Which step in mastering bridge did you enjoy most?

[Free]

I enjoyed learning MOSCITO the most. However, tonight I made my first suicide squeeze, which was quite enjoyable as well :o

[ArcLight]

I've read almost 90 books on Bridge (I have a long commute).

On the one hand I find it frustrating that I can read on a subject, then as the months go by it slips away. But probably each book does make a little dent subconciously. I'm concentrating on declarer play. From that solid base I can expand to defensive play. I try not to spend too much time with lots of conventions.

 

I LOVED doing all the Mike Lawrence software.

But his 2/1 and Conventions were a lot of work, requiring me to take lots of notes.

 

I really do enjoy reading and studying Bridge.

 

I think by far the hardest part is being able to track the cards.suits/hcp and build up a picture of the unsceen hands. Thats whats needed to become a good player.

[dogsbreath]

hi ..

two items come to mind ...

 

1: from Mollo (from the Menagerie series) .. 'it's a very poor declarer who lets the opponents find the perfect defence'

 

2: from an old friend who played at International level dor many years...

'always ask yourself ... what would a GOOD player do? '

 

 

..if y mastered these you are a formidable player :o :)

 

Rgds Dog

[pclayton]

I'm at the stage of the game where I'm starting to make a lot of 2nd degree assumptions and inferences based on what declarer / defender / partner DIDN'T do. The other nite I was playing with Matt against Josh in a low level NT contract. Josh was counted out to hold the AK D with Txxxx in dummy (with entries) but chose to play a suit off the KQ instead. I deduced the AK was doubleton which it was.

 

To me, seeing the hands like this add a real dimension to the game. Its more rewarding than playing out a hand when the count is known even if it involves an esoteric manoever.

 

I wasn't able to function at this level a few years ago. And it amazes me how so many 'experts' aren't in tune to these clues and rely on just linear data at the table.

[mike777]

I repeat myself but....

Counting and visualize. Not to smother, squeeze or endplay as Mikeh and many others suggest but just count/visualize at a basic novice level.

 

Lawrence is onto the motherlode subject, he just needs to find a way to teach us so it sticks :o. JLaLL suggests a method of 10,000 hands.

 

Whether playing a few hands with Ben, Han, Matt, Phil, Jimmy, Wayne or others I see this blowing more easy winnable imps than anything else combined by me.

 

In a tight well played winning team match tonight, 11-8 I think, I blew around 4-12 imps due to my lack/poor counting/visualize. Yes other mistakes were made, but these are ones we int players need to make and win.

[inquiry]

However, tonight I made my first suicide squeeze, which was quite enjoyable as well :o

You enjoy squeezing your partner to give declarer an extra trick?

[Free]

However, tonight I made my first suicide squeeze, which was quite enjoyable as well  ;)

You enjoy squeezing your partner to give declarer an extra trick?

Lol no, I got an extra trick because opponents squeezed eachother :)

[Fluffy]

So, still now, the part I like of bridge are the parts that involve partnership: so everything that involves agreements between partners (bidding and defense).

the more agreements we have, the better.

You forgot the finer signals :)

[Rain]

I didn't realise how fun this game is until I read the menagerie, and then the Kings books. Everyone should write like them, and then we'll have no lack of people clamouring to be in on the best game in town!

[SoTired]

What do I enjoy most about mastering bridge? When nubile, young females seek out my advice

[jillybean]

Suicide squeeze, trump, criss cross squeeze, partial elimination, throw in, hyperdouble-crisscross and a backward-stepping stone-miracle squeeze ;)

 

I've no idea what it is called but I'm hooked.

[pigpenz]

What do I enjoy most about mastering bridge? When nubile, young females seek out my advice

wait till the real old wrinkly ones seek you out like they seek justin out :)

[cherdano]

Thanks all for pointing out so politely that my question was badly phrased :)

 

As for my own answer:

One thing I know I enjoyed very much is when I learned to reevaluate my hands on the bidding. (I still remember the first time my partner and me bid a cold 20 hcp major suit game without any extreme distribution, just based on a double fit and fitting values.) I wondered whether anyone else would bring that up, but maybe it is just much more long ago for you guys than for me ;)

 

Han wrote:

The ultimate joy comes from confident partnership communication. Being complete sure that partner will interpret your bids and plays the way you intend to is the best that bridge has to offer.

I think what gives me even more thrill is a successful partnership effort in defense.

[han]

Arend, notice "bids and plays" in the sentence you quoted. A play that partner interprets correctly is obviously a defensive play.

 

 

Let me add a joke:

 

Bidding games with good fitting hands and 20 HCP's indeed happened eons ago for me. These days I'm more interested in staying out of 20-point games with badly fitting hands.

 

Sadly enough, the second part isn't really a joke.

[pigpenz]

you probably realize that you are mastering bridge when yourealize that there are no right or wrong answers :rolleyes:

 

You probably realize that you are getting there when you realize that no matter how hard you try you will never know it all.

[Guest Jlall]

you probably realize that you are mastering bridge when yourealize that there are no right or wrong answers :rolleyes:

I really don't agree here. There are rights and wrongs when it comes to both bidding and play.

 

In card play I'd go so far as to say there is ALWAYS a right play or a wong play given a set of circumstances unless something is completely 50/50. Even "guesses" usually take into account math, the lead, etc. When you go down in a contract that could have made, or dont beat a contract you could have you really have to ask yourself if you made the right play and were unlucky or if you made a bad play. To say "there was no right or wrong here, it was just a judgement call on which inference I thought was more likely" is a copout.

 

In bidding, there is almost always a right or wrong in the context of your system and style. There is no "wrong" system or style (within reason), but the bids you make within that context can be wrong. In bidding there are more judgement calls, and it's harder to determine if you were unlucky or wrong sometimes. Occasionally, like in situations of tactics, there is no right or wrong really, but again if you make a bid that doesn't work out you should always ask yourself what happened. How often is your bid right vs another bid. Sometimes this is impossible to determine, but sometimes you will realize you made a mistake, other times you were definitely just unlucky and made the right call.

 

I think if you accept the premise that there are no right or wrong answers you do yourself a disservice because that is simply untrue, and it will be much harder to gain through introspection as you will think "well there really was no right or wrong here."

 

I do not claim to always know what IS right in a given situation, but 99 % of the time a "right" does exist.

[inquiry]

Arend, notice "bids and plays" in the sentence you quoted. A play that partner interprets correctly is obviously a defensive play.

 

 

Let me add a joke:

 

Bidding games with good fitting hands and 20 HCP's indeed happened eons ago for me. These days I'm more interested in staying out of 20-point games with badly fitting hands.

 

Sadly enough, the second part isn't really a joke.

Hehehe,

 

Playing with me at imps, get use to streching the envelope. Last night we bid six games our way, the most points we had was 25, the fewest was 19, and the average was 22.2.

 

All in all, for these hands, we went down on two of these that were cold. A 3NT and a 4♠ despite teh low count. Going down when we could have made cost a total of 30 imps (losing around 7 each instead of winning 7 each on both of those). The 19 point hand should have been a minor vicotory.. They bid 4♦ which was cold... and 4♠ should probably be down one (-50, or 100 if doubled), or maybe a huge victory if they push to 5♦ which can not make. Sadly, I played that one for easy defense to beat me two.

 

Of all the hands, only one was a true misfit, and getting to game on 21 hcp and a misfit was certainly not a bidding victory. One must tread softly with misfits... they are just as bad as 4333 hands. :-) Remember, ZAR starts subtracting misfit points from hands so a good looking 12 hcp can become pretty bad fairly quickly.

[pigpenz]

I really don't agree here. There are rights and wrongs when it comes to both bidding and play.

your missing the point, Justin ;)

you can make a 98% line of play and if its not your lucky day and it doesnt work then it doesnt work. So right or wrong play is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Like the Rabbie says if its stiff King offside then the right play is to drop it

[Guest Jlall]

So right or wrong play is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Like the Rabbie says if its stiff King offside then the right play is to drop it

I must be taking you too literally. Or perhaps you are taking the Rabbie literally ;)

[Free]

I really don't agree here. There are rights and wrongs when it comes to both bidding and play.

your missing the point, Justin ;)

you can make a 98% line of play and if its not your lucky day and it doesnt work then it doesnt work. So right or wrong play is in the eyes of the beholder.

 

Like the Rabbie says if its stiff King offside then the right play is to drop it

There are no rights or wrongs, the only thing you get is 'feedback' :)

[beatrix45]

 

I can also attest that this skill (i.e. counting hands) will atrophy quickly without constent reinforcement - at least for me. 

 

Winston

;) True for me as well. That is why I like BBO. I can keep "in shape" mentally despite a fairly busy schedule by playing in the short BBO tournaments.

 

Also, I have taken a number of long breaks (in one case 17 years), and discovered after a long lay off my ability to count hands went away altogether. Getting that mental ability back has been a most enjoyable experience. For me, the first breakthrough in this process came when I could count and visualize distribution and high cards without really having to think about it at a conscious level. That took months to return after my 17 year layoff. The next step was when I no longer kept coming up with the occasional 14 card suit or 12 card hand.

 

My results when playing infrequently in ACBL tournaments are now better than ever. My biggest problem has been revoking. This seems to happen about once every two or three sessions. Also, these new bidding boxes still feel awkward to me.

[Wiste1]

There are rights / wrongs in both bidding and play....can be difficult to see sometimes but lets take 2 simple examples :

 

1. Bidding (sayc): Partner open 1♠ and you have AQxx-QJx-Qx-xxxx

Right answer ? of course it is....3♠

 

2. Playing: xxxx in hand vs AQxxx in dummy, you must play with no looser

Right answer ? finesse is the only right thing to do. And if you can afford

1 looser but not 2 ? the right thing is to play the ace first.

[Free]

There are rights / wrongs in both bidding and play....can be difficult to see sometimes but lets take 2 simple examples :

 

1. Bidding (sayc): Partner open 1♠ and you have AQxx-QJx-Qx-xxxx

Right answer ? of course it is....3♠

 

2. Playing: xxxx in hand vs AQxxx in dummy, you must play with no looser

Right answer ? finesse is the only right thing to do. And if you can afford

1 looser but not 2 ? the right thing is to play the ace first.

1. No right answer, since some will consider this a GF hand, not an invite!

 

2. Sometimes you just can't play for no loser, or 1 loser. With KJx behind AQxxx, your answer is still 'wrong' :D However, you get feedback that your line of play didn't work in this scenario :)

[TheoKole]

Being able to count opponents points and distribution has been the greatest improvment in my declarer play, including (CPA as lawrence calls it) "Card Playment by Assumption". It is like night and day.

 

While pulling off a squeeze, endplay, trump coup and such does bring a particular moment of pleasure. :), one of my best moments happened just a couple of weeks ago at my local club. A very good player, teacher and bridge master asked me in all seriousness, if I could SEE his cards, while I was declaring a particular hand.

 

I believe that up until now this was the best moment that I have experienced in my brief bridge playing career. :D

 

Now if I can only learn how to bid correctly. :)

 

Theo

[Rebound]

Being able to count opponents points and distribution has been the greatest improvment in my declarer play, including (CPA as lawrence calls it) "Card Playment by Assumption". It is like night and day.

 

While pulling off a squeeze, endplay, trump coup and such does bring a particular moment of pleasure.  :), one of my best moments happened just a couple of weeks ago at my local club.  A very good player, teacher and bridge master asked me in all seriousness, if I could SEE his cards, while I was declaring a particular hand.

 

I believe that up until now this was the best moment that I have experienced in my brief bridge playing career.  :D

 

Now if I can only learn how to bid correctly.  :)

 

Theo

I derive great enjoyment from any slight improvement I gain in each of those skills.

 

However, while I am far from having mastered it, defense, for me, provides the biggest thrill. Sometimes the combination of the visible cards - i.e. my hand and dummy's - and my partner's carding, give me such a complete picture of partner's hand that I can ensure taking the maximum number of tricks available. Often, one must wait and see as the hand unfolds, but when I get the entire picture early, I can't help but play with great confidence. Especially when I know we're going to stomp all over the contract, heh heh ;-)