Jump to content

Weirdest/worst agreements you've encountered at the table?


Recommended Posts

They were too happy to know opener's HCPs very accurately when they opened 2X. :blink:

Offer them this:

 

All openings up to 2S are artificial:

 

1: 8-10 HCP

1: 11-13 HCP

1:14-16 HCP

1: 17-19 HCP

1NT: 20-22 HCP

2: 23-25 HCP

2: 26-28 HCP

2: 29-31 HCP

2: 32-34 HCP

 

All openings above two spades are transfers, 0-7 HCP, (6)7+ trumps at the three level, more at higher levels.

 

If you have more than 34 points, just bid six (or seven) of something.

 

This should result in a large number of lovely bottoms. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1: 8-10 HCP

1: 11-13 HCP

1:14-16 HCP

1: 17-19 HCP

1NT: 20-22 HCP

2: 23-25 HCP

2: 26-28 HCP

2: 29-31 HCP

2: 32-34 HCP

If you just add 2 points to each (1 is 11-13 etc.) I met someone who played exactly that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is another crazy agreement from our local club played by one of the pairs.

 

Over 1M, a jump to 3M = slam interest!

Over 1M, a jump to 4M = a limit raise (10-11 HCP)!

They don’t have any method for being able to show a hand with long trump support but low in HCP.

 

I’m not kidding you. This really is their agreement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is not uncommon and was part of the Goren system.

Yes. More generally, old (1960 or earlier I think) bridge books are full of strong jumps in suits already bid. For example

 

1-1

1-3*

(*forcing)

 

Presumably, limit bids just didn't exist back then. Responder either forces to game or signs off at his second turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1M - 3M as forcing raise is also suggested by Alvin Roth in picture bidding,

he moves lots of things in the forcing NT.

 

I dont think, playing the jump raise as forcing is a bad agreement, you could

move the limit raise to 2NT, helping you with game tries, you have no game try,

when it goes 1M - 3M.

This may espesially be useful, if you dont require 4 card support for the limit

raise, e.g. you want to keep open the option of playing in 3NT.

 

The point is of course, that the 3M bid is a game forcing raise, that does not

show add. SI - you will alway have SI as responder, if you have opening strength

and a fit for openers major.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? Are they playing Canape or something?

No, they just recognise that beginners have a lot of trouble understanding (and recognising) reverses, so if they don't treat them differently from other suit rebids they gain some advantages at the price of sometimes getting too high on unsuitable hands.

 

In this way they never miss a fit in opener's second suit, and a rebid of opener's first suit absolutely guarantees six cards.

 

Eventually learners will reach the stage where they wonder why they are getting too high on minimum two-suited openers, and when they do they can be told to "lie" on such hands - ie they will understand why reverses & high-reverses should show extra.

 

On several occasions I've seen players who've progressed from ARBC to play in county or national events, with "we don't play reverses" written on their convention card. On one of those occasions the player said that he didn't really understand what it meant, but someone told him to write it on so that the other players wouldn't get annoyed with them.

 

I think it's a method of teaching that has a lot to commend it - and ARBC is far and away the most successful teaching club in the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, they just recognise that beginners have a lot of trouble understanding (and recognising) reverses

They certainly will if they are never taught the difference! Honestly, I have taught many people how to bid in a simple Acol system and have never run into anyone who was unable to grasp this. Bidding after a reverse is a different matter though. I see even very good players getting into a mess on these auctions without decent agreements in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I have taught many people how to bid in a simple Acol system and have never run into anyone who was unable to grasp this.

Me too (using the concept of "the barrier", which I think is better for explaining than the odd-sounding "reverse"). They always seem to understand it when it's explained to them. And how often do they recognise it when it comes up? Never!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never used the term "reverse" either. I simply used a priority system and "2 of a higher ranking suit" was not on the list for weak hands. Therefore such hands automatically defaulted to "2 of original suit". Sometimes people asked why they could not bid the higher ranking suit; then I explained about it pushing to the 3 level. Mostly they just followed the crib sheets though and then internalised them as the concepts became familiar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

A couple of days ago at the club my RHO opened 2, which was alerted as "Flannery": 5+ hearts, 4+ spades, 12+ HCP no maximum strength (I asked). Over that LHO bid 2NT inquiry and RHO replied 4 which shows precisely 4=5=4=0 and nothing about strength.

Probably not the worst ever but I rarely see anything other than Israeli Standard where I play, so I found it noteworthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bunch of us in the bar after a Sectional listened to one pair discuss Smolen at length and decide to play Reverse Smolen.

 

They put it on their card as such and prepared to alert it properly when someone told them "That's Standard American".

Along those lines: (1M) 3M requesting partner to bid 3NT with a stopper because we have a long solid minor was dubbed "Reverse Treadwell", after he jokingly said his partnership agreement was that it showed a stopper so partner could bid 3NT with a long solid minor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know someone who (in a non-ACBL-sanctioned game, of course) played 0-40 Flannery. For fun, obviously. I think they took it out once into the club (as 10-40 Flannery, to be GCC).

 

I know a pair that played (and properly Alerted and explained!) 2 as "11-15, 5-4 *either way* in the majors.

 

I played 2 Minor Suit Flannery in my "twist the GCC so hard it screams" system.

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...