bid_em_up

Exactly, that is why playing up is an important option for people who dont want to simply collect points. I find it confusing, a C player can earn points in A or B section so other than protecting the 'C' players from the better players I'm not sure what added value it has. (edited) To clarify what uday said a little more, there are two types of events (ok, three), flighted, stratified, and strata-flighted. A flighted event will seperate each section (or sections) into flights A, B, C and possibly even a D. A stratified event will not separate the pairs, a pair from any given strata may play another pair from a different (higher or lower) strata. Only the final results and MP awards are based on strata. The higher the strata you place in, the higher the MP award is likely to be. Since MP awards are based on strata and the number of tables in play (in most cases), and the number of tables in play is based on an umbrella principle (Each strata encompasses every strata underneath it), the higher you place in a strata above you, the more MP you are apt to win. If you were/are a novice/beginner, and the only club game available to you was an open game, most players quickly tire of going and getting beat senseless and going home with nothing to show for it, week after week after week. The ACBL (rightly or wrongly) decided that by stratifying events, they would encourage attendance in both clubs and tournaments since the lower stratas would now be guaranteed to be able to have a chance to place somewhere. Lets say there are 16 tables in play, with 5 from strata A, 5 from strata B and 6 from strata C. If memory serves me correctly, Strata A will pay 7 places (40% of 16 tables rounded up), Strata B will play 5 places (40% of the remaining 12 tables rounded up), and strata C will play 3 places (40% of 7tables rounded up). This effectively yields 15 possible payouts even though there are only 16 pairs in each direction and is a method to help the lower echelons possibly place somewhere and feel like they got something for their efforts AND to encourage them to return again another day. Now, since the MP awards are based on the number of tables in play, the A strata has 16 tables, the B strata has 12 tables, the C strata has 7 tables. A player receives the HIGHER of what their award would be in each Strata they place in. If a strata B player scores 3rd in strata A but were first in strata B, it is entirely possible that their strata A mp award is greater than the one for being first in strata B. The same applies if a strata C player were to be 4th or 5th in A, 2nd or 3rd in B, but first in C. They receive mp award for whichever position would pay the most. Strata-Flighted events are usually those where the top strata is removed to play seperately, and leave the B/C/D strats to play amongst themselves.

Change the layout to this: [hv=d=n&v=b&n=sakj10h7643dck9752&w=s54h8dq107542ca1083&e=s9862hj52dak963c6&s=sq73hakqt9dj8cqj4]399|300|Scoring: IMP[/hv] and tell me if you still want to be in this slam. And the 3♣ game try is certainly likely to tip LHO to leading the A♣ and another, expecting partner to ruff. And after you go down, do you: a) Cry? b ) Chalk it up to bad luck? c) Think, damn that club lead. If only I hadnt bid 3C. d) Think, well if partner had just held the club Ace instead of the king. (Playing for a similar but different perfect hand). e) Wonder if maybe you should have just stopped in game? f) Get passed in your serious 3N bid? Man, wouldn't that be funny. (I am not certain that this would be serious 3N here, you may only be on an 8 card fit as far as partner is concerned). Hmmmm. Personally, the only sequence that can think of that MIGHT get you to 6H is if opener slightly overvalues his hand and cuebids 3♦ over 2♦ on his playing strength. However, I would expect that normally this bid would also include the A♣ in his hand.

I dont recall ever saying that anything on my list was an "absolute must have" or a necessity (other than maybe the first seven). Anything after that, and at a very distant order of importance, I thought I stated that all were about equal in merit, and you can use them or not as anyone sees fit. However, it does help to at least be familiar with all of them, imo, for when they are used against you. And of course, the further down the list you get, the less value I would assign to any of the conventions (other than the defense to Multi). Other things, like "a lot more useful is stuff like cue=good raise, or jump raise in competition = weak, or that a forcing new suit bid at the 3-level is pretty much always game forcing, or some understanding of cue-bidding auctions", are things that you would/should have an agreement with your partner regarding these bids (I dont necessarily consider these to be "conventions"). And also, I wasnt thinking about bids with unusual meanings at the time of posting. (Note I didnt include Western Cuebids). Reverses, I included because many (even advanced players) do not use them properly, or insist that they do not carry any extra meaning, which is, to the best of my knowledge, outside the mainstream philosophy. You dont like splinters? Don't play them. You like Drury, by all means play it. You think 4SF should be #6 on your list, please feel free to place it there. Minor suit transfers are (at least in my case) included in Jacoby. Really, why do people insist on picking apart what is/was an attempt at a helpful post? Just as an fyi, extended stayman allows a partnership to further inquire about NT openers hand pattern, after 1N-2C-2x, to find out if opener has a 5 card major, or a side four card minor, or in the case of a 2D response, which 4 card minor(s) or 5 card minor that the NT opener holds. I only use this in one partnership but I have found that it can be quite helpful.

I think one thru seven are almost mandantory. 1. Stayman 2. Negative Doubles 3. Takeout Doubles 4. Jacoby Transfers 5. Blackwood (plain old vanilla) 6. Reverses 7. Weak 2 bids, 3/4 level preempts and any appropriate asking bids thereafter. Wide seperation between those above, and the following (in just about any order), which help to supplement the above: 8. Roman Keycard Blackwood (1430) 9. Michaels and Unusual NT 10. Jacoby 2N 11. Interfering over opponents NT (Capp, Dont, whatever you pick, I prefer Capp.) 12. Lebensohl over NT opening interference 13. Splinters 14. New Minor Forcing 15. Fourth Suit Forcing 16. 1N forcing 17. Puppet Stayman (especially over 2N openings) 18. Lebenshol after Reverse 19. Lebenshol after takeout double of a Weak 2 bid. 20. Inverted minors 21. Checkback Stayman 22. Extended Stayman 23. Ghestem or Modified Ghestem. 24. Multi and especially, a DEFENSE to Multi. 25. Exclusion Keycard Blackwood I used to regularly play with a partner in sectionals and regionals where she refused to play anything more than conventions one thru seven. The lack of our sophisticated bidding sequences was more than compensated by not having system (conventional) misunderstandings. She could defend and play reasonabley well, and we arrived in the right contract at least 95% of the time. In 5 years, I do not recall ever not placing in the top 3 teams at any sectional or Regional that we attended (of course, we were also in Flight B at the time). As a side note, I'll include a few conventions that I think are worthless, useless, or have better uses for the calls required by them: 1. Flannery 2. Drury 3. Bergen Raises (yea, I know. Don't bother telling me I have to play drury or bergen, cause I don't and I won't.) :)

While this may be the way you play it, I am fairly certain it is not what Ron Anderson describes in his book, "The Lebenshol Convention Complete". But I am at work and the book is at home, so I cannot check it right now. The best I can do is refer you to Bridgeguys.com which says after 1N-2x, where X is listed first: RHO bids 2C/D/H/S = X is penalty. RHO bids 2C = 2D/2H/2S are to play. RHO bids 2D = 2H/2S are to play. RHO bids 2H = 2S is to play. Many people apparently like systems on and stolen bid doubles over NT interference when 2C is the suit bid. I am not a fan of this treatment, however. This is correct Ron Anderson - thats the one you have in full in the web-site link I provided on top of this thread. Please remember 2♣ must be a genuine suit and after 1NT opening 2♣ interference mostly means something else(any 1-suiter or ♥+♠). Therefore Ben is right Lebensohl is not right here. Please note, Ben stated that Leb. NEVER applies over a 2♣ bid, which was my point. It absolutely does apply over a natural 2♣ bid UNLESS otherwise agreed. The original poster also asked what if 2C was Natural? How does leb. apply? Unless otherwise agreed, LEB is fully on and systems are OFF when 2C is natural. If 2C can be any one suited hand, then X = penalty of clubs, otherwise pass to find out what their suit is and you will usually find yourself better placed in the auction on your next call. jmoo.

While this may be the way you play it, I am fairly certain it is not what Ron Anderson describes in his book, "The Lebenshol Convention Complete". But I am at work and the book is at home, so I cannot check it right now. The best I can do is refer you to Bridgeguys.com which says after 1N-2x, where X is listed first: RHO bids 2C/D/H/S = X is penalty. RHO bids 2C = 2D/2H/2S are to play. RHO bids 2D = 2H/2S are to play. RHO bids 2H = 2S is to play. Many people apparently like systems on and stolen bid doubles over NT interference when 2C is the suit bid. I am not a fan of this treatment, however.

Just after this guy gets married, he was invited out for a night of bridge "with the boys." He accepts and then tells his new bride not to worry, because that he'd "be home by midnight...promise!" Well, the cards were running his way and the beer/wine was going down easy, and at around 3am, drunk as can be, the guy finally stumbles home. Just as he gets in the door, the cuckoo clock started, and cuckooed three times. Quickly he realized she'd probably been woken up by the clock, so he cuckooed another nine times to make her think it was midnight. He was really proud of himself, having the quick wits even when smashed, to escape a possible conflict. Next morning the miss's asked him what time he got in and he tells her, "12 o'clock, dear!" Whew! Got away with that one! "Hmmm, I think we need a new cuckoo clock," she says over her morning coffee. "Why is that?" the husband asks. "Well, it cuckooed three times, said 'OH *****!,' cuckooed another four times, farted, then burped, cuckooed another three times, cleared its throat, cuckooed two more times, and then laffed its ass off."

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'll have to remember that one.

Do we know if there was any opposition bidding and if so, what was it? (It seems like with 11 spades between them somebody would have preempted somewhere along the line).

I dont agree with 4♦ which wasn't an option listed in the poll. However, I would also expect that partner would pass 3♥ with a better than normal opening bid and that 4♦ will be a weak hand with long diamonds and no desire to defend anything. (A silly position, imo, since he does not KNOW what my hand is). That said, I think I put slam out of the equation, and simply bid 5♦ and hope that his declaring is better than his bidding, but I wont hold my breath on that either.

Really? By who? Sorry, but I have never heard this, nor do I agree with it. To each their own. I treat this as 1x-1y-? X= minimum 4-4 in other two suits, decent hand (10+) 1N = minimum 5-5 in other two suits, can be garbage. 2N = minimum 5-5 in other two suits, good hand. and I find that I really dont miss having a natural NT overcall available.

Right or wrong, I would bid 3N over 3C. It lets partner know we have spade stops (that he is lacking) and no REAL fit for either minor. A close 2nd choice is 3H.

You see this in individuals because: 1) They don't know any better. 2) They know better, but suppress the four card major as a surprise for the defense (forget about partner, I only have to play two boards with them and then will never see them again). 3) NT scores better. 4) They think they can always play the hand better than some random partner sitting across from them, no matter what. 5) They just are making the bid that most likely guarantees them playing the hand. There are other reasons, but the above are a good general representation of reasons why people bid like this in individuals. Helene's description of 1m-1N is adequate for what the bid is supposed to mean in SAYC.

I think anybody recommending preempting with a side 5 card major in the Beginner/Intermediate forum should be shot as quickly as possible. :) (I realize you weren't actually recommending it, Phil. Just registering general displeasure at anyone who would.) Nice. I think all players need to understand that there are two types of bridge being played on the globe right now; 2 handed and 4 handed. If we are teaching beginners judgement in differentiating between a 12 count that looks like: AKxxx, KQxxx, x, xx and one that looks like: Axx, Kxx, Kxx, Qxxx, then we should also teach them about judgement in preemption as well. There is a big difference between preempting with a hand like: xx, Jxxxx, QJTxxx, void and: KJxxx, xx, QJxxxx, void. To make a blanket statement like, "I think anybody recommending preempting with a side 5 card major in the Beginner/Intermediate forum should be shot as quickly as possible". takes a lot of gall. Add all the smileys you want, but this comment is offensive. Furthermore, I AM recommending this style, but only if the players are willing to accept some bad results in echange for some great ones. There is no 'right' or 'wrong' method. Neither is close to 'optimal'. 2 handed bridge is to describe your hand to your partner in a relatively narrow range, so that your partner is involved in the decision making process. If a hand doesn't fit within a narrowly defined box, then the green card is appropriate. 4 handed bridge accepts that sometimes partner will be left completely in the dark on certain hands, and that sometimes, less than optimal contracts will be reached (sometimed doubled). However, you believe that you do better overall with this method. I've been doing it for over three years, and I am convinced its better. And not just against club players. You may ask yourself, what style would you want your partner to play. This is easy. However, you must also ask yourself, which would you rather play against? If the answer to #1 and #2 is different, then I suggest you rethink how bad it is to teach others this school. I think a lot of the teaching that has occurred is a result of professional players tutoring their clients. I can't think of a single one that would want their partner to make wide ranging bids, because it dulls their decision making ability. As a result, 2 handed bridge has been accepted as dogma for reasons totally unrelated to the results it obtains compared with 4 handed bridge. Geez Phil. Get over it. Notice no smiley there, and I find your comment offensive as well, especially when mine was just good natured humor and NOT directed at you, per se. It takes no gall whatsoever to make a comment with a sense of humor. Maybe you need to buy one, only 44.95 plus shipping and handling. The point was that I simply do not think that a question like this really should be addressed in the BIL forum. Its that simple. I dont think its appropriate for anyone to be suggesting OR encouraging beginner/intermediate players to preempt this sort of hand. Also note, I did not say, anyone who preempts this sort of hand should be shot on sight. Nor did I say whether or not there was any merit to doing so or not. You want to do it, knock yourself out. You want to recommend it to others? Go right ahead. But as you reflect in your last post, there is probably a right way and a wrong way to explain this sort of bidding to a BIL player. It may have benefits, but it can also have some serious drawbacks as well, and until the BIL player has a solid grasp on fundementals, I would not encourage this sort of preempting (as Fred reflects). If a beginner/intermediate player wanted to ask this question, fine, but they can do so in one of the other forums. Other beginners/intermediates who happen to be reading this forum shouldnt be reading a question such as this, seeing the answers given and then going back to their "live" partnerships saying, well....this is what it said on BBO forums. Geez.

I think anybody recommending preempting with a side 5 card major in the Beginner/Intermediate forum should be shot as quickly as possible. :) (I realize you weren't actually recommending it, Phil. Just registering general displeasure at anyone who would.)

Since partner could (should even) always force us to ruff the 2nd (or 3rd) heart if he had a club void OR the diamond K, I really dont think it is possible for declarer to be 7-3-3-0, but then again, partners do make mistakes. ;) At the table, I would pitch a diamond on the second heart, ruff the third one and lead a diamond. Partner has at least remembered to clearly signal diamond preference by his heart plays, even though he appears to have forgotten to force me to ruff the third heart.......

Since partner could (should even) always force us to ruff the 2nd (or 3rd) heart if he had a club void OR the diamond K, I really dont think it is possible for declarer to be 7-3-3-0, but then again, partners do make mistakes. ;)

From what I can tell, I'm the only 6♦ bidder on the second hand... Its possible that this should given you even more pause than zero 6♦ bidders... No, I bid 6D also in my earlier post (on page #2 in this thread).

I'm really surprised everyone is passing 5♦ in the second problem. 2. KQxx K10xx Q10xx 9, you deal: P-(P)-1♦-(1♥)-X-(4♥)-5♦-(P)-? Partner has essentially bid 5D on his own (not withstanding our negative double). One thing I am (almost) certain of it that partner is void in hearts. He does not have 4 spades or 4 clubs (if he did, he should bid one of those two suits instead of 5D). Since the AK♦ along with either black ace will give 6♦ excellent play (the spade A rates to be onside if partner doesnt have it), I will bid 6D. I would expect partner to hold Axx void AKxxxxx Kxx or Jxx void AKxxxxx AQx or similar.

Really? I think this would be a 80% vote in favor of 1♠. Anyway, if you cue-bid, you at least tell partner your bid is based on some hcp. A direct 4H could be much weaker and more distributional. For a long time, I thought 1♠ was the "normal" call on the suggested hand (and it still is for many players as suggested by others). However, I no longer believe it to be the best call at IMP scoring. At MP's, 1♠ is still probably the best call in the long run, but ONLY because of the scoring differences between minor suit and major suit contracts. At IMP's, double is automatic these days in my partnerships, as the objective should be to immediately find your best fit as frequently as possible. I agree with Phil on the philosophy that this hand has three possible places to play and X is more descriptive of this immediately and will work better the majority of the time.

#1. 4♥ #2. 6♦

Life sucks when you're a vacuum cleaner.

Ok, so what is double?

Please define Raptor as used in your methods. I cant find a good definition of it anywhere.