System restrictions in the US

[fred]

The problem is describing what makes systems simple and what makes them complex. Simple systems can get complex as well, you can start with a basic 2/1 scheme and adopt lots of conventions, relays, transfers, slam bidding treatments,... Do we still have a simple system?

Not according to my way of thinking. For me "complex" is mostly a function of, well, complexity. Complexity is not directly-related to how closely the opening bid structure mirrors "standard". That being said, I suspect that for most there is a correlation between departure from standard and the tendency to introduce complexity.

 

What I basically meant was that pretty much everyone learned some standard system first. Then we saw other, more complex systems which had (or seemed to have) high potential. Some of us got interested in those, like you (apparently) and me, and made the step to switch to such a system.

Agree. The problem is that most of us (and this includes me) take the plunge before they really have any clue as to how to play. In my experience, unless the person in question is gifted in terms of natural talent (I don't consider myself to be) or unless that person is willing to spend some time in a "back to nature" phase, the chances are that a premature switch will effectively kill whatever potential the person might have had in terms of ever becoming a highly-effective player.

 

And yes, I do understand that for some people learning complex systems is more important than becoming a highly-effective player.

 

In my experience complex systems take away some of the judgement you need playing simple systems. Using correct judgement in a simple system gives more satisfaction than letting the system do it's job on its own. If you failed however, it's your own fault and you can learn from it, while if you play a complex system you can usually blame the system more easily.

Agree, but you need certain bridge skills in order to decide whether to blame the system or yourself, especially since the system gives you an excuse to avoid blaming your own poor judgment. If the system is really to blame and you are willing and able to recognize it, you need a different set of bridge skills in order to do something sensible about it. If you are really to blame and you are willing and able to recognize it, you need yet another set of bridge skills to learn from your mistakes.

 

In my opinion it is important, at least in terms of becoming a highly-effective player, to develop these bridge skills. IMO keeping the bidding simple and focusing on the basics is a good way to do that.

 

An analogy that you might appreciate: I have recently become interested in pool (which you might call billiards) so I hired a pro to give me lessons. It is naturally tempting to learn tricky shots because they are so much fun to execute. But my pro insists that I spend a great deal of time focusing on the basics - things like how to hold the cue, how to swing, and how to aim, how to hit at various speeds, etc.

 

If/when I master these skills, I expect we will move on to lessons about tricky shots, but to focus on such things before I am proficient at simply sinking balls will be counter-productive with respect to my goal of eventually becoming an good player (at least according to my pro and I have no doubt that he is right).

 

Note however that I have another f2f partner who likes to experiment a lot. We now switched from natural to precision a few months ago, because we both think it's more fun during the auctions. The system is more complex for sure. I heard you also gave precision a try a while ago, so I guess it's safe to say the attraction to complexity isn't completely gone. ;)

Yes, I enjoy playing a sophisticated version of Precision with some partners and the version of 2/1 I play with Brad is certainly "complex", but I already know how to sink balls :)

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[Zelandakh]

In my experience complex systems take away some of the judgement you need playing simple systems. Using correct judgement in a simple system gives more satisfaction than letting the system do it's job on its own. If you failed however, it's your own fault and you can learn from it, while if you play a complex system you can usually blame the system more easily.

I think this statement is particularly sage in this thread. My experience is that to play a "simple" system at a high level requires world class judgement. For the majority of players around playing a system with more coded responses and thereby fewer judgement decisions means that they make fewer mistakes. Not only that but I have found that the judgement decisions I need to make playing a complex system (strong club relay) versus a very simple system (Benji Acol with almost zero gadgets) are often quite different in nature. Which decision types are easier to make will naturally depend on the individual player and how they tend to think. So while I agree with Fred that a natural system such as 2/1 will often be perfect for top-level players, I certainly do not agree that that makes it right for everyone and that straightjacketing weaker players into systems with which they are less comfortable is not only detrimental to the game but, worse, unfair to those players whose mentality is suited to such an artificial style of bidding.