Orient Bidding system

[mojila]

Hi,

Yesterday I came across Orient Bidding system on Brigeguy.com. Though very interesting How one can open 1 Notrum with single,dbl or three voids

(20+ Points suggested 1N opening). Does anybody has Exposure with playing this system.

 

mojila

[Vampyr]

I have my doubts about whether this is a playable system. If you are interested in artificial 1NT openings, try Romex.

[blackshoe]

The information on Bridgeguys about this Orient system does not fill me with confidence. There are, OTOH, several books on Romex which lay out the system pretty well - including the Dynamic NT (19-20 balanced, six controls or (18)19-21 unbalanced, 5+ controls, 4-5 losers). The sequence 1x-1y-1NT then shows 12-16 HCP. Two Way Checkback (2C with invitational hands, 2D with GF hands) allows opener to refine his point range (12-14 or 15-16) and show 3 card support for responder's major or 4 cards in the other major. Note: 2C is an asking bid; it is not a relay to 2D. That's a different "Two Way Checkback". :-)

[Zelandakh]

One could make the same observation about Standard - how can someone open 2♣ without any clubs? Strong artificial openings are just that - they show strength and do not say anything about the denomination being named.

[mojila]

Main concept is in system .... Bases for that system... I just read and Article mentions regarding usability and sustainibilty.

"how can you open without any club argument is same as How can you open 1!D or 1!C with 2 cards .. "

The above quote is depends on what system you are using. Articles conclusion Bridge authority .. that surprised and asked here

[nige1]

Hi, Yesterday I came across Orient Bidding system on Brigeguy.com. Though very interesting How one can open 1 Notrum with single,dbl or three voids (20+ Points suggested 1N opening). Does anybody has Exposure with playing this system.

I've played simple systems where 1N (any shape) is the strong bid. e.g.

• 1♣ = ♣ or 12-14 flat or 18-19 flat.
• 1♦ = ♦ or 15-17 flat or 20-21 flat.
• 1♥/1♠ = Nat 5+ cards.
• 1N = Art 22+ HCP flat or game-force.
• 2♣/2♦/2♥/2♠ = Nat weak.

You soon miss a natural non-forcing limited 1N opener, a frequent and effective bid :(

[guido]

Hi,

Yesterday I came across Orient Bidding system on Brigeguy.com. Though very interesting How one can open 1 Notrum with single,dbl or three voids

(20+ Points suggested 1N opening). Does anybody has Exposure with playing this system.

 

mojila

 

There is nothing new about using 1NT as a strong artificial opening. The Vienna System was used by the players who wont eh first world championship (in 1937 if I recall correctly). 1NT was strong, artificial but less than a game force (2 of a suit openings were natural, game forcing and asking bids).

 

Arno (aka Little Roman) used 1NT as it's only strong opening. It was used by one pair who won quite a few World Championships in the 60s

 

As mentioned, Romex uses 1NT as an artificial intermediate hand (too strong for 1 of a suit; too weak for a game force.

[blackshoe]

As mentioned, Romex uses 1NT as an artificial intermediate hand (too strong for 1 of a suit; too weak for a game force.

Rosenkranz, in one of his books, described the Dynamic NT as showing (unbalanced) hands that in SA or 2/1 would open at the one level and then reverse or jump shift. As does Precision, Romex treats reverses and jump shifts by opener as shape showing, albeit maximum in points for the one level opening (in Romex, this is 17-18, compared to 14-15 in Precision).

[mojila]

Though I will have to read paper again ...

- Points showing artificial limit suit opening bids (any shape)

- 1N Any distribution not necessarily balanced

- Combined strength count mandatory for playable contract arrival

- Single yardstick to evaluate hand (both balanced an unbalanced hands)- evaluate hand after each bid.

 

Respond-er knows required points for game-slam zone- or partial immediately... and is also responsible for placing playable contract.

[mojila]

can Both partners HCP combined fulfill slam or GS ..

we all know it has short comings..

Which system has one yardstick to evaluate worth of hand..

[mojila]

There is nothing new about using 1NT as a strong artificial opening. The Vienna System was used by the players who wont eh first world championship (in 1937 if I recall correctly). 1NT was strong, artificial but less than a game force (2 of a suit openings were natural, game forcing and asking bids).

 

Arno (aka Little Roman) used 1NT as it's only strong opening. It was used by one pair who won quite a few World Championships in the 60s

 

As mentioned, Romex uses 1NT as an artificial intermediate hand (too strong for 1 of a suit; too weak for a game force.

[mojila]

There is nothing new about using 1NT as a strong artificial opening. The Vienna System was used by the players who wont eh first world championship (in 1937 if I recall correctly). 1NT was strong, artificial but less than a game force (2 of a suit openings were natural, game forcing and asking bids).

 

Arno (aka Little Roman) used 1NT as it's only strong opening. It was used by one pair who won quite a few World Championships in the 60s

 

As mentioned, Romex uses 1NT as an artificial intermediate hand (too strong for 1 of a suit; too weak for a game force.

 

It is not regarding 1N forcing opening.. but very first opening... Partner knows your (points+ distribution)

Many system has incorporated artificial bids.

[PhilKing]

Sounds awesome.

[Vampyr]

It is not regarding 1N forcing opening.. but very first opening... Partner knows your (points+ distribution)

Many system has incorporated artificial bids.

 

The problem with systems like this is that partner does not know anything about your distribution. That is why these points-based opening systems are so bad; it is vital to exchange shape information as early as possible in the auction. And if the opponents preempt, you may never find out anything about partner's shape.

[TylerE]

One could make the same observation about Standard - how can someone open 2♣ without any clubs? Strong artificial openings are just that - they show strength and do not say anything about the denomination being named.

 

The key difference, is that generally 2♣ isn't a contract you actually want to play, whereas 1N frequently is, and 1N actually has a fairly serious pre-emptive effect, even if it isn't normally thought of in those terms, so 1a-1b-1N auction may leave you much worse off than those opening 1N.

[mojila]

Combined strength count is the brain of the Orient Bidding System. In association with artificial limit opening

bids and formula style of bidding, it provides a unique opportunity for precise and targeted bidding by

transforming the complex art of bidding into a simple scientific process. It eliminates the age-old controversy as

to what should and should not have been the correct bid thereby fostering greater partnership harmony.

 

Reason For Combined strength count is....

 

- The playable contract level is directly related to the combined strength holding. Bidding without the

knowledge of combined strength count is like sailing on a dark night without the North Star or a lighthouse to

serve as direction giving guide.

 

Combined Strength Count

 

- Knowledge of first round combined strength count allows a partnership to assess in the very first round of

bidding whether there is a part score, game or a slam.

 

- Combined strength count enables a partnership to know when to, and when not to apply the brakes.

 

- Combined strength count places a partnership in a commanding position with powers to dictate their own

terms. If you know the combined strength then the opponents can neither steal a contract from you nor can they

push you overboard. You know exactly where you stand, what you have to do and what you are capable of

doing.

 

The Orient Bidding System’s opening bids are artificial and point showing with a very narrow margin. Once

the opener shows the full strength of the hand through the opening bid, the responder counts his/her high card

points and adds to the minimum points shown by the opening bid. The total, baring extra values (one singleton/

void), shows the full strength of the combined hands. The responder then takes a decision as regards the

approximate playable level on the basis of the Combined Strength Scale.

 

I put this from bridgeguy site where I read above Paragraphs. One bid showing Openers Total points (any Distribution)

Responder is deciding contract level.

[Vampyr]

If you like the system so much, play it. With a bit of luck it will catch on and all of my opponents will start playing it.

[TylerE]

That approach might have worked 50 years ago. These days those pesky opponents have learned how to overcall a strong opening.

[PhilKing]

WHY IS NOBODY LISTENING TO HIM?

[mojila]

Hi Vampyre,

 

Author had given test to this system was in England Clubs. Also whether 50 years ago or now, I would say every system evolved and vanished or improved version

came in what is mentioned in encyclopedia.

 

Those who say First bid shows only points are wrong. Opening bid is working points+Distribution e.g. 1!S says have total points barring (shortness)18-19

suite will be told later. Responding partner on that knowledge answers Positive if 25-25 condition to fit. if has 7-8 points. if not 25-26 gives negative

response.

 

I play 2/1 and sayc there is nothing wrong exploring advantageous system. Like Big Bang

 

mojila

[Zelandakh]

Those who say First bid shows only points are wrong. Opening bid is working points+Distribution

Showing only points and showing only Milton Work points are not necessarily the same thing. The opening shows only a measure of general strength without any indication as to shape. This is the point being made.

 

I am not sure where the reference to Big Bang comes in. As far as I remember that is a natural-ish 2/1 system with a few bels and whistles, not related to the Orient system at all. Modern systems tend to emphasise showing shape even where they use a strict strength division such as with Precision. The point here is that strength-showing calls tend to provide some purpose within the overall system to make the shape-showing more efficient, rather than the strength-showing being the primary purpose.

 

This is basically where Orient goes wrong and it makes for an inefficient and non-homogenous system. I agree that there is nothing wrong in trying to find a better system, I do this myself. I just do not believe that the Orient system is the right direction for making serious improvements on where bidding theory currently stands.