Jump to content

Looking for Non-Natural system players


Recommended Posts

I hope we can do it again. Be better prepared:

 

- over opponents opening methods and

- handling opponents intervention.

 

That is why I would like to see the systems posted here.

 

One of the pairs came in as substitute to replace one of the pairs who were scheduled to play, and that was perhaps part of the problem because they were unprepared for the match.

 

Our match was clashing with a Topflight Special featuring Zia Mahmood, which is why we did not attract as many spectators as we might have done. Hopefully next time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

One can kibitz the match, even after it is over.. since it is there on myhands site. I was unable to attend (and if I could have, I would have kibitzed Zia... sorry guys, let's be truthful.... you would too... ).

 

So far, I have only looked at the table free and hgorthar played at. What this showed was that if you play a big club (or diamond) system, you need to discuss your treatment to deal with competition. The match was rather one sided, but I don't think it proved one system inferior or superior, not yet at least. I look forward to the next match, and hope to be able to watch it live rather than in replay...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to start playing NTC with misho (it is his home grown system, available on Dan Neill's webpage). It is based upon a Romex type 1NT opening as the big hand. It uses 2C and 2D opening bids as DONT-like weak opening bids. We use transfer and transfer advances in competition and OUTSIDE of competition too.

 

Of course, if no one is interested in playing against this I will be glad to just watch you other guys.

 

Ben

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to start playing NTC with misho (it is his home grown system, available on Dan Neill's webpage). It is based upon a Romex type 1NT opening as the big hand. It uses 2C and 2D opening bids as DONT-like weak opening bids. We use transfer and transfer advances in competition and OUTSIDE of competition too.

 

Of course, if no one is interested in playing against this I will be glad to just watch you other guys.

 

Ben

Doesn't present anything too nasty and I already have a good defense against the 2 openings...

 

Amusing to see you playing what is (essentially) the Frelling 2 opening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't present anything too nasty and I already have a good defense against the 2 openings...

 

Amusing to see you playing what is (essentially) the Frelling 2 opening

Well.. good to see we don't scare you... maybe we can match up with you and you can play your defense against us. While I like NTC, I prefer my natural 2/1 ultra light opening system, but i am a romex player from years and years ago, so the foring 1NT opening bid is fine for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good points

 

and as i said, it was a learning experience.  and the majority of the problems we had were dealing with the forcing pass in the second round, which we were completely unprepared for.

One last comment

 

As I noted earlier in the thread, I think that its a mistake to expect the opponents to provide good defenses to their own methods. I very much prefer structures based on advanced pre-disclosure...

I don't mind providing suggested defenses to our systemic openings (I was on the pair playing the forcing pass system). Our suggested defenses are not overly complex and if anything they err on the side of simplicity. I'm sure they aren't the optimal defense. I don't even know what the optimal defense is given that I've never played against my own system! I also don't mind posting the system beforehand and letting people devise their own defenses.

 

I think it is important to differentiate between problems with our style versus problems with our system. Our style as enabled by our system is to get into the auction quickly and often with limited bidding and to get to the final contract quickly. This often leaves the opponents not knowing who has the majority of the points and the degree of our fit. This approach increases the amount of times people don't compete when they should and do compete when they shouldn't. My opinion at the time was that were some problems dealing with our system itself but that our style is tougher to deal with than the system itself. Then again, I wasn't on the other side so I'd be interested in hearing their opinion. I'd have to look at the hands again but I don't remember thinking to myself during the match that confusion over our system won us anything.

 

Todd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to look at the hands again but I don't remember thinking to myself during the match that confusion over our system won us anything.

 

Todd

I didnt watch the play but from what i understand here, you won and also free and Richard won, i dont know the players too well but from what i know you are just better player then the other team and also better pairs since you play more together, maybe it was a bad idea to put you on the same team. If the turney was swiched teams then sorry for my stupid comment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know, it looks like this was supposed to be "let the air out" and good, plain, serious fun. It certainly won't tell anybody what the best system is (although it would certainly show holes to cover). I don't think anyone's going to complain about lopsided results, unless they were system forgets (either good or bad).

 

I thought about suggesting me partner and I as a pairing, again for the fun value. I already know how good our system is (we'd play stone-age EHAA) and we'd probably get hammered by the opps (because they're better than we are). I didn't, because I've been out of practise with it, and organizing has been much harder since I moved away and my job is almost normal working hours (pd is a night owl, even more than I). Of course, the fact that we'd rather be playing MP than IMPs was a factor, too.

 

But we've been pretty effective against "weird systems" by using our defence to standard systems - "play EHAA". I expect that's partly because most WS players we've run across don't handle aggressive interference well - they just don't get that much of it - and that it would work significantly less well against the other pairs here. Would be fun to see it proven, though, still. And I think everyone who played had fun, and got to play their system.

 

Non-ACBLers can stop reading here :-)

 

And especially they could play their system without 26 boards of bellyaching from the opponents. As I've said before, with one exception, which I have bid exactly once, stone-age EHAA is playable on the *Limited* Convention Chart - the one suitable for 0-20 MP games (that exception is P-1o; 2NT showing 4441, singleton "o", 10-12 HCP). But if it's "different", it must be illegal, right? Especially if you Pre-Alert ("Why are to telling us this now, instead of just Alerting when the time comes?" or "You shouldn't be allowed to do that." (optional addition: Director!))

 

Wish I hadn't missed the show, though.

Michael.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...