO:-) I've been watching several times lessons at BIL, but only answered private questions from members or when the teacher asked me in common chat. In my view that's the correct and "good" way to behave. We should respect the efforts of the Teacher who had to spend some valuable time for preparing all the topic, examples etc. And not to forget that all are volunteers:-) Regards Rado