fantoni-nunes system

[Free]

Does anybody have a FULL description of this system? I'm familiar with their convention card and notes, but I'm interested in how they continue their auctions, subsequent bidding, relays, whatever. Every interesting part of this system is also welcome, even specific bidding sequences you've seen, perhaps we can nit the system piece by piece ourselves :o

[Flame]

I wish i could help you, but i think those systems are a secret, i play boochi doubin 2c over 1M, and really wish i knew thier conntinuations because ours sux.

[EricK]

I wish i could help you, but i think those systems are a secret, i play boochi doubin 2c over 1M, and really wish i knew thier conntinuations because ours sux.

Are pairs allowed to keep their system secret?

 

What about full disclosure?

 

Eric

[LukeG]

I wish i could help you, but i think those systems are a secret, i play boochi doubin 2c over 1M, and really wish i knew thier conntinuations because ours sux.

The Bocchi-DuBoin 2♣ response to 1M is very similar to Garozzo's Ambra system, so you may want to check out those notes. See Dan Neill's web site for the info.

[Flame]

I wish i could help you, but i think those systems are a secret, i play boochi doubin 2c over 1M, and really wish i knew thier conntinuations because ours sux.

The Bocchi-DuBoin 2♣ response to 1M is very similar to Garozzo's Ambra system, so you may want to check out those notes. See Dan Neill's web site for the info.

played Ambra, its not the same thing, and even in ambra you dont have all the developments, it make sense to keep the responder making relays, and for someone who know relay system it might have been easy there because the normal relay rules works, but as i dont want to learn a the all relay prucuders we are in problem.

About disclosure, you dont have to give all your system. some world class partnerships system is known to be a big secret worth lots of money.

As much as i wish it was public, i think its understandable that its not, someone working years on a system doesnt have to give it to anyone for free.

[peefco]

I think bridge systems are not the same as a procedure to make a Coca Cola to keep them in secret. As Erik mentioned full disclosure in bridge is a law. I play many conventions ( BLK, multi or wilkosz, splinter, cue bids etc etc) and never paid for it. Now I became a little bit scary, maybe someone is going to charge me for useing these conventions (for 25 years it might be a lot B) ).

For 5 years I've been playing Polish system NS. NS means "Nasz System" what is very easy to translate to english as "Our System". Who was "Our" ? Top Polish pair in 70/80 Krzysztof Martens - Tomasz Przybora. They for sure were working on this system many years but I hope they let me play it for free. They made some money on me because I brought these book about that system ( I didnt need to) and I think thats the right way to make a money. Keeping system in secret make no sense to me. Poles call someone like that " gardener's dog" because cant eat fruits by himself but doesnt let to eat anyone else :)

[helium]

I think bridge systems are not the same as a procedure to make a Coca Cola to keep them in secret. As Erik mentioned full disclosure in bridge is a law. I play many conventions ( BLK, multi or wilkosz, splinter, cue bids etc etc) and never paid for it. Now I became a little bit scary, maybe someone is going to charge me for useing these conventions (for 25 years it might be a lot :( ).

For 5 years I've been playing Polish system NS. NS means "Nasz System" what is very easy to translate to english as "Our System". Who was "Our" ? Top Polish pair in 70/80 Krzysztof Martens - Tomasz Przybora. They for sure were working on this system many years but I hope they let me play it for free. They made some money on me because I brought these book about that system ( I didnt need to) and I think thats the right way to make a money. Keeping system in secret make no sense to me. Poles call someone like that " gardener's dog" because cant eat fruits by himself but doesnt let to eat anyone else :)

think u have to read the previus post more carefully.

[peefco]

Well, I did.

[the hog]

Totally agree Peefco.

[PriorKnowledge]

You do not have to publish a system to achieve full disclosure. You merely have to fully describe any bids that occur and what they mean.

 

As a simplistic example, playing standard Jacoby 2N, after a 3C shortness rebid, you would describe that bid as, "club shortness, no 2nd strong 5-card suit, nothing about hand strength."

 

To achieve full disclosure the opps do not have to know that a jump-rebid shows a 2nd strong 5-card suit.

 

A thorough kibber could reverse engineer the whole system, but it might take quite a few hands.

[1eyedjack]

You do not have to publish a system to achieve full disclosure. You merely have to fully describe any bids that occur and what they mean.

 

As a simplistic example, playing standard Jacoby 2N, after a 3C shortness rebid, you would describe that bid as, "club shortness, no 2nd strong 5-card suit, nothing about hand strength."

 

To achieve full disclosure the opps do not have to know that a jump-rebid shows a 2nd strong 5-card suit.

 

A thorough kibber could reverse engineer the whole system, but it might take quite a few hands.

That is fine so long as the methods are not so complex that advance notice is not required in order to develop a defence. (I think I got the right number of negatives in there!)

[Gerben47]

I just did a simulation and what I got scared me a bit. They have a mean opening of 2.15 which is much higher than standard systems (which have about 1.6). A mean opening of 2 means on average your opponents take away 2 bids if they are in 1st seat (i.e. open 1D). Most standard systems have an average below this but as I said, 2.15 is very high!

[Flame]

I just did a simulation and what I got scared me a bit. They have a mean opening of 2.15 which is much higher than standard systems (which have about 1.6). A mean opening of 2 means on average your opponents take away 2 bids if they are in 1st seat (i.e. open 1D). Most standard systems have an average below this but as I said, 2.15 is very high!

You mean you take 2.15 from your opponents ? or else i didnt understnad you.

If i understand right, do you consider a high mean as always good, always bad or usually good/usually bad ?

I think its usually good but not always.

In general i consider their system to a new age system, based on the consept of total tricks more then any other system i know. The main fault imo is the forcing 1 bids, but i cant say how bad this is.

[junyi_zhu]

I just did a simulation and what I got scared me a bit. They have a mean opening of 2.15 which is much higher than standard systems (which have about 1.6). A mean opening of 2 means on average your opponents take away 2 bids if they are in 1st seat (i.e. open 1D). Most standard systems have an average below this but as I said, 2.15 is very high!

You mean you take 2.15 from your opponents ? or else i didnt understnad you.

If i understand right, do you consider a high mean as always good, always bad or usually good/usually bad ?

I think its usually good but not always.

In general i consider their system to a new age system, based on the consept of total tricks more then any other system i know. The main fault imo is the forcing 1 bids, but i cant say how bad this is.

To me, this system is not playable for teamgame. Their 2 level opening can't guarantee 5 cards if you want to open AKxx AJTx x xxxx which is probably not a one level opening unless they distort their shape to open 1NT which I don't realy like.

Another thing is that they don't even have weak 2, without weak 2, that means SAQJxxx Hxx Dxxx Cxx can not be opened.

The third thing is that For some strong type of hands, they still have to open one level and rebid at two level, for which, other systems would simply make a jumpshift, and I've seen them miss a cold game about every 20 boards in this team olympic game. So I think overally, it's a match point system, it's pretty good at 2 level and 3 level bidding. But For game and slam bidding, I don't see it's good.

[Guest Jlall]

To me, this system is not playable for teamgame.

I think its probably playable since they won european championships and olympiad.

[inquiry]

To me, this system is not playable for teamgame.

I think its probably playable since they won european championships and olympiad.

Lol...

 

Imagine what they could do with a system good for team-games. :-)

[Flame]

I dont play weak two bids and i dont miss them, they are too rare.

I dont think this system is a mp system more then its good for imps.

[Antoine Fourrière]

In my view, their 2♣ opening has the advantage of showing real clubs as opposed to 1♣, and their 2♥ and 2♠ openings often find a playable contract without much description.

But I don't see the point of opening 2♦ instead of 1♦ with 10-13. There is no economical relay, 1♦ already shows a real suit, and you can always devise something for the diamond powerhouses, such as 2♦ weak in a major or strong in diamonds, or 1♦ forcing one round with a 2♦ response for the 0-4 HCP hands.

[MickyB]

To me, this system is not playable for teamgame.

I think its probably playable since they won european championships and olympiad.

Yes, this baffles me. I feel certain that their opening structure is poor, yet they keep winning everything! Maybe they have just been lucky so far :)

[junyi_zhu]

To me, this system is not playable for teamgame.

I think its probably playable since they won european championships and olympiad.

Well, with so strong teammates, two copies of myself can also win those things.

[Guest Jlall]

junyi they won the round of 16 match against USA (these 2 teams considered the strongest) by 11 if i remember correctly. so if you play within 11 imps over a long match as well as fantoni-nunes do you are one of the best in the world :)

[twcho]

Yes, for sure I also witnessed F-N missed some very good game contracts. This does not prove that they play poorly (I also witness B-D and L-V bid to slam lacking two aces in the same round and they were beaten each time. Does that prove they are lousy pairs?)

 

I think the fair way to measure their performance is to look at the pairs' individual score. We can judge from their butler score in the round robin that they are actually by far the most consistent Italian pairs. They are way up in the score with 1.07 imps while B-D is only 0.52 and L-V only 0.41. Moreover, they are the runaway leader in their strong group (their group consists of the final champion, the 1st runner up and 2nd runner up).

 

Further to strengthen the fact they did play very good is that in their round of 16 vs USA, it was because the two sessions that they played did they win over USA (the two sessions they participated Italy won 27:4 and 54:17 which is the final set and they overtook USA as the result of this set)

[twcho]

Among Fantoni and Nunes, Fantoni was being applaused by the commentators such as Bart Bramley as "Deep Fantoni". We have witnessed the excellent declarer plays by Fantoni to bring in some very difficult contracts. If I should label one player as the best player in this Olympic championship, Fantoni is definitely my choice.

[junyi_zhu]

junyi they won the round of 16 match against USA (these 2 teams considered the strongest) by 11 if i remember correctly. so if you play within 11 imps over a long match as well as fantoni-nunes do you are one of the best in the world :angry:

Well, is this USA team the best of the world? I really doubt so. Even China's team

almost blitzed them at round robin stage.

Also, two copies of myself mean no misunderstandings in bidding and defensive

signals, that's a huge edge. You lose a match usually not because opps play

too well, usually because you have had too many misunderstandings in your partnership.

The third thing, I have probably the one of the best 2/1 systems in the world.

The last thing, I might not be the best now, but who knows in ten or twentry years what will hapeen.

 

Still, they win many events doesn't mean their system is superio. If a system has

many holes, it can't last long in my humble opinion.

[pclayton]

Wow - I can't resist. :D

 

Per Jun-yi:

 

Well, is this USA team the best of the world? I really doubt so. Even China's team

almost blitzed them at round robin stage.

___________________________________________

 

I think you can look at a lot of the RR results and draw a lot of erroneous conclusions. The fact that China had a good match with them over 20 boards doesn't mean squat. See how they do over 120 and call me.

___________________________________________

 

Also, two copies of myself mean no misunderstandings in bidding and defensive

signals, that's a huge edge. You lose a match usually not because opps play

too well, usually because you have had too many misunderstandings in your partnership.

___________________________________________

 

Hogwash! If you have ever practiced with your favorite partner, he is making a call looking at his own hand. You make calls looking at your hand. Whenever my pard and I have a mix-up, I can't tell you how many times I've said, "Your interpretation looks correct from YOUR side".

 

So, just becuase you are bidding with a clone of yourself doesn't mean that you are immune to misunderstandings.

 

Even Meckwell has bidding misunderstandings; its impossible, not to mention impractical to have agreements for every conceivable situation.

 

___________________________________________

 

The third thing, I have probably the one of the best 2/1 systems in the world.

 

___________________________________________

 

I will look forward to the book with interest. :angry:

 

___________________________________________

 

 

The last thing, I might not be the best now, but who knows in ten or twentry years what will hapeen.

___________________________________________

 

Well, I hope you get involved in cloning research, since you will need a team of 5 copies of yourself to accomplish this, because, with this attitude, you rate to have a tough time getting teammates.

 

___________________________________________

 

Still, they win many events doesn't mean their system is superio.

 

___________________________________________

 

I'd say winning an Olympiad is about the only proof I need.

 

___________________________________________

 

If a system has many holes, it can't last long in my humble opinion.

 

___________________________________________

 

You and I sure have a different idea about what 'humble' means. :D