gwnn Posted April 15, 2010 Report Share Posted April 15, 2010 Does anyone know where the notes for this system are? I could only find their CC. Their opening structure looks *much* more intelligent than any other canape system I found*! I heard somewhere that it's readily available somewhere but apparently not to me. I would prefer if there were no Santa Claus references on the website. *vs Caroline Club they retain one weak two and don't open 1♦ on balanced hands anymore. Also forcing NT and 2/1 GF sounds better than the relatively contrived 2/1 structure in Caroline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JanM Posted April 15, 2010 Report Share Posted April 15, 2010 As far as I know, there is nothing published on this system. You can find a more current convention card by looking at Ekeblad-Rubin in the Senior Bowl in Brazil (unfortunately, when I went to the ECATS site to get the URL for this, there was an error), but here's the Ekeblad-Granovetter card from Beijing, which is also more recent than Sukoneck-Ekeblad. For the USBF System Summary Form, see Ekeblad-Weichsel from last year's USBC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PrecisionL Posted April 22, 2010 Report Share Posted April 22, 2010 I have been following Ekeblad - Sukoneck for some time now as their system evolves. They were in BW Challenge the Champs in Jan 91 and Feb - Mar 93 playing Neapolitan type responses to Strong Club and canape and various 2 openings to cover gaps in the system. A more recent BW appearance may have happened, I am behind in my indexing CTC. I have all their convention cards and notes, but nothing else has appeared on the web as far as I know. We (KeyLime and I) use Sabine Aukens' approach to a Strong Club (I Love This Game). We gave up control responses years ago and recently (2 years) we even gave up Beta asks to transfer positives. http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/CarolineClub...eckEkelblad.pdf Ekeblad - Rubin in CTC: July - Aug 2007: Big Club with transfer & other artificial responses, weak NT, natural suit openings from 1♦ to 2♣ with a canape tendency, and specialized responding techniques after each. Some 2-bids help to cover weak spots in the one-bid structure (analogously to Flannery): 2♦ shows a minimum-range opening bid with 5+♥ and 4+♦, 2♥ a similar hand with 5+♥ and 4+♣. Constructive bidding often uses relays: cheap, non-descriptive bids that ask partner to continue telling about his hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.