Which system would you teach a new player

[EarlPurple]

1. I agree with teaching them to play fairly early on. And that includes defence, of course. If you start teaching them to bid, they will never get to play and will get totally bored of the game.

 

2. Bidding should be simplified. I think SAYC, 2/1 and even Acol are too complicated. Simplify them. But tell them the system is simplified, and also tell them that there's more than one system, and more than one way of playing these things so they are ready to change later on when they are more advanced. It's like teaching a tennis player - you teach them simple forehand and backhand shots - they can learn to put on spin later and they might know that such shots exist, but tell them not to try them yet.

 

3. Competitive auctions are very important. Get them ready for competition. The simplest way to start is that all doubles at the 1 and 2 level are take-out (they can learn the exceptions later), all doubles higher up are penalty except for double of an opening pre-empt of 3 of a suit. Teach them the law of total-tricks and to support with support.

 

I have found that beginners have trouble giving preference to their partners. An auction like this:

 

1♠ pass pass 2♦

2♥ pass ?

 

A responder with nothing will feel they can't bid with only 1 point or whatever so they pass.

 

Another common mistake by many players is bidding their hand twice. That includes showing weakness twice. For example:

 

2♣(1) pass 2♦(2) pass (1) strong but not game-forcing (2) negative response

2♠(3) pass ? Natural with spades, non-forcing.

 

Responders will not understand that 5 points is a good hand in this sequence. Opener chose to open 2♣ because he was worried about missing game if he opened 1♠, i.e. he knew there might be game on if partner only has 5 points.

 

Beginners can even do this:

 

2NT(1) pass 3NT pass (1)20-22

4NT

 

To me I think these errors show a lack of common sense, not a lack of experience/knowledge, and those who continually make this kind of error will never make it in the game and should give up now. But I know they want to encourage everyone to play, no matter what standard they are capable of achieving.

[xx1943]

HI Earl,

 

100% agree. :) I never saw a better description of this issue.

You write down in a pefect manner, what I'm always try to teach my mentees in the BIL.

 

:) Do you allow me your post to copy, paste and distribute to my BIL-mentees. :)

I'd be very happy, :rolleyes: if this is possible, because my English is too bad :unsure: :o :unsure: to write such an excellent post.

 

 

Many thanks

 

Sincerly

 

Al = xx1943

[Gerben47]

Probably the best system to start with is a system without convention, something like this:

http://www.tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de/~di...idge/bignt.html

 

Agree that you need to tell about the existence of different systems and all. 21+ hands are very rare so don't worry about those too much. If it comes up tell about a convention to bid 2♣ over 1NT with 0-3 HCP.

 

Get people to play as soon as possible and worry about the well-accepted bidding methods later.

Maybe a Fantoni-Nunes type opening structure would function even better but then you would need to introduce Stayman and such.

(For those who not know what this is: 1-level 14+ natural, 2-level 10-13 natural, weak NT)

[dogsbreath]

hi ..

Real Acol (ie NOT benji ) is ridiculously difficult for beginners to learn, since it depends so much on inferences that you cannot easily explain to them. 2/1 probably similar since y need a raft of gadgets to play it sensibly. Benji Acol nearly as bad as SAYC except it got a weak NT. So what's left?..

.. first system I learned was Neapolitan Club .. (& it never done me no harm :) ) ..which is slightly easier than 'An Introduction to Topology'.. so what else? ..precision ? sayc looks easy to start with even though it's horrible...

Rgds Dog.

:)

[EricK]

Something like this seems simple to explain, simple to understand and suitable for people starting out in the game:

 

Balanced hands:

 

13-15 1NT

16-18 1x followed by 1NT, where x is the lower (or only) 4 card suit

(possible exception: open 1♣ on 4333 with weak 4 card major)

19-20 1x followed by 2NT, where x is the lower (or only) 4 card suit

(possible exception: open 1♣ on 4333 with weak 4 card major)

21-22 2NT

23+ 2♣

 

Unbalanced hands:

 

Rule of 21

Open longest suit

(possible exception: weak hands with 5 card suit higher than 6 card suit)

Open higher of 2 equally long suits (except for 4441 types)

 

Responses:

 

Bid a 4 card major (good 5HCP +) or

Raise opener's suit (only needs three cards to raise to 2 level even in a minor) or

Bid 1NT (6-bad 9)

2/1 needs at least good 9 HCP, if it bypasses 4cM then GF

 

Subsequent bidding is essentially natural (strong balanced hands always rebid NT at the appropriate level unless responder's 1M bid has uncovered a major fit)

 

Obviously the details need to be fleshed out a bit more, but I'm sure you get the idea.

 

Eric

[EarlPurple]

Is your system 4-card or 5-card majors?

 

I have noticed a popular method nowadays:

 

1NT pass 2♣ pass

2♦ pass 2♥

 

traditionally used to be 4-5 in spades/hearts but now is often played as 4-4. This means you'll sometimes play in 4-3 fits but will not miss the 4-4 major fit when responder lacks the points for 2NT and has both majors.

 

Now, whatever the merits of this over the traditional 4-5, is this something you would teach beginners? I think maybe - once you teach them Stayman they will use it at the wrong time anyway. But then I think maybe not - I don't think beginners should be trained to play in 4-3 fits. I prefer not to play in them.

 

1m pass 1M pass

2M

 

3 card support or 4? I prefer 4, on the whole. 3 with a side-suit singleton, horrible hand like this:

 

Kxx x AKxx Kxxxx

 

1♣ pass 1♠ pass

?

 

yeah, of course I raise to 2♠. My only worry would be that I've underbid, a bit.

 

Kxx xx AQxx Kxxx

 

not this time. It's a balanced hand and a 1NT rebid for me. If I get another bid I can show spade support now.

 

There is actually a system whereby:

 

1♣ promises a 4-card major

1♦ denies a 4-card major.

 

I'm pretty sure it's that way round. Should be anyway, as you can now use 1♦ response to 1♣ to ask for the major. So obviously a 1M response shows 5. I guess the rest of the time we use 1NT response for 6-10 and 2m for 11+.

 

Might be the simplest system to teach beginners...