Kaje

Forgot 2 important basic features : 1) 1H/S 2NT = 11-12 support, 3 trumps invitational. 2) After a major opening no bid and if responder is a passed hand, absolutely no bid, is forcing unless it shows some form of ARTIFICIAL support for the major. Hence : 2C : drury = artificial (doesn't show clubs at all) guarantees support ( 11-12 at least 3 trumps). OPENER : 2 diamonds is waiting with weak and bordeline opening. Any other bid is game forcing at least. Opener can also bid game directly. 2NT : 11-12 support, 4 + trumps + shortness somewhere. Jumpshifts = 4 + trumps and good side suit (possible source of tricks if opener can contribute/is interested). 3 in major = pre-empt with shortness somewhere 2/1 with the exception of 2C = NON FORCING : p p p 1S P 2H = NON FORCING. P P P 1S P 3H = good hearts with 4 trumps +

I am not aware of anything about SEF in English, sounds almost alien to ME :( SEF : 5 card major openings. Longer minor : with 4C and 4D : 1D normally. with 3C and 3D : 1C With 5-5 : open the higher-ranked suit. Except with 5S and 5C : weak hands = 1S. With average to strong = 1C, then Opener will bid 1S over 1D/H with average (14-15-16HCP) and then will repeat SPADES at the lowest level. With good hands (17-18) + Opener REPEATS SPADES with a jump and with strong hands 19 + opener jumps directly to 2S over 1D/H and THEN repeats SPADES. If the response is 1NT, opener just bids 2S which is forcing. (The debate has raged in France for years about how to open black 5-5, though I know from experience that the above is widely used I would not venture to say that a solid consensus has been reached). The system usually requires 17H for a reverse with 5-4 and 15-16 for good 6-4. When responder is not a passed hand a 2/1 response is forcing 1 round as responder owes opener a bid, which means that opener can NEVER pass a 2/1 bid under ANY circumstances (i.e it is an entirely different matter when responder is a passed hand). That is why repeating your major at level 2 over 2C/D or 2S over 2H does not guarantee 6 cards at all, there MIGHT be 6 cards and responder is not supposed to lean on that possibility for his future bidding... A 2/1 response does not change the basic value of a reverse (same as above, of course reassessing, upgrading is always possible as an evaluation is always progressive, i.e in context). 1NT = 15-17 : stayman, 4 suit X fers, smolen at level 3 only. No afican texas (4D for H and 4H for S). 4D = both majors at least 5-5 no slam intention. The system has very precisely codified ways of describing major 5-5 depending on their strength. 2NT = 20-21 : stayman, major X fers (correct = at least 3 cards = as long as responder bids over 2NT he's bound to be in game except when p corrects; that means if you got 5H and 2HCP and you bid 3D opener will systematically bid 3NT if he's got just 2 cards in H!!!! The system thinks that a weak responder has absolutely no means of knowing which contract is better 2NT or 3 in the major and that this situation has nothing to do with the one that may take place over a 1NT opening), smolen. Weak 2's : majors only 2C = Artificial forcing 1 round : 2 types of hands : a) 22-23 balanced (rebid = 2NT over 2D most frequent relay-response) :) Strong Acol type "C D H S" (rebid = 2H, 2S, 3C, 3D over 2D waiting/relay- response). 2D = Artificial : Any game forcing hand, asks for aces : Responder : 2H = 0 ace, less than 8HCP or 2 kings. 2S = 1 MAJOR ace 2NT = 0 ace, 8HCP + or 2 kings +. 3C = Ace of C 3D = Ace of D 3H = 2 reds or 2 blacks (same colour). 3S = 2 aces : DC or SH (same rank). 3NT = Shape : 2 aces : any 1 minor + any 1 major. ***There are variations but hey proceed from the same basic strategy. MAJOR SUPPORT (1NT is not forcing) : THE FOURTH TRUMP IS A CAPITAL ASSET (hmmm :) )!!!! No direct jump support without 4 trumps at least : 1H 3H = invitational, 11-12 support, less than 12HCP. At least 4 trumps. 1H 4H = PRE-EMPT : usually 5 trumps + shortness somewhere. With 13 support + a 2/1 forcing bid is necessary : the system strongly dislikes saying 2H over 1S with just 4 cards with or without S support. So 2C/D will come to the rescue as sacrificed suit (sometimes just 3 cards). The cue-bid of opp's suit is game forcing with at least 4 trumps after a MAJOR opening. Double will cover all the other positive support = More and more jump supports after opp's overcalls are weak. Still many continue to play level 3 jump major supports as if no overcall. BLACKWOOD : 30/41/22 : RKCB + QUEEN. Leaping specified Michaels : 2NT = always 2 lower unbid suits. cue-bid of the major = other major + C 3C over a major = D + other major Usual defense over 1NT = Landy but lots of different stuff have flourished recently. I will stop here and if you found that of any interest I will make it more complete if so you wish.

The other night or was it day, I was watching one fine match in which France's and USA 2's seniors teams were vying (seg 8/21). The protagonists were USA2 (open room I think) : Stansby and Bramley, France : Stoppa and Stretz. All the ingredients were to be found in this match to captivate the kibs : high quality bridge, excellent technique, good judgment and psychology coups. The last ones brought me here. Bord 7. France leading (don't remember by how much, maybe 16 to some 1 digit number). The players pick up : West dealer, NS vulnerable STOPPA North : K10754,KQJ105,Q10,2, BRAMLEY East : A62,3,KJ974,K1065 STRETZ South : J8,A876,A8653,A7][/ STANSBY West :Q93,942,2,QJ9843, The auctions are rugged due to Stansby's unexpected opening which wrong-footed a commentator who didn't think he "was modern enough for 3C opening". Indeed I've heard about Lew's prowesses since I started playing and that was a sure long time ago. But the game is tougher and tougher as is real life and to survive you've got to adapt and these guys do understand that as they closely scrutinize the evolution of the game. Our best player by far in GPE is now a senior and is currently representing Gpe in Shanghai. Can't say the guy is consevative! But this is not my topic. So Stansby opens 3C and Stoppa thinks and produces a most unexpected bid (at least to me it was). I envisaged only 2 possibilities : 4C with both majors (but confusedly felt I didn't have enough for that bid, especially with no aces) and 3S and if given the opportunity PERHAPS 4H. Nah, Stoppa bid 3H!!!! What, why, how? Don't we bid the hiher-ranked suit 1st anymore so we could economically fight later on if needs be? It's really become a wild world out there. Obviously he had come to the conclusion that the hand wasn't good enough for 4C, but why H and not 3S? I was thinking hard. Well probably because he thought that the hand was not necessarily theirs (vulnerable) and that a middle of the road approach was perhaps the best way : if they play 3NT he wanted a H lead and not a S 1. Fabulous! Because he found the perfect fit down there in South. Luck, experience, good judgment, intuition? All these things are what make experts so different from the baffled expert to be, that is the average bridge player, the absolute vast majority of us playing on BBO. Now, what we want to understand is how the expert mind works, how she/he can apparently so easily find the "best" solution when we suffer martyrdom. And we rely on commentators to try and help us there. There wasn't any comments about that particular Stoppa's choice. if I remember. So 3C 3H 5C 5H the final contract and there the commentators did congratulate all players for their good judment. Play starts with the C5 from Bramley. Declarer (Stoppa) wins in dummy, clears trumps finishing in dummy and obviously, as duely noted by the commentators, success hinges on hooking the SQ (with west according to the "hypothesis of necessity" concept). And there Stoppa, methinks, makes a 1st mistake, he plays the S8 finessing the 10, trying to cater for queen stiff I guess, which was definitely possible but that hypothesis created too many other problems, and it's too late for me to even try to analyse them, to be taken into consideration! And we'll see that the play of the Jack was the 1st problem solver. So the 10 loses to the Ace and Bramley returns another C ruffed by declarer who gets back to board with a trump and Sjack. There Mr Stansby says no and plays the Q U E E N. Hehehe, who's got the 9? Ruffing finesse (ruffnesse, i'm tring to have that one coined if nobody else's already got the patent :) or play for split. There again the commentators alerted us. And indeed the play was psychologically brilliant and displayed Stansby's physical quickness (no hesitation whatsoever) and agility of mind. Was stoppa going to raise... to our expectations. He didn't and the commentators didn't understand why, said they didn't understand why but failed to explain why Jean-Louis (that's his first name I think) should've prevailed. This is perhaps what they might have said: 1) the 5 may come from 4 cards as the pair leads either 4th best or udca, which here coincides, I mean in french carding this 5 would come from 3 cards as leads are 3rd/5th. (And incidentally, there's one question that i've never been able to answer : how is count given on lead in the system since with 4 or 3 the smallest is led or attitude is shown with 3 small by playing the highest. Not in pure UDCA where it should be the 10 with K105. I have a very hard time when count is not clear in my suit on lead. I think the french scrupulously give count on lead in p's suit when a meaningful sequence (KQ, QJ) is not available. Understand me well, i'm not saying that the system is not viable, what i am saying is that with a hi-lo minded count it's difficult to follow track and readjusting is not easy. UDCA is not a problem as it is just the reverse of high-low). So Stansby would have just 6C. And this is where the commentator was probably right : given Stansby's generation with just 6C PERHAPS he would need a singleton!!!!! Not conservative ok, but not foolish either! 2) Does that "fine" reasoning really stand in the face of this other factor : The C K. Extremely important. If Stansby got KQJ the pre-empt becomes again justified and the soundness of the suit doen't make the absolute presence of a singleton crippling anymore and if you add to all this that Stansby was simply determined to make things very difficult for opps (the commentators did say that too) Stoppa had a lot to deal with and Stan had done a fine job!!! 3) If SJack played instead of 8, Stanby can no longer try and fool him : either he plays it right away or doesn't and case close. And of course when Queen captured the same play of the S9 would be a gag that would relieve all average kibs :"oh, them too!" B) It is absolutely out of the question that commentators should go so extensively as I just have netless, they don't have the time and it is, no doubt, tough, and they're doing a fine job but in this show world it's a show and the risk is worth taking : you gotta explain if you assert and when interesting things happen kibs heavily count on them and appreciate all the more their efforts. The basic idea being : help see things differently, bust clichés, demonstrate and convince that each situation is specific due to a specific context and that the game is physical, mental and psychological... nothing is ever given and so on... Early morning in GPE right now : 6.37. Going back to Venice Cup on bbo and then hopefully to bed. Nice day

I am from the rank and file, a daily user of BBO. I simply cannot understand why an organization whose very reason to be is thus being self-negated by its patent reluctance to accomplish the job myself and the thousands (millions?) of other rank and files like me have trusted it with. Boggles my mind. My anger cannot address the technicalities whether they are commercial, political or technological, I’m simply not conversant with them and thus can’t discuss them with the appropriateness they certainly deserve. Consequently I have to point at what looks indecently obvious to me and bring out my gut feeling: the WBF, which, no doubt (word :) , can be compared to a mater/pater familias refuses, point blank, to give exposure to our/its offspring. It denies them the help and assistance any child is entitled to from its parents. Organizing a somewhat huis-clos Youth World Championship (compared to what it could have been on the internet) is outrageous because it is jeopârdizing the very lives the WBF’s sole purpose is to protect and help thrive. This could be construed as child abuse. The job of the WBF is to promote the game through its actions which should/must (we gotta make room for tremendous but fruitless efforts) benefit its members at large, the masses (there’s the big frightening word). Period. Not doing it in this particular case is denial of service. All these misdemeanours in our modern times are severely punished by the law, or are they? Does the WBF think it is untouchable? That would be arrogance. The WBF is not run nor does it run for the sake of the WBF but for the sake of those who pay for the WBF to be able to run their bridge interests or any interets linked with in any licit manner we would give our support to. If there can’t be any showcase project seen worldwide, why call it “world”? Add to the aggravation the fact that my child, your children could be missing yet another opportunity to show what they can do. Bridge can surely also be understood as a mere medium through which talent would be channelled and talent that might have nothing to do with bridge directly. We want our kids to be something (?) and bridge players, at least that what I would like for my daughter. I certainly would not want her to be a bridge player period, tends to be sclerotic, not the right 9-letter adjective today . If she would still ask for my advice, I would strongly encourage her to try and develop any other skill, any other center of interest. The WBF must be our two-way window/mirror. I understand from what I’ve read that they do a great job in other instances. Why stop the good work there? Is it as if to say : “the excellence we have reached there can cover our other weaknesses here”. No way. What is blatantly missing here is solidarity with the have-nots. All those ever-inflating bodies which deliberately sever links with those they represent invariably become monolithic and self-serving. Do the job you were elected to do. I’m not sure though that the embarrassing bit is the right thing to do, seems to be pointing at one man. This is exactly what frustration that has been building up, does; the feeling gets to the brink of explosion when you feel trapped. The other (ugly) face of the moon is that I am not capable of seeing which other lever would be efficient in making the behemoth change its way, either. So, as is always the case we (the same) are caught up between evils that systematically boil down to one thing : our own demise. The eternal dilemma between hard-core actions and middle of the road ones Scuttle the ship and we wind up drowning. Try to seal off the gaps from within and it may take so long that the monster will restore its forces to the point it becomes an impregnable fortress (i.e, ship too deep in waters). Most NCBO's are a mere extension of the WBF, should be the reverse, hmm, let me think about that again :blink: I understand Fred, BBO staff and Roland’s position though, how couldn’t I? BBO is committed to keeping whatever they can free, and by golly, that’s what they’ve done. This argument is extremely tough to refute as one can experience it every/any second one wishes to. Going to and fro unrestrictedly, changing your name, leaving the table when you wish (politely whenever possible). You feel at home, you make friends, you can host them, you can block any unwanted conversation. You feel free, can't say that about a whole bunch of places today.That’s comfort or I’ve never played on BBO :) . That’s exactly what we Bridge lovers --not necessarily good players or experts-- or simply WBF members from all the nooks and crannies of this all cracked up flat Earth have been expecting from the WBF. Why can’t they deliver? No, my one and only daughter doesn’t play bridge. Why? At age 2 she had some reserves about the WBF and she preserves herself from everything on shelves. Kaje, keep all jacks enlightened:)