micsfyuen

My last one: https://webutil.bridgebase.com/v2/daylong_hands.php?tourney=ARDARD%3A212d2b23.4859.11ed.897d.0cc47a39aeb4-1665378316-&username=micsfyuen

Would u mind to review some of my tournament results? By 57% I meant making single dummy optimal decisions, not any cheating or double dummy play. I often find it hard to understand how the robots behave differently, 57% could be due to me not understanding robots enough to identify the changes needed.

I started playing in the daylong reward tournaments last week. They are match point tournaments with 1 player+3 advanced robots at each table. I keep getting only 48%-55% scores and do not seem to find any way to break through and get better scores. I review the 16 boards every time, I could find possible improvements to score up to ~57%, but nowhere near getting the top scores. I saw some players exploit the robot behaviour to score high, e.g. NV overcall 4N over 1N opening to sacrifice when robots would not X. Are there any skills or tricks that could help me play better in robot tournaments?

Thank you for the detailed replies! There are some more questions that I would like to ask: 1. Is both minors bidding as controvertial as both mjors? 1D - 2C - 3C - 3D A cue or a fit? What is the RKCB suit? 2. Do we establish 2nd suit fit at 4 levels? 1C - 1S - 3S - 4C A cue or a fit? What is the RKCB suit? 3. It feels like some 5-6level bidding might be confusing too with 2 suit fit: 1S - 2D - 3D - 3S - 4N - 5C - Seems it is commonly agreed that 4N is RKCB for S unless agreed otherwise. Do we use 5D to ask trump SQ? Or 5H? (At the table, I probably would choose to not ask trump Q at all to avoid confusion)

I am an intermediate player, looking for advice on developing slam bidding agreement with partner when we have 2 suit fit. assuming 2/1 and 5 card Major e.g. 1S - 2C - 3C - when responder has S fit/tolerance and slam interest, suppose he could bid 3S here, does 3S require 3+card in S support? could it be a cue bid with some Ax of Spades? what would be the agreed trump in 4NT RKCB later? Would the treatment be different if 1S - 2H - 3H instead of clubs response? 1N - 2H(txf) - 2S - 3C - what does opener do when he has different fit, S fit only/C fit only/both suit fit? Any scheme or agreement or convention that would help us understand how to handle 2 suit fit in slam bidding would be very helpful.

A friend and I went back to our secondary school to teach bridge lately. There are around 10 students, they are age 12-15, with strong math background, but 0 experience in bridge. Our school dominated the local high school championships 10-15 years ago (won 3 champions and 2 runner-ups in 5 years), so we have high hopes in bringing back a competitive team. We have a session of 1.5 hr once every week after school. In the first few weeks, we did not do much on teaching, mainly just trying to get to know these young people and watch them playing freely. After three weeks of observation, I find these young people are passionate and have potential to play really well (Without any teaching, they manage the entries properly and they know they need to establish long suit). We would like to establish a method to help them learn better. Please advise if you have experience on teaching young beginners. We started actually teaching techniques last week. We started our session with 20-30 minutes teaching, using the "learn to play bridge - basic" program, then play team match in the remaining time. We have also written up some notes on bidding system and carding agreement for them to follow, but we are not pushing them to memorize the system, they just look at the notes when bidding. Look forward to hearing some advise.

Thanks for the advice! We play mainly match point, so we look for a system that works fine on the balance of probability, instead of a system that works perfectly in every scenario. Also, I may be a system geek but partner is a KISS style, partner can probably handle a few conventions but not a switch to precision. Apparently we have two major issues that we need to tackle: 1) 22+ unbal vs 0-7: 2C-2D-jump is too high 2) 18-19 unbal with minor vs 0-5: 2C-2D-3m is too high and we have 2 solutions to these: for 1) have both 2C and 2D as strong bid, may study Bocchi-Duboin's style for 2) open 1m with these hands Issue 1 is rather low frequency (I guess 0.1% to 0.2%), we probably could just live with it. Issue 2, I think open 1m with these will be fine, anyone could suggest the frequency of this?

Partner and I have not played competitive bridge for a long time and joined a local tournament recently, in an attempt to simplify the bidding system, we decided to make 2C 18+ instead of the more common 22+. In the tournament we played altogether 66 boards, 2C appeared 2 times and we got average results with it, but we gained more comfortable bidding in the 1-level opening and got satisfactory overall result. Partner and I are inclined to keep 2C 18+ in our partnership, but seems nobody is playing this way, is it good or bad idea after all? our system overview: NT ladder: 15-17 bal: open 1NT 18-19 bal without 5M: open 1m and jump NT 18-19 bal with 5M: open 2C rebid 2M 20-21 bal: open 2C rebid 2NT 22-24 bal: open 2NT 1m: 11-19, 3+cards (18-19 must be bal) 1M: 11-17, 5+cards (responder can pass with ugly 6-7) Opener reverse bid/jump bid shows max (16-17) but can be passed, and no Lebensohl/Ingberman convention 1M - 1NT - 2 lower: limit to 11-15 instead of the more common wilder range 2C: 18+ 2C - 2D: 0-7 2C - others: 8+ natural 2C - 2D - 2H/2S/3C/3D: 18-21, 5+cards, can be passed 2C - 2D - opener jump with really big hands

Today, I looked at the results of last months through Myhands. This time I sorted the scores differently to see if anything interesting comes up. I copied the scores into an Excel spreadsheet, keeping only the boards that I partnered my favorite partner, and sorted the IMP scores into 4 columns according to who declare the hand. (I play, partner plays, I lead first, partner leads first) Then I calculated the average IMP/board of the 4 columns to see who the better declarer is/who consistently make losing first leads. I was pleased to see that all 4 averages are positive, but to my surprise, these 4 scores differ by quite much. The boards that we declared scored much better than those we defended on average, and boards that I played scored quite differently as partner's. I tried this analysis on 3 other regular partnerships that I know. Interestingly, all of us scored better in declaring than in defending. A friend of mine scored a stunning +3.13IMP/board average on the boards that he declared, but only +1.27 IMP/board on defending. I am not a good statistician, so I may not be able to comment on how significant these differences on the scoring average are. But I believe this kind of analysis would bring us insight on how to improve our game and which skills to work on. Myhands is such a wonderful tool for us to keep tracking our performance. May someone be able to make use of the data to come up with a performance index or the like to help everyone understands their strength and weakness?

Thx guys, your ideas are great

Hi, I am Michael, this is my first post here. I love to read this forum, especially this non-natural discussion section, you guys have lots and lots of great ideas, and this is really enjoyable to learn in this forum. I am an intermediate youth player, and always play very simple natural system with partners, I like KISS style with partners, but I definitely like to know any interesting systems and conventions. EHAA (natural 2s and very constructive 1 opening) is a system that I quite like, but I don't see many people around playing it, are there any people playing this (or variant of this) with great success? Here's a question I want to ask about EHAA. Say, playing level 2 limited to 13 HCP and level 1 is 14+. How do EHAA bidders bid intermediate (10-13) distributional hands and hands with both majors? 1) If they pass, a) how do they show this great playing strength after partner opens 3/4th seat or :blink: when opps bid? 2) If they open level 1, a) how would partner distinguish between real contructive hands (14+) and weaker but distributional hands? B) how much would partner need to make a game-force? 3) If they open level 2, a) level 2 openings seem to have a really wide range of possibilities, how is partner possible to make judgement better than pure guessing?