Cave_Draco

There is a philosophical difference between BW & RKCB; RCKB asks a different question! BW asks "How many Aces, P?" In the middle of a cue-sequence it is not the "Pony Express" solution, B). RCKB asks about key cards; it could mean "I am suitably encouraged by the cue-sequence, P, tell me key cards?" RKCB can be compatible with cue-bidding, BW isn't... I can cue a void, I hate the BW jump! Hope this clears up any misunderstanding, :'(. P.S. It is easier to apply the "brakes" in BW, RCKB makes 6 or 7 easier, ;D.

Agreed, hrothgar, mixing cue-bids & BW is like changing horses in mid-stream but many systems allow it! As to initiating a cue-bidding sequence with a 2nd round control... sometimes it depends upon the answer you are looking for! "The truth points to itself", B)

Hi Peter, You can start a cue-bidding sequence with a 2nd round control but the response is expected to be a 1st round control. With a void the H cue-bid is appropriate, with a singleton it is misleading. Cue-bidding & BW are not mutually exclusive BUT... the aim of BW is to avoid slams (according to Blackwood himself), the aim of cue-bidding is to find slams! Suppose I cued a H void & P asks for Aces? Jump to show a void? Horrid! Second round controls can be shown on the second round, 1S-2C-3S-4D-4S-5C-5H shows either a singleton H or the HK, still room to sign off in 5S, (Or 1S-2C-3S-4C-4S-5D-5H depending upon style), ;D.

<"if" 4 Club is a cuebid, then 4 Diamond must deny a Club control> is a consequence of playing cue-bids up-the-line. I prefer to play that a cue-bid denies the higher suit not the lower. So, 4D-4S-5C shows both minor suit aces and denies the Heart ace. 4C would deny the Diamond ace but not the Heart ace. Cue-bids are easy with one ace, two aces need room to breathe, ;D.

Seems a touch gender biased? I'm sure we've all encountered "Little Old Ladies" who play like world champions, B). The two methods we use are logic & visualisation & control of emotion... The three methods... lol.

RKCB comes highly recommended, P would like to play it & I am willing but... The subsequent auction seems a mess unless the answer is 2 or 5; does anyone have a "logical" system? The value of 0314 V 1403 escapes me if there is no answer to "What does 5NT ask for/about?" Again, read Bridgeguys page... "Two schools of thought", both get messy, ;D.

At the risk of really opening a can-of-worms; Orla's question was, to some extent, prompted by me misinterpreting an Astro response (I am a Very Old Dragon and had had a few barrels, :o). DONT is poor against the Weak NT, no penalty X. Cappeletti? the 2C bid is a waste. IMO. Astro is simple & 2H/S, 3C/D are essentially preemptive. But, then one comes to the responses... I don't like to think of what happens after, playing DONT, 1NT-X-p-2S... Is 2S verboten? Surely not! What would I need to bid it? P.S. I did look at Bridgeguys section on DONT; hmmmm, P is one-suited & it is NOT Spades... ROCL.

Interesting... I don't actually count distribution points at all! The Milton Work count only works for balanced & semi-balanced hands. If I have distribution, or Partner announces distribution, I use Losing Trick Count. IMO, LTC & TNT give a better guide on distributional hands, :).

"Stronger hands must start with DBL"? Balancing hands double... stronger hands can cue-bid? Admittedly, it depends upon what 1C means... short, inconvenient, Precision... but I did see an analysis of the probable Club holding for a short club... odds favour 4-card suit. P.S. has anyone heard of a defence to the short C? P could have S Axx H xxxx D x C AKQxx?

Not an ideal string, but... As I understand it, licensing is about what you should know to play in a Tournament. I learnt Precision, not to play it but to avoid opps having to explain everything. I can play, but don't like, SAYC; I have awareness of 2/1. One should allow opps to have a defence to any bidding system, if they choose to play DONT V Weak NT, their prob, but SAYC players have an obligation to "see" Acol, IMO. Opps have an obligation to explain every call... licensing is an attempt to allow the game to flow.

The tables at Bridgeguys look like a copy of the tables in "The Official Encyclopedia of Bridge". There may be more tables in that, estimable, publication. There are certainly probability tables associated with "Suit Combinations". Isn't the original question about biased "binomial" distributions? It seems to me that, if you wish to set up such a "spreadsheet", DON'T use the Milton Work count? Quacks are over-valued... etc.

Good points, Ben. However, I don't know of many who still play "vanilla" Acol. I ditched "vanilla" Acol over 30 years ago, :). 1) The Acol 2 bid is alive & well as the Benjamin 2C but 2H/S bids are so much more useful as Weak 2s. 2D has always been the theoretician's "problem child" be it Flannery, Multi, Tartan... etc. Benji uses the bid to distinguish between distributional & semi-balanced hands. You can open a Benji 2C with a powerful 2-suiter. Maybe someone plays Benji SAYC but I've never seen it; Benji Acol, on the other claw, is fairly standard. 2) The Weak NT is not integral to Acol, it's just more common with Acol than it is with 5-card major systems. It fits in with being able to bid 4-card majors somewhat better, IMO. When one opens 1 of a suit in Acol, one is announcing "I have points (15+)" and/or "I have distribution"; as opposed to a system like SAYC, where 1M says "I have distibution, might have points too" and 1m says "I don't have a Strong NT opening". 3) I've had debates about the 5-card S suit implication. To some extent its justifiication depends, IMO, on what system one is playing against. I prefer to grab the Spade suit if I can and quite like the inferences that flow from Acol's handling of 4-4-4-1 hands. Playing against 5-card major systems, I see no good reason not to grab the Spade suit; playing Acol V Acol it is less clear. 4) Oops, lol. Acol has "always" allowed a "prepared" Club, but there is no way I am going to allow opps to play "short club", or "inconvenient minor", I paid the table stakes... 5) The other key point about Acol is the concept of limit raises, if memory serves they originated in Acol? I still have a problem with the Jacoby 2NT, :o. P.S. to Eric... At IMPs "Get in cheap, get out quick" is not a winning strategy, at MP... :D. Zia has... a reputation, but not as a theoretician; mostly it's what people learn, 5-card majors & Strong NT are "safe"... we'll all live to a ripe old age, ::). Wrt "if you are going to play a weak notrump, then you *must* play five-card majors" as I pointed out above; playing the Weak NT a 1NT bid says "I don't have distribution & am 12-14, you decide, P".

The quality of the x's has an influence on whether NT or S is better but assuming tiddlers and a transfer "bail-out"... Most of them, ;D. The exceptions would be 3, 4 & 5 (is 5 missing an Ace?). Many of them I would not regard as a "bail-out", several of them are candidates for 1NT-2H-3S-4S if P "super-accepts".

:), Hog... you did suggest moving the NT comments; Orla pre-empted you. A few comments: 1NT-2D-2H-3C probably shows a two-suiter (any partner that passed would be HD&Q) but to me suggests 3NT, 4H or 5C rather than being a game force let alone a slam try; I get another bid... 1NT-2D-2H-3C-3H-3S IS a slam try! With regard to 1NT being disciplined? Ask Orla, I will open 1NT with a manky 5-card major but it is the exception; as Orla pointed out, bending the rules for the Weak NT is a matter of partnership trust. I will bend the rules, but I'd better have a good explanation... Losing the post-mortem, :D. Stayman? I play 1NT-2C-2?-3C/D as a weak t-o; 1NT-3C/D invites 3NT. I would prefer to play 1NT-2S as control asking: 2NT=0-1, 3NT=6: but it also makes sense to put twiddly bits in, which gets complicated, so MSS will have to do, lol.

The Weak NT is very strict; you bend the rules to open 1NT with a 5-card major! 1NT shows 4-3-3-3 or 4-4-3-2 or 5-3-3-2(5-card minor) & 12-14hcp.

"The other potential drawback is that 1NT X can go for 300/500 with nothing on the other way. All I can say is, that this rarely seems to happen." One reason is that partner can keep quiet with 10- hcp; 1NTX, tick is almost always bad. Another reason is that defences like DONT aren't effective v the Weak NT; you have to kiss for penalties, ;D.

Good points, :). I will admit a reluctance to bid 1NT when 4-4 in the majors... Ooooh, that 10 looks nice, maybe worth 3/4 point? It's one of the reasons that I don't like opening 1H when 4-4 (Modern Acol), 1S-blah-2H is a way out of the 4-4 major dilemma, it really shouldn't show 5-4, lol. Also, 1NT as a contract, tends to be a bit of a lottery! Many, as Orla pointed out, are scared of it; but, it is probably the hardest contract to defend. Even 1 down is acceptable, opps had a partial, ;D.

"low promises an honour"? MUD or top-of-nothing? I'm not surprised few play the system you described, Roland. Advanced players can simplify their signals, no point playing UDCA with a novice. Although, I will admit 3rds & 5ths are automatic... I have to think about playing 4ths, :D. In my experience, beginners are taught "4th highest" and don't have the Rule of 11 explained. So, the Rule of 10 or 12 makes no sense! To play both...? I would be interested in your rationale; do the benefits outweigh the potential confusion?

I was going to suggest linking BBO profiles to BB Forums profiles... However, at BBO I have no _, I had to go to my corner shop... Ooops, keyboard, to get one for BB Forums, :D.

The preemtive value of the Weak NT is, actually, secondary! The main value of the bid is that it is both common, about 10% of all hands, and descriptive. In one bid you give partner a fairly complete description of your hand, both offensively and defensively, and yield control of the hand to your partner. When you don't open 1NT you are conveying the information that you either have 15+ or distribution or both. Bad results? Nah, very few attributable to the Weak NT, and many good results that are attributable, ;D.

In "modern" Acol, a 1S opening almost promises a 5-card suit... I don't like it but.... With 4-4 in the majors & 15+? "Modern" opening is 1H, <shrug> Yup, 15+ 4-3-3-3 is a "prepared C" (never a prepared minor) , it always was with the Weak NT? Personally, I think "modern" Acol is a perversion but "modern" Acol or SAYC... lol.

Also, I seem to remember that the "Variable NT" was once part of Acol? The 12-14 NT was Tournament Acol? I still prefer to open my 4-card S suit, if I have ... The 5-card S suit is implied by opening 1H when 4-4 in the majors... times change... <sigh>. & yup, Dutch Acol just ain't Acol, :).

The lead of the Ten is correct, in most systems, as the top of an interior sequence?

"Revolving Lavinthal" is a bit of an oxymoron! Lavinthal discards are based upon the discard of a high card asks for the higher-ranking suit, the discard of a low card asks for the lower ranking suit. Revolving discards are based upon the discard of a high card asks for the higher suit, the discard of a low card asks for the lower suit. Pretty similar? BUT... Both the suit discarded and the suit led (or trumps) are excluded! So, in Lavinthal discards... if I want a Spade, I have to discard a high card; in revolving discards, I can ask for a Spade lead by discarding high from one suit or low from the other. As clear as mud, (I dislike MUD, :)) an example? Opps play 3NT, P clears D & runs his/her D; we have 4 tricks, I get to discard on the last D? Playing Lavinthal, I can ask for a Spade by discarding a high H/C; I can ask for a Heart by discarding a high S or low C; I can ask for a Club by discarding a low S/H. Playing Revolving, I can ask for a Spade by discarding a high H or a low C; I can ask for a Heart by discarding a high C or a low S; I can ask for a Club by discarding a low H or a high S. P.S. Since you can, with Revolving discards, always give a suit preference with a low card... you can play a high discard as a "demand" that P lead either the suit requested or the suit discarded, according to partnership preference, :).

There is a "Third Way"... I play Inverted Attitude but standard count. As Ben pointed out, there are times when, playing standard attitude, you wish to encourage but cannot afford a "high" card. To some extent it depends which of "Yes" or "No" you want to give higher priority, :o. With respect to count: 4th highest is, intrinsically, Lo-Hi for even; whereas, 3rds & 5ths allows Hi-Lo to show even, in all cases, ;D. Does anyone play UDCA with 3rds & 5ths? Just curious, :(.