wank

Presumably you meant 4 card suits. fixed

until you get to the level of expert, never overcall on 4 card suits. if you have more than around 16 or 17 points, you should normally start with a take-out double.

take as many tricks as you want? presumably the defense should be asked how many tricks they want. if they're playing to win they would obviously say 13. then it becoems a double dummy problem to see how declarer can restrict himself through legal plays to the minimum number of tricks.

thanks for the replies. this was the key point imo.

[hv=d=n&v=n&n=sjthaqxdktxxxxcax&s=saqxhxdajxxcq8xxx]133|200|Scoring: IMP[/hv] EW silient 1NT 15-17, 2S minor suit stayman, 3D 4+ of em, 3H shortage maybe only looking for right game, 3NT, end of

differentiating between voids+singletons = very useful. differentiating between 2 ranges of splinters = waste of time imo

reminds me of this hand from a junior european championships:- First in at white xx xx x QJT9xxxx bidding at my table with opps silent: 1S from me - 2H 2S - 3D (I got a sinking feeling at this point) 3NT - 6NT p Dummy was Ax AKxxx AQxx Ax low diamond lead. i stuck the queen in which held. low heart off dummy, rho rose and switched to the 8 of C, Q, K, A. I led the last club off dummy before claiming to see if his switch had collected his partner's Kx of clubs, but sadly it had been stiff all along so I could have made +1. It didn't matter though, because 990 was the same lucky 2 imps in as 1020 would have been versus 940. anyway, the funny thing was the german who held my hand in one of the other matches, kicked off with a strong NT and floated his partner's stayman bid (don't know why he chose stayman with that shape), leaving his partner to make stayman +5.

p bids 4c to help you judge whether to push onto 5h or not and you've got the worst possible holdings in his suits. if you're not going to X with this, your partner might as well not bother trying to describe his hand in future

so you're agreeing with me lol. i think strong and 4 is a fine system. weak and 4 is not. their 'intermediate' no-trump is 14-16 or 15-17 depending on position. personally i call that strong. with regard to a weak and 4, if you're playing minor openings with 4-4 Mm, i think you're wasting your time, because partner usually has 5 to open 1M but you can't trust him for it in competition - much better to play 5cM then you know where you are. on the other hand, opening the major with 4-4 your killer sequence is 1M - 2M when you've got a strong NT. can't really move but you can be cold for game. i realise this isn't relevant to what you should be teaching juniors. what is relevant though is that none of the better english juniors play weak and 4. these are the people one would expect the OP's children to be playing with online or otherwise, not grannies at the local bridge club.

better players in england stopped playing weak and 4 already. teach them strong and 5

Rob i've blatantly stolen most of your stuff and fiddled with it a bit to imo optimise it. seems hypocritical to keep it quiet when i got it all from you so here it is:- 1C - 1H - 1S = non-GF in a minor, 19-24 with 5+ spades, 23-4bal, GF 5H 4+ clubs, GF 1 major, non-GF 4M-5m >>>> 1NT demi-semi positive >>>> 2m = nat no game may have 4cM, 2H = GF opposite a fit, either max 4H 5m or 23/4 bal, 2S = GF opposite a fit, either 5 spades or 4 spades 5m, 2NT = 5H 4+Clubs GF, 3M = GF single suiter 1C - 1H - 2D = 16-18(19)5S4m, 19-24 5H4m or GF both minors 1C - 1H - 2C = majors or 21-22 bal or GF bal (2NT rebid = 21-22, 3 minor bids available to unravel major fits with GF bal, 3M bids for GF majors) 1C - 1H - 2H = nat single suiter 19-24 1C - 1H - 2S = 16-18(19) 6+ spades 1C - 1H - 2NT = 5S 4+clubs GF 1C - 1H - 3m = nat GF 1C - 1H - 3M = nat GF with diamonds positives:- more definition with the major based hands in terms of point ranges a lot of the time with this arrangement a minimum opener with a minor can escape in 2m

forcing would be ridiculous. 2S would be marginally excessive imo 1S and make a take-out double later if an opportunity presents itself

xxxx AQxxx Axx x = claim at t1. mark me down for 5D

lol the swiss pairs at the english summer congress can get 250 tables in a good year. i don't know why it's not so popular in america. i don't collect them myself but mugs love these events because the ebu awards a tiny fraction of a premium master point for every match won or drawn. from what i've seen, americans love masterpoints even more than english mugs - i've seen amercans describe themselves as 1000 point players or whatever, whereas most people here have no idea what their masterpoint rank is, just that they want more points- if the acbl want to make these events more popular, crank out the masterpoint awards.

i understand the need to protect little old ladies from conventions they don't know how to defend and normal people from conventions which would require excessive time to discuss defence to. and it would be nice if you could objectively judge which methods are not being played for serious reasons, i.e. for objectives other to win, but that's a very grey area. 7NT opener as a random pre-empt would obviously fall into that category, but a strong 1C with a point or 2 less than the 16 which has been around for 40 years couldn't be reasonably described as non-serious. disallowing controlling of psyches: ok fair enough too. but no, i can't think of any other reasons not to allow conventions.

in theory yes - they're not bracketed together, but in practice the requirements are identical - i.e. any 'extended rule of 25' as set out above: 16+ points or rule of 25 or 8 clear cut tricks and a normal opening strength. ridiculous imo. nothing difficult about defending a 15 or 14+ strong club opener.

because if they pass implying penalties with the intention of removing the expected penalty double to show a strong push-on hand and partner pulls in front of them, they know their partner has a more obvious removal then if they make a normal forcing pass and partner bids on.

don't try to extrapolate any bridge knowledge from random bboers

yes p should just smack 2C. playing double as take-out would be pointless - you've already essentially denied 4 spades. you're not going to try playing in LHO's 5cM. anyway, when he doesn't smack it, you obviously assume he made a sensible call and bid 2D, your marked fit

this is good, except 1NT as natural is useless to you, helpful to the oppo and stops you playing it as a transfer to clubs which is infinitely more sensible. oh and you only do this over 1M (x), not minor openers. over 1H (x) 1S is natural. 2S you can play as a mixed raise if you like or as fit

passing for penalties on k932 is druggy

his point about not bidding bad suits on good hands was that you don't want to end up in a slam with a weak trump suit when you potentially had another slam, with a worse fit but making on power. obviously if you've got a minimum game force or game invitational type hand it's safer to show the suit because you're likely not playing in slam. it's a bit like not bidding stayman with a flat 14 count opposite a strong NT - better to play 3nt on power.

this is absurd. how can poorbridge be in inverted commas? <_<

if you're playing that p must bid go past 4h lest he denies a club control, you're going to go overboard a lot imo

distinct danger of getting to slam sans the requisite number of bangers. 4s as sub blackwood last train?