Rado

Hi Ben and all friends, I did not vote at the poll, since the problem with original or remaining count is based on the type of leads/signalling. At the example given when playing standart (or 3/5) leads and signlals with 10972 and having led the 10 if we return the original count (7) it would easily cost us a trick and relying just on common sence we feel returning the 2 (remaining count) is the correct. Same when playing 2/4 leads and udca then returning the original count - the 2. So I think is good advice to have standar+remaining or 2/4+udca+original. Same when partner leading through 2-3 small cards in dummy and we have A92 - putting the Ace and returning the 9 seems the correct way to attack this suit. I'm quite sure that any of us may construct many, many similar examples:-) Regards the old man (also known as Rado)

Hi Ben, Pointing out that I have just "theoretical" view on META upto now, I think that after 4 level opening the things are dramatically different. One of the basis when inventing META was to right side the possible NT contract, together with developing more agressive (DONT-like) suit overcalls. When Opps open at level 1,2,3 we are still trying to locate our possible 3NT game. When Opps open at level 4 or higher the NT as game is nearly out of question (yes I agree that sometimes 4NT is the only makable game, but life's not perfect :-) so the overall idea must be changed from standart META. Regards Rado

Greetings to all from the "OLD" man from the above quoted post. And because I'm old I'm typing very slow, so you may read it slow too. I was the poor "old man" who opened 2♥ vulnerable vs not, playing friendly at BBO on a good table (of course GOOD as per old man's understanding). When I was about to hit the 2 ♥ bid I fully realized that I was exposing my stone age bid to the furious criticism of some "Godlike / Mr. know all" posters. Some days passed in suspicious peace and silence, because of the distance from Olymp of Bridge to our mortal daily round, but today the noble wrath struck my head and and scattered all over the world the ultimate truth. Bowing my grey haired head to the "truth" bringers, remaining sincerely Yours the Old Man (also known as Rado among some mortals) P.S. In the old manuscripts is written that the purpoce of preempt is to make life harder for the Opponents, but nowhere mentioned to give them lazily slam record, when they have only a difficult to make game. Would you kindly quote some good examples for excuses to teammates and partners after the correct 3♥ opening vulnerable vs not with the above monster hand , just in case it creates some juicy phone number in Opponents' column instead of their normal part score result. Maybe something like: "I was thaught by the famous..... that 3♥ is the only correct bid so no excuses here" or "I have perfect preempt and it's only the bad luck now resulting in a disaster but I promised nexd 10 times to win Bermuda Bowl with such bid" or.... .... P.S. (2) The initial definition of the BBO "star" symbol was just "worth watching" (at that time there were not any "world class" self-rated , know all people). Since that symbol is appointed by Fred only, the quoted well proved accusations must be directed to Fred:-)

Hi all friends, I've followed very carefully the discussion upto now. The original idea of Meta seems very interesting but still no chance to try it at live. Also Wayne's addition after we open 1♦ might be very usefull, keeping the same agreements in many other situation. My proposal is to try to investigate this style when playing together at BBO Regards Rado

Hi all friends, Nice gallery of questions and opinions here:-) While we always like to have our good constructive 1NT responce (7)8-10, the real life offers some weaker hands which scream for NT contract: ♠Q109x♥xxx♦Q109♣Q109 is nice example for 1nt answer. Even hands worse than the above sometimes might work well bidding 1NT as the least from the evils. There is enough space after 1NT for the Doubler to check our strength before blasting into Game. Another point is which of the 3 cards suit's to bid? We must have in mind that although take-out DBL is Major oriented and is enough probable to have 4 cards♥, it will almost never has 5 cards♥ unless 16 or more points. Having 5 cards in ♠ strongly suggests singleton in partners hand and some of the times he will have 5 cards in ♦. Another possible danger is when partner see our 2♥ responce to jump directly to 4♥ hoping we to have 4+ suit and 1 usefull honour, while after 2♦ he might bid 2 or 3 ♥ which we will gladly pass. Further with the standart "bid your lowest possible place to play" I think 2♦ is the "correct" bid Regards Rado

Hi all friends, As far as I know the modern trend is to have: 1M - double jump in new suit as 10-12 p and 4+ fit while with 13+ to make some artificial FG raise (2NT, 3♣..) or just start with simple 2/1 Anyway for direct splinter the limits must be quite narrow (1-2 max 3 points) in order the opener to make immediate decision whether slam will be good or not and to avoid useless cue-bids just in case partner might be 4-5 points above his agreeded minimum, dancing at level 5 :-) Regards, Rado

Hi Dwingo and all According to the laws when claiming whithout explaining any plan, declarer is supposed to play from top so at the given exmple TD must rule 4 tricks for declarer only and down 1. Finessing the 10 of !C after claim was reject will result in marking that tricky declarer as "enemy" If it happens when I'm playing. P.S. of course the Laws do not let declare to play unreasonably or stupid for example: A10xx against KQ9xx declarer plays the K and one of the opps shows off, now if he claims it's self evident that finesse of the Jxxx is normal line Kind regards Rado

Hi Chamaco, In my view the best way to improve your bidding and play skills is to study world top pairs and to try to develope your style. You may look in CC from last Bermuda Bowl: http://bridgebase.com/yeshoney/ Where Italian pairs (Bocchi Duboin for sure) as well as some others use differend kinds of relay 2♣ Regards Rado

Hi Nilbes and all friends, The version of 2NT you've posted was from the excellent book "Better bidding with Bergen". I used to play it for some 4-5 years and it worked pretty well. The only problem was that it required too much memory and might lead to funny contracts when somebody from the pair had forgotten a single bid. Speaking generally I've seen more than 10 different types of developments after 2NT Jacoby raise (most of the world leading partnerships have their own version) so it's hard just to say: "hello partner we play Jacoby 2NT". Anyway the modern tendencies are to use some lower forcing as 2♣ relay and freeing 2NT bid for more limited hands. Regards Rado

Hi all friends, The main reason that people feel the computer dealt board are more "WILD" than hand ones is the 3-4 shuffles usually made at live play. Some mathematician sproved that for really "RANDOM" deal at least 7 shuffles must be done. That's why when playing home bridge we are used to more 4-3-3-3 hands tha to 7-6-0-0. Regards Rado

Hi Free and all friends, The bidding structure (2NT-3C) proposed seems to be much better that standart Stayman, puppet Stayman or Baron. At first glance I see only one little disadvantage: - the possibility to have single suited minor slam try when starting with 3C. This may often lead to wrong sided contract which might be crucial or to bidding misunderstandings like: 2NT - 3C(relay) 3NT (5 card S) - 4m = Cue agreening !S or single suited minor or...... That's why maybe the old idea for 2NT-3S/4C as minor transfers (C/D) fits perfectly with the other stuff. (to Misho only - 2NT-3NT as D transfer might be easily forgotten, so let's leave 3NT to sound as natural as possible ) BTW I'm going soon to insert this 2NT-3C structure in my regular live partnership so maybe after some time will have more practicle view on it. Best regards Rado

hi Luis and all friends, Glad to see the system you are discussing is almost same with my lovely precision Club variant. Just may add that 1Di opening is 4+ cards non balanced, and when 4414 distribution open 1He with 4 cards. Another useful gadget is to add in 2Di multi the hand with 5He and 4Sp and 16-18 p ( the weakest range for 1Cl) Best regards Rado

Hi all friends, Please include me in the list. As many of you know I'm trying to answer all question, although sometimes urgent work appears and might be a little delay. Regards, Rado

Hi all friends, Further to Flytoox example,may add: 1C - (1D)-? DBL = 4-4 in majors 5+points, or 5+4+ when FG 1M = 4+cards F1 such agreements helps a lot when bidding goes: 1C-(1D)-...-(3D) Regards Rado

Hi all, I have played transfer preempts and have defend against transfer preempts many times in live bridge. The main goal of the preempt is to disturb opponents from finding their best contract and to find our sacrifice / contract when available. It's destructive bid by itself aiming to steal space. When opening natural PRE the options for opps are DBL, suit.... When opening transfer PRE we give 3 additional options: direct DBL, delayed DBL, DBL+DBL and low-level Que. Obviosly a contradiction arises between the goal of PRE to steal space from Opps making their live harder and giving them 3 more options to describe constructively their hands. In general transfer works well when Opps are silent(constructive option), and natural is better when opps need to bid(destructive option). Regarding science bidding of 6-6 two suiter by transfer - it seems perfect on paper and worse at the table:-))))))))) Best regards, Rado

Hi all, 1Sp, see Misho's reasons, regrads, Rado

Hi Pbleighton and all, Good agreement about raising on 3 cards fit might be: min opening (12-14) and outside singleton: Axx x KQxxx Kxxx 1D-1S 2S delayed raising would promise better hand (15-17) and is invitational: AJx x KQxxx AQxx 1D-1S 2C-2D 2S With some of my live partners we have an agreement that outside small doubleton is enough excuse for raising on three cards. Best regards, Rado

Hi all, very nice idea to have more such matches. I'm always ready to take part thanks in advance Rado

Hi all, what about following: 1C-1S 2C-2D(art nmf) 2H-2S 4C = good 6 cards in clubs + Tx in SP + max hand(14-15 points) ? might work well for bidding the slam Regards, Rado

Hi Claus and all friends, We have many translations of different precision Club books distributed among bridge community here at Bulgaria. Unfortunatelly we are still far far aways from official publishing of such books since not enough money for bridge. For the last 30 years we have maybe 15 bridge books published - some of them are good and usefull, others are just before sleep readings LOL. In case nobody invents new systems and all rely just on already published where should the progress come from? Best regards, Rado

Hi all friends, here are the real results from the Albena tourney: 1. Love all: pass - ? A J98xxx QJ10x Jx playing undisciplined weak 2's would you open this hand in 2nd pos, non vuln? if pass then comes: pass-pass-pass-1Sp (from partner playing 2/1) pass - ? now? 1NT (semi forcing or forcing?) or 2 He ? P's hand was: J10xxxx AQ10 x AQx at both tables were played Sp partscores for 140 - flat board (The so called "LAW OF THE MIRROR" for team matches LOL) 2. Love all 2Di* - pass - 2He* - ? Opps bids asf: 2Di was multi (weak 2 in Major only), 2He was pass or correct x AK109xx AQJxx x propose your simple or "scientific" bids :-) P had AQx xxx xxx Qxxx I bid 4Di = 5+Di5+M F1 and played 4He DBLD (opps misbid) for +2 (790 non vuln). At the other table quiet 4He+1 for 450 and 6 IMPS for us 3. game all 1Sp:2Cl 2Sp: ? (2Sp showing abt min strength 11-bad15, still 5+ cards) AQ10x KQx x QJ10xx Playing 2/1 with enough gadgets 1.a. do you agree with 2Cl and what now? 1.b. other bids different from 2cl? P had: KJxxxx Axx x Axx I bid 4Di Spl and we quickly reached 6Sp for + 13 IMPS (other table bid just 4Sp) (strange 1-1 in Di with ops silent) Regards, Rado

Hi all, of course Misho cannot bid 3Cl over 3He since not allowed by the rules:-))))))))) In practice lack of natural 4m overcall is not so dangerous as it seems. If we insist to have 4m natural then all monster 2 suiters will fly away in some theoretical actions. For example next time P will DBL opps 3He opening with: AKQJx x x AKQxxx and we have to invent bidding sequences to find the grand. If 4m is 2 suiter then with minor one suiter we must take a little lie: 5m, 3NT, DBL or pass Best regards, Rado

Hi all, It's pure LTT calculation. Let's assume partner has perfect 4144 shape with (14)15+ points. Opps have 9 cards fit, we 8 cards fit and totla number of tricks is 17, plus 1 trick adjustment for 7 card He suit = 18 total tricks minus 1 trick for probable minor honours opps have in our Sp fit (or CL or DI when 41(53) shape) returning to 17 total tricks. If we make 4Sp they are down 2 for 500 If we make 3SP only they are down 1 for 200, If we are down at 3Sp they had 3He DBLD just made which is not so probable when holding 2 Aces against partner's 3 level take-out. Also Partner may not have perfect shape with 2 cards in He (42(43), even 4252) where the expected plus from passing is bigger. In my view both the percentage and practical bids are PASS, Best regards, rado

Hi all friends, here some interesting hands from our live Albena tournament - 6 boards team match IMPS: 1. Love all: pass - ? A J98xxx QJ10x Jx playing undisciplined weak 2's would you open this hand in 2nd pos, non vuln? if pass then comes: pass-pass-pass-1Sp (from partner playing 2/1) pass - ? now? 1NT (semi forcing or forcing?) or 2 He ? 2. Love all 2Di* - pass - 2He* - ? Opps bids asf: 2Di was multi (weak 2 in Major only), 2He was pass or correct x AK109xx AQJxx x propose your simple or "scientific" bids :-) 3. game all 1Sp:2Cl 2Sp: ? (2Sp showing abt min strength 11-bad15, still 5+ cards) AQ10x KQx x QJ10xx Playing 2/1 with enough gadgets 1.a. do you agree with 2Cl and what now? 1.b. other bids different from 2cl? Thank you all in advance, Regards, Rado

Hi all friends, Yesterday I played live MP tourney at our local club and after that I entered BBO and had a chance to play in test match. Here are some interesting hands/problems: 1. MP green (green stands for we non, opps vulnerable) (1Di)-P-(1He)-1Sp (1Nt)-2Sp-(Dbl)-Passed K8xx Qxxx xxx Jx J10xxx AK xx Q109x lead 10 of He RHO signaled even number (4) You win AK He and play small Sp to Dummy Now LHO (the 1NT bidder) has a problem Holding AQ9 in P if he plays 9 to protect his 2 trump tricks then on QHe flyes a looser, if he takes Asp and cashes all their side winners, his QSp will be finesed later for 8 trick. +470 not so bad at MP LOL Does anybody know how this "coup" is named? Maybe "Morton's trump coup" ? 2. MP red (we vuln, opps non) Holding : AKxxx Kx AKx Q109 hear the following bids RHO opened 1Di precision (1+carsd in Di 11-16 p) you DBL ? Any other opinions? LHO bids 1He= 4+cards F1 (1Di)-DBL-(1He) -P (3He) -? 3He alerted and explained as not so much points but good distribution ( for those unfamiliar with short 1Di Precicion the hand may contain both 5+Di1Cl and 5Cl1Di or 4441 or 4414 as distributions) Now what is our bid? 3. MP love all KQJxx K10xx K9x x 1SP:2Di (2/1 FG unless suit rebid) 2He:2NT (FG expecting further description) 3Di:3NT ? any opinions for Partner's hand and whether and what to bid? 4. Team match IMPs, love all (P) - 1Cl - (p) - 1Sp (2Di)-3Di-(Dbl)-3Sp (P) - 4Sp-passed Lead ADi, RHO gives 2 of Di 10 of Cl shift by LHO for 2nd trick, what now? QJxx AQJ10 x AJxx A10xx xx xxx Q9xx 5. teams match IMPS game all QJxxx AKQxx 10x Q A10x xxx AKQJxx x open 1Di opps are silent, Pls propose reasonable sequence to bid 6Di 6. Teams match IMPS green KQJ xxx KQ10xx K10 playing 2/1 Partner opened 1He :2Di 2He: ? what and why Hope you will find the above enough intersting, awaiting your comments regards, Rado