haben12

[i hope that the editor doesn´t destroy the size again.] reply @Mikeh Although you don´t agree with me, I thank you for your commend, specially for encouraging innovation, and for advising me not being too down over your criticism. Your grave and main argument is: I would try to solve problems which don´t exist or are already solved and tested. If you are right, my proposition would only serve for the garbage. But let us survey and first of all make a short walk in history of aeroplanes. Remember in past times aeroplanes have had a propeller as engine, a very technically mature system, but nevertheless nowadays most of aircrafts has a jet propulsion. So (also in this sense not only in that of feeling) you are right: "The world is turning faster than it did when I was young." Conclusion: An successful and tested system might also have been replaced by another. How does happen this? I think: There must exist some people, having the courage testing a new theory. After these tests they´ll assess the new theory on bringing more profit than the already tested (one). If the result should be positive they adopt, otherwise they abandon it. Some annotations to the other systems, recommended by you. Exclusion Blackwood is a fine system. But it premise a void in one of the partner´s hand. Do you know, how high is the probability for such a hand? Could you imagine, that the percentage is only a little bit more than circa 5% (5.19...). That means, on one hundred (slam suitable) hands you are able to use Exc.Blackw. only in 5-6 hands! And what about hands having a singleton? Such hands have anyhow a probability of circa 31% (30.5...). I think, you don´t use Exc. Blackw. for these hands or do I err? Or perhaps do you have a modified Exc. Blackw., applicable for hands with a singleton, a system, that I don´t know? Provided if both P. would agree to renounce (for avoiding misunderstandings) on Gerber and Blackwood systems [both in all of their variations], Cue-bids are a good system. But these manner of bids causes not seldom a too high level, specially, when one of the P. has 2 neighbouring Aces with the result that then informations about the kings also fail. An example: (you permit that I use your icon hand a little bit changed) Nord: ♠ A, K, 4 ♥ Q, J, T ♦ Q, J, T, 3 ♣ A, K, 4 Cue bid auction (without bids from the ops): You: 2 NT P: 3 NT 4 C 4 D 4 S 5H and now? You haven´t any information, where the 2 kings will be located. Speculating you may think, P. will have one of the missing kings, then little slam is possible. Otherwise should he have none, it is possible, that each opp will have (only) one. Then this one of the two kings will be finessed. Thinking that, you may end auction with 6 NT, otherwise you must stop at 5 NT. Auction using my proposition (without bids from the ops): You: 2 NT P: 3 NT 4 ♣ (3 or 4 AsKs) 4 ♥ (2 AsKs, no s/v) and now? You have the sure information on a low level (4 ♥) that P. has 2 AsKs. But normally 6 AsKs (in sum) don´t reach for a reasonable little slam. But let us think a bit further. Admittedly you don´t know exactely, which cards are in P´s hand: Has P. either 2 Aces and no Kings or 2 Kings and no Aces or 1 Ace and 1 King. But for a sure bidding this knowledge is important. Therefore you has to investigate the exact meaning of the bid either by rolling bid or with an additional convention of 4 NT. The answers: 1 step: 2 kings, 2 steps: 1 Ace and one King, 3 steps: 2 Aces. In the example above the answer is one step (if you don´t use rolling, 5 ♣). Now you have the absolutely sure knowledge, that 2 Kings are in the opp´s hands. But now, based on this sure knowledge, you may also speculate and think: P. has not one of the 2 missing kings, but should each opp. have one king, one of the two will be finessed. (for it the probability is 50%). Otherwise both kings could be finessed, if East should have both kings (for this is the probability 25%). In the remaining case the little slam go down (for that is the probability 25 %). Now you may decide yourself, what you are doing: - a little bit lion-hearted - 6 NT or sure 5 NT (if used rolling: 4 NT). (The hand of South: ♠ Q, x, x ♥ A, x, x ♦ A, x, x, ♣ D, x, x, x) I admit not knowing turbo. This system isn´t described in any of my books and not yet in http://www.bridgehands.com/Indexes/Index_G...BridgeHands.htm. May I ask you, how useful is a secret or encrypted system? My answer: it may be good for those profis, knowing that system, but not for the uninformed majority of all the leisure or hobby players having enthusiasm for this game like me. Analysing my proposition entirely, you´ll find: My part 1, valid for circa 5%, is a modified cue-bid system, avoiding misunderstandings, that I´ve seen by many opps using other systems. My part 2 is a modified Gerber system, combining and contracting the original Gerber 4C (Aces question) and 5 C (Kings question) in only one question, informing P. at the same time of the minimum in Aces and Kings of the own (Enq.) hand. The Res. on his part is able to inform the Enq. about having either a singleton or a void. The more information the merrier. @manudude03 Ty for your opinion to my proposition for a new slam bidding system. I´ll give you a little bit long reply. One man´s opinion depends on his location, should it be allowed to transfer the cognition of Einstein in physical laws to the mental activity: From another position there are other aspects or approaches. From my point of view I could answer uncouth: I´ve thought Bridge is a partner game, not a pure detective game. - But seriously, I agree with your first sentence for my part 1 and nearly for the part 2. As there is a difference between the two words "always" and "most" as there is the same difference between us. Mostly (myself), but not always (yourself), one of the P. should have the control of the Slam auction. Thus you are thinking there are no exeptions. But is that so sure? F.e. imagine P (=Res.) has a good non trump suit in being K, Q, J, x or even a (non fit) suit containing A, K, Q, J, x (may be announced before or rare not). I ask you: Has - even in this (admittedly no frequent) cases - the Res. to remain always inactively? - I do admit, that I don´t know all slam bidding systems. But do you know anyone, by which Enq. gets the knowledge of one of the described sequences? (as well not in my proposition). Even though Enq. is aware of A-Q from the Res. (f.e. possible by Gerber, not by Blackwood) it fails the knowledge of the J in a constant sequence. A Jack in such a sequence (like described) promises at least one trick more. When the Res. has the knowledge of 8 AsKs or somtimes of 7 Asks, shall the Res. not be allowed to bid in doubt one level more (from 5 to 6 or from little slam to a grand slam)? -- You affirm the thesis one of my assumptions would be that the hand has no void or singleton. This thesis is correct for my part 2, but not for part 1. In part 1 there is the possibility to give notice of a void, having by the enquirer, while in part 2 the Res. is able to announce a singleton or a void being in his hand. You like to hear the right amount of 1s/v. My answer is: I am not an expert in probabilities. But please click the link: http://playbridge.com/pbgen_shuffle_project.asp. There you´ll find the probabilities of all possible hands. When you should add the values of all hands with a void therein, you´ll get nearly 5.2%; the same with s-hands constitiute 30.56%, both together 35.8%. I think you´ll agree that this number is a little bit far from your assumed approximate 50%, isn´t it? To your proposition: If I would not set a high value on having the possibility to inform the P. (Enq.) of a singleton or a void in Res.´s hand, I would reconsider to adopt your modifying proposition. But this possibility fails in your alternate proposal.

This part had to be written new, because the used table has been destroyed by the editor. :P Realization of these 2 ideas: .......................................................................................... Abbr.: Enq.= Enquirer ¦¦ Res. = Responder ¦¦ AsKs = sum of Aces and Kings .......................................................................................... 1. ..... (look at the acticle) 2. If the Enq. will know the AsKs of the P., (s)he has 2 possibilities to do that: 4 ♣ or 4 ♦. This depends on his own AsKs: When Enq. has 3 or 4 AsKs, the question is 4 ♣, when (s)he has 5 (or even more), the question is 4 ♦. The advantage of this question choice is: The Res. knows rather exactly too, how many controls the Enq. has (the minimum exactly). The Res.´s answers after 4 ♣: 4 ♦: 0 - 2 AsKs (no slam possible) minimum together 3 4 ♥: 3 AsKs and neighter Single nor a void min. together 6 4 ♠: 3 od. 4 AsKs and either a Single or a void min. together 6 4 NT: 4 AsKs and neither a Single nor a void min. together 7 5 ♣: 5 AsKs 8 The Res.´s answers after 4 ♦: 4 ♥: 0 or 1 AsKs and neither a Single nor a void min. together 5 4 ♠: 1 or 2 AsKs and either a Single or a void min. together 6 4 NT: 2 AsKs and neither a Single nor a void min. together 7 5 ♣: 3 AsKs 8 The rebids of the Enq.: ....... (Look at the article)

Maute´s proposition for another Slam-biding-system (= Askiss-q.) or How would you find the following slam-bid-sequences? Introduction: For a Grand Slam you need, if you have a normal distribution (therefore without a Chicane or a Single in your hand), for a start 4 Aces and 4 Kings (in sum: 8); while for a small Slam it suffices either 4 Aces and 3 Kings or 3 Aces and 4 Kings (in sum: 7). If you notice that, you may have another idea as only asking first for Aces and after for Kings: I asked me, why not combining both to a summary system, therefore inventing a special question for the number of Aces and Kings, an Aces-Kings-sum-question (Askiss-q., look below nr. 2), instead of the usual isolated Ace-questions like Gerber, Blackwood or announcing the Aces (or Chicane) by cue-bids. After such a question you may continue by other questions for example by a Queens-question and/or a Trump(s)-question. But nevertheless there are also cases, in which you are not really interested in the number of Aces or Kings, because you only will know, if partner has one certain Ace. - F.e.: Are you in one suit void and you have in another suit a Single (or a good colour with K, D, J, x), you are only interested in the Ace of this colour. Therefore you must also have an additional system, in which you are able to enquire that, similar like the thought of the cue-bids (look nr.1). Realization of these 2 ideas: .......................................................................................... Abbr.: Enq.= Enquirer ¦¦ Res. = Responder ¦¦ AsKs = sum of Aces and Kings .......................................................................................... 1. If the Enq. will know only a certain Ace (applicable mere in trump contracts) Enq. bids (asks) 4 NT, Answers: if Res. has no Aces, he announces the fit-suit (next level). if Res. has one Ace, he announces that colour in which he has an Ace, - when it is Trump Ace with jump in trump-suit. if Res. has two Aces, he announces the Ace of the lower suit with jump. 2. If the Enq. will know the AsKs of the P., (s)he has 2 possibilities to do that: 4 C or 4 D. This depends on his own AsKs: When Enq. has 3 or 4 AsKs, the question is 4 C, when (s)he has 5 (or even more), the question is 4 D. The advantage of this question choice is: The Res. knows rather exactly too, how many controls the Enq. has (the minimum exactly). The Res.´s answers meaning after 4 C: meaning after 4 D: together: 4 D: 0 - 2 AsKs (no slam possible) ---- ---- ---- min.3 4 H: 3 AsKs and neither a Single nor a void / min. 6 0 or 1 AsKs and nei. a Single nor a void minim. 5 4 S: 3 od. 4 AsKs and either a Single or a void 1 or 2 AsKs and ei. a Single or a void min. 6 4 NT: 4 AsKs and neither a Single nor a void min. 7 2 AsKs and nei. a Single nor a void min. 7 5 C: 5 AsKs 3 AsKs 8 The rebids of the Enq.: after the answer 4 D, as a rule: the Fit-suit as the end of slam-bidding (There are in the 2 hands max. 4+2 AsKs, normally 6 doesn´t reach for a small Slam.) 4 H: if Enq. only has 3 AsKs or if Enq. had asked with 4 D, the same rebid like after 4 D (= fit-bid), but if Enq. has 4 (after the q. 4 C), then Enq. continues (normally) with 5 C (Queen-question). 4 S: a) 4 NT as a new question, if Enq. is more interesting to know, in which suit Res. has a Single or a Void. Answ. of Res.: The suit, in which the Single or the Void is. or b.) 5 C, if Enq. prefer to know the number of queens. 4 NT: normally the Queen-question with 5 C, except you prefer the trump-question (see below) or you bid at once 6 or 7 NT. 5 C: after this answer, the question-answer-situation rotate: The answer 5 C is now for the other (Enq.) the question for the number of queens. [= This question should be answered by those, who was first the enquirer. (Answers see next)] Optionally followed with Queens-question 5 C: Answers: 5 D 0 or 3 queens 5 H 1 or 4 queens 5 S 2 queens Optionally followed with Trump-question 5 NT: A: 6 C 0 or 1 Trump High Cards, A-J (THC) 6 D 2 or 3 THC very rarely: 6 H 4 THC if necessary: 6 S Ace and King 6 NT Ace, king and queen Remark: the jump in AsKiss-question announces a fit in the last announced suit. (F.e. 1 C, p, 1 S, p, 4 C = fit in S, not in C) Advantages: how said already above: The Res. knows rather exactly too, how many controls the Enq. has (the min. exactly), in the other systems the Res. is mere an inquiry object. More often you are able to begin a slam-bidding, because after the (Res.-) answer of 4 D, you may stop bidding on the forth level! (not possible with Blackwood-questions and if you need a king question with 5 C [or drumming] even not with Gerber) or in minors at the fifth level (mostly not possible with Blackwood-questions and after kings-question even not with Gerber) Because the answer of 4 S signalizes a Single or a void, this bid warns P. for NT-contract. disadvantages: Swiss convention is incompatible to this system. If partners have a fit in C, either they cannot use this system for this one case or they arrive at an agreement that 4 C is always the AsKiss- question. Then, in this case, there isn´t allowed to announce or to (re-) confirm with 4 C the C-suit. I hope, you will find this sequences :lol: otherwise I beg you to say me what is rotten in it. Thanks.