Topic for an intermidiate level course

[Flame]

As opposite to books which usually take one issue and focus on it, courses suppose to include many issues and obviously not to go as in depth on any of them.

What topics would you teach on intermidiate bridge course ?

A topic suppose to be something that you teach in thory then give examples and all this suppose to be usually in no more then one lesson.

I'll give examples.

1. Law of total tricks

2. hand evaluation

3. diffence matterial like second hand play when to cover when to split etc

4. diffence carding

5. squeeses

6. system issues

basically its taking a book and giving it in one lesson

What are your intermidiate topics. and basically any advices on teaching intermidiate.

[mike777]

One and only one. Count and visualize. After they complete the course I would tell them to take it all over again. If you know 50 out of 52 cards at the table you can pick up the rest of the other stuff with practice.

[Walddk]

Basics, basics and basics again, and then as few conventions as possible. Stayman, Blackwood and negative doubles. Period. Finally, declarer play and defence over and over again.

 

The rest is mere details and can be added when one masters all of the above.

 

Roland

[han]

I agree with the above posts, but it also depends on the intermediates.

 

I think that listening to lectures is not the way to learn bridge.

[Guest Jlall]

Teach them counting.

[Flame]

Teach them counting.

The problem with teaching counting is that its pretty boring, they want more exiting stuff, but i totally agree and will force them to learn to count.

I just run into a nice website that practice count. (or math for first grade)

http://www.eastontario.com/conventions/count.htm

and

http://www.eastontario.com/conventions/count2.htm

[Guest Jlall]

Interesting, to me counting was always the most gratifying. Being able to figure out a complete hand solely by counting shape and HCP, that is the basis for all "advanced" plays to come. And even when it just told me which way to finesse or something, it was always very rewarding to me somehow. Kinda like when you finish a puzzle.

[Chamaco]

Teach them counting.

The problem with teaching counting is that its pretty boring, they want more exiting stuff, but i totally agree and will force them to learn to count.

I just run into a nice website that practice count. (or math for first grade)

http://www.eastontario.com/conventions/count.htm

and

http://www.eastontario.com/conventions/count2.htm

Ty Flame, this is a nice site for practicing countig :lol:

[sceptic]

personally I think to much time in intermedaite level is spent bidding, teach people our level, to play better and defend better (this includes counting and visualising etc)

 

and most importantly teach our level how to communicate with each other

[ArcLight]

>personally I think to much time in intermedaite level is spent bidding, teach people our level, to play better and defend better (this includes counting and visualising etc) and most importantly teach our level how to communicate with each other

 

From what I've seen many players are either lazy and wont study (read books) or poor and can't afford them. Why "take courses on play" when (in the USA and probably much of Europe and Austalia) you can go to the library and get a ton of older books on play of the hand and defense and read and reread them?

 

(These are old books and should be in libraries with older collections from the 70's)

 

 

Read and reread these "old" books:

 

 

Bill Roots: How to defend a Bridge Hand + How to Play a Bridge Hand, both classics!

 

Victor Mollos: Card Play Technique - a classic!

 

Kantars - Modern/Advanced Bridge Defence (or its predesessor, "big red" titled Defensive Bridge Play Complete). Hios other books are also worth reading.

 

Terence Reese: a ton of books on declarer play

 

Fred Karpin - has a bunch of books on declarer play

 

Ron Klingers - Card Play Made Easy 4 volumes (96 pages each) all outstanding

 

SJ Simon - Why you lose at Bridge - Classic

 

Dorothy Truscott - Winning Declarer Play - Classic

 

Jeff Rubens - Secrets of Winning Bridge

 

David Bird - Bridge Technique Series - however this is a newer series and may not be in most libraries (only a few were available in New Jersey, USA)

 

Danny Roth is another good author.

 

Robert Berthe - Step by Step Card Play in No Trumps

 

Mike Lawrence - Card Combinations + Read Your Opponents cards and whatever else the Library has

 

*Marc Smith/Tim Bourke - Countdown to winning Bridge - *ok, this is not an old book but its a fantastic book on counting

 

After you have done them all twice, try the Hugh Kelsey.

Kit Woolsey - Match Points.

 

These will cover declarer play and Defense.

Forget about Squeezes until you can recognize an end play or elimination play.

 

 

I have left off "Expensive items like" Freds Bridge Master or Mike Lawrences Private Lessons 1&2, Counting at Bridge 1&2, Defense, Conventions

[Walddk]

Reading books is good, no doubt about it, but there is no substitute for practice, practice and more practice at the table. You don't improve your bidding, dummy play and defence, let alone win tournaments, in your study or in the library.

 

Roland

[ArcLight]

>Reading books is good, no doubt about it, but there is no substitute for practice, practice and more practice at the table. You don't improve your bidding, dummy play and defence, let alone win tournaments, in your study or in the library.

 

I agree.

 

But in order to improve you will benefit more by some study (reading) and application (playing) than just playing and trying to pick things up.

This is especially true for squeeze play.

 

I don't remember who said this, but one very strong playre said you should spend one third of your Bridge time studying. Perhaps thats true up to a certain level.

[david_c]

I've always thought that opening leads are very hard. I think intermediates would appreciate some general advice here. Books seem to be good at explaining that KQJTx is a good suit to lead, but you rarely see any good advice about how to decide what suit to lead when the choice is between, say, Kxxx and xxx. Or, what sort of auctions suggest that a trump lead might be right? And things like that.

[Walddk]

I agree.

 

But in order to improve you will benefit more by some study (reading) and application (playing) than just playing and trying to pick things up.

This is especially true for squeeze play.

"Replying to Topic for an intermidiate level course" is the name of the game. Forget about squeezes. I have said this a dozen times before, and I haven't changed my mind.

 

I repeat: most intermediates do not master even the simplest of card play, so why on earth would one waste their time with squeezes? Intermediate players may not like to hear this, but that's how it is. And as we all know: nothing hurts like the truth.

 

Roland

[plaur]

Basic cardplay, basic cardplay and basic cardplay and then some simple sound bidding. Forget about squezzes and endplays

[GeeGee]

I agree. 

 

But in order to improve you will benefit more by some study (reading) and application (playing) than just playing and trying to pick things up.

This is especially true for squeeze play.

"Replying to Topic for an intermidiate level course" is the name of the game. Forget about squeezes. I have said this a dozen times before, and I haven't changed my mind.

 

I repeat: most intermediates do not master even the simplest of card play, so why on earth would one waste their time with squeezes? Intermediate players may not like to hear this, but that's how it is. And as we all know: nothing hurts like the truth.

 

Roland

Unfortunately, I have to agree. I don't consider myself even close to advanced, but a few years ago I designed and ran a course for intermediate club members on declarer play.

 

It became apparent pretty quickly that fewer than half of the attendees were able to grasp concepts like the ruffing finesse, loser-on-loser plays, or endplays.

[Finch]

There are two different questions:

- What should intermediates be taught?

- What do they want to be taught?

 

and the answers are different. Are you giving people what they want (usually equates to "are they paying customers") or what would improve their bridge fastest?

 

My parents have run many residential bridge weekends. On one morning they have a 'seminar' - a shortish lecture followed by 5 or so prepared hands for people to play, followed by a post-mortem explaining what should have happened. The topics covered are generally way beyond the attendees capability to execute themselves - as others have said they'd be far better off learning how to set up their side suit. But that's not what they want. They want to see the clever, the spectacular - the things that (in their eyes) make bridge fun not hard work. If they get something that would directly improve their bridge, they say it was a bad choice.

 

The same is true of better players as well. How many people who've read "Adventures in card play" are ever going to execute one of the 'fiercer' trump squeezes? How many (including me) list it as one of their top five books?

 

These plays open your eyes to what is possible, to what makes the game endlessly fascinating.

 

So whatever topic I chose, I'd make sure there was some dramatic or fun extension I could show at the end. If we're counting LHO's points, make sure we drop a singleton king. If we're taking finesses, have a finesse against a 5 or ruff a winner to gain an entry to take a finesse (I had one of them on Sunday). If we're endplaying people, have one of those hands where the opening leader is endplayed, or where we take a ruff-discard by discarding in both hands. If we're into squeezes, after explaining that it only gains one trick have a triple repeating squeeze that gains two tricks, or after explaining that you have to rectify the count, have a squeeze that operates 4 tricks short of the count. If we're teaching Blackwood, show a hideous B'wood disaster from a world championship.

 

Right, rant over, what was the question again?

[Flame]

I think squeeses arent as big as people make them.

Most spqueeses you will find and execute at the table are simple suqeeses, and those are pretty easy to learn, ofcourse i will never think of teaching adv squeeses, i think not even double squeese.

[Finch]

I think squeeses arent as big as people make them.

Most spqueeses you will find and execute at the table are simple suqeeses, and those are pretty easy to learn, ofcourse i will never think of teaching adv squeeses, i think not even double squeese.

This is getting off-topic, but successful simple squeezes are, IMO, one of the rarest type. Double squeezes and strip (throw-in) squeezes are much more common. In essence, a simple squeeze requires the same hand to be guarding two suits; a double squeeze requires different hands to be guarding them which is intrinsically more likely.

 

Unsuccessful simple squeezes are very common!

[Chamaco]

"Replying to Topic for an intermidiate level course" is the name of the game. 

 

Sure, but then also your previous post that said

 

"Reading books is good, no doubt about it, but there is no substitute for practice, practice and more practice at the table. You don't improve your bidding, dummy play and defence, let alone win tournaments, in your study or in the library. "

 

was out of context.

 

The fact that practice is the best followup to the things we learn is certainly true, but since the title of the thread was to list "Topic for an intermidiate level course", one instructor cannot tell his students only "play play play": it simply is not a topic :)

 

The thread is on the specific topics to be taught by an instructor, and to my opinion Arclight listed many good references from which select topics and examples for the targeted audience, and he hit the nail on the head with respect to the title of the thread(although I agree with you about squeezes).

[Walddk]

OK, here is my list of topics if you want to teach intermediates:

 

1. Basic bidding.

2. Basic declarer play.

3. Basic defence.

 

After years of practice we can move on to

 

4. Advanced bidding.

5. Advanced declarer play.

6. Advanced defence.

 

I know, it's boring, but no one gets anything for nothing. It's damn hard work, and one has to go through all that boring stuff in order to learn the game. Then, and only then, will it be real fun.

 

Roland

[ArcLight]

>It became apparent pretty quickly that fewer than half of the attendees were able to grasp concepts like the ruffing finesse, loser-on-loser plays, or endplays

 

Then they are not intermediates. Those are not difficult plays "in general". meaning that a player may not always be able to execute them, but they are not complicated at all.

 

 

I think defense is linked to declarer play. If you are not very comfortable with a number of declarer techniques, it will hurt you on defense.

Examples:

 

1) Declarer is trying to perfom a trump reduction to shorten trumps and deal with a bad trump break. A defender who isn't familiar with trump Coups/Reductions will think he is making a good move by forcing declarer with the short suit (as opposed to attacking dummies entries).

 

2) defender will not play or unblock a high card, resulting in an endplay

 

 

 

 

>This is getting off-topic, but successful simple squeezes are, IMO, one of the rarest type. Double squeezes and strip (throw-in) squeezes are much more common. In essence, a simple squeeze requires the same hand to be guarding two suits; a double squeeze requires different hands to be guarding them which is intrinsically more likely.

 

Thats the opposite of what Mike Lawrence says in his Private Lessons software. And Terence Reese wrote something similar in his "Squeeze Play Made Easy". Just look for a case where you have 2 suits that are say 4-3+ and 4-3+ and you may have squeeze possibilities, at least consider them.

 

A direct quote form Mike Lawrences Private Lessons Vol. 1 on Squeeze Play:

"The fact is that the HUGE majority of squeezes are easy to find and easy to execute. The problem is that squeezes have always been discussed as if they were a sacred secret reserved for great players who then sent their deeds to newspaper columns where they could be recorded into history"

All the examples he gives are simple squeezes.

 

 

>Unsuccessful simple squeezes are very common!

 

Declarer may have made a mistake, or the squeeze may never have been on, but that was the only chance they had of making their contract, so they took it.

 

 

Having said all this, I would still save Squeeze Play for later.

[Chamaco]

A direct quote form Mike Lawrences Private Lessons Vol. 1 on Squeeze Play:

"The fact is that the HUGE majority of squeezes are easy to find and easy to execute.  The problem is that squeezes have always been discussed as if they were a sacred secret reserved for great players who then sent their deeds to newspaper columns where they could be recorded into history"

All the examples he gives are simple squeezes.

Arclight,

of course I agree on what you say, but I think that, if I had to pick priorities in improving card play techniques of beginer/intermediates, I would focus on other areas first, and I join the crowd of people who suggest focusing primarily on counting the hand.

 

Besides counting, I'd focus:

 

DECLARER PLAY

 

- first on card combinations and percentage plays, with special attention to the topic about combining chances.

- secondly, entry management

- thirdly, timing (the hardest of all, IMO)

 

DEFENSE

 

- thorough analysis of opening leads

- second hand plays and 3rd/4th hand plays (especially at the first trick): when to cover and when not

- inferences (from counting of course) and signals

- discarding technique (when opps run a suit): that's where many many tricks are blown everyday

 

===========

 

There are lots of nice topics in card play left out from the above, but I think a serious coverage of these would improve radically any serious student, if accompanied by practice at the table.

[Winstonm]

I still remember distictly the first time I thought through a hand and executed an enplay because of counting - it was in one of those local/national games that provided hand records and recaps and I remember how thrilled I felt in reading that recap and not only was my bidding reasoning duplicated virtual word for word but so was my play.

 

So definately teach counting, over and over and over and over and over - and let the student see/learn/use the results of this counting.

 

And if you want to get a little deeper, psychology teaches the most powerful reinforcer of all is intermittent positive reinforcement, so this means that after the basics of counting were learned that not every hand should be determined by a successful application - create a set of boards where count is critical and random - it would force the student to count every hand and get the Aha! ohly periodically - the same reinforcement the casinos use to make billions.

 

Winston

[GeeGee]

>It became apparent pretty quickly that fewer than half of the attendees were able to grasp concepts like the ruffing finesse, loser-on-loser plays, or endplays

 

Then they are not intermediates.  Those are not difficult plays "in general".  meaning that a player may not always be able to execute them, but they are not complicated at all.

 

Which brings up the question, what defines an intermediate player?

 

I agree that those who couldn't grasp the concepts were unlikely to progress. Those who could at least had 'a bridge mind' even if they may not easily initially apply the concepts to their own play.

 

However, I wonder whether an intermediate player would recognise a trump coup position as declarer, let alone in defence.

 

For those who know Bridgemaster, would the average intermediate player be happy at level (i) 2, (ii) 3, or (iii) 4?

 

Just trying to get an idea of how much does your average intermediate player already know.