German Moscito Examples....

[luis]

Well I'll try to produce something for our fellow students/friends.

Can't promise anything but I will try....

Maybe the basic structure....

[hrothgar]

I will note the following:

 

I don't like the structure that Luis proposed.

After a 1NT opening, it is impossible to play in 2C.

I consider this a significant short coming.

 

Is there any reason not to use

 

1C = Strong

1D = Hearts

1H = Spades

1S = Diamonds

1N = Natural

2C = 6+ Clubs

 

This is simple, its logicial, its efficient, I already have all the notes written on the response structure.

Anyone who is going to find it too difficult to handle transfer openings won't be playing MOSCITO.

 

The only place where I see problems cropping up is the 6-4 major minor combos after 1S + 2C.

[hrothgar]

>5) No forcing pass or opening relays be used

 

MOSCITO can not be played without relays over the constructive openings.

[luis]

Maybe this structure can work:

 

1c 15+ any.

Responses as in German Moscito (2c=9-11 balanced)

 

1d 10-14 no (no 4M or three suited)

1s = positive INV+ relay

1N = Balanced

2c = relay

2d = minimum

2h = relay

2s = 4-4 in the minors

2n = 5332 with 5 d

3c = 5332 with 5c

3d = 3-3-4-3

3h = 3-3-3-4

2h = 4-4 in the minors (r=asks for doubleton)

2s = 5332 with 5 diamonds (r=asks for doubleton)

2n = 5332 with 5 clubs (4=asks for doubleton)

3c = 3-3-4-3

3d = 3-3-3-4

2c = Clubs one suiter or three suited with both minors

2d®

2h = Three suited

2s+ = S1

2d = One suited with diamonds

2h+ = S2 (both minors)

 

1h 10-14 4+h no 4s

1s = relay INV+

1n = balanced or three suiter with both majors

2c®

2d = minimum balanced

2h®

2s = h+d

2n = h+c

3c = 3-4-3-3

3d+ = 5332 show doubleton

2h = three suited

2s = h+d

2n = h+c

3c = 3-4-3-3

3d+ = 5332 show doubleton

2c = h+d

2d = h

2h+ = h+c (s2)

 

1s 10-14 4+s UNBAL

1n (relay INV+)

2c = s+d

2d = s

2h = S2 (s+c)

 

1n 10-14 balanced with 4/5 spades

2c (relay GF)

2d = minimum

2h®

2s = s+h

2n = s+d

3c = s+c

3d = 4-3-3-3

3h+ = 5332 show doubleton

2h = s+h

2s = s+d

2n = s+c

3c = 4-3-3-3

3d+ = 5332 show doubleton

 

2c (10-14 both majors)

2d (relay INV+)

2h+ = S2 (h+s)

 

 

Symmetric relays used:

 

S1:

2s = high shortage or 6322

2n = mid shortage

3c = Equal shortage (7222 or 10-1-1-1)

3d+ = S1 list

 

S1 list = 5332, 6331, 7321, 7330,....

 

S2:

2h = reverser

2s = equal length

2n = r

3c = high shortage

3d+ = low shortage S2 list with equal length

2n = high shortage

3c = equal shortage

3d+ = S2 list

 

S2 list: 5431, 6421, 6430, 6520, 7420.....

S2 list equal length: 5521, 5530, 6610......

S2 list equal shortage: 5422, 6511, 7411....

 

After shape is known:

3n = to play

1st non 3nt bid = CAB

4d = terminator

Others = RKCB setting trumps using rr suits in length order

After CAB denial cuebids are used

 

Feedback?

 

Luis

[inquiry]

 

>5) No forcing pass or opening relays be used

 

MOSCITO can not be played without relays over the constructive openings.

 

What I meant was an opening bid of 1D to show 4+ hearts, and 1H opening bid to show 4+Spades.... not relays in general.

 

Ben

[hrothgar]

I'm going to make one last post on this topic, though I wonder why I bother given that the students are such experts that they already know what MOSCITO should and should not include.

 

I've been teaching new partners to play MOSCITO for about 4 years now. I've always followed the same basic approach which has worked well.

 

Step one is constructive bidding over major suit opening.

 

Start with

 

1D = Hearts and

1H = Spades

 

and then explore all of the non-relay responses. These openings are the "core" of the system. Everything else is designed to facilitate this opening/response structure. The best way to find out if MOSCITO is "for you" is focus on this part of the system, because if you don't like this, you aren't going to want to "bother" with the rest.

 

To date, the main focus of discussion has been about what flavour of relays to use. To me, this simply illustrates that folks don't really know the basics about MOSCITO.

 

Step 2 is an introduction to symmetric relay using an extremely basic system over the strong club openings.

 

1C - 1D is artifical negative

All bids from 1H+ = Game forcing and symmetric.

 

Step 3 is Auction termination.

How do we explore for slam once we know shape

 

Step 4 is learning to apply this same symmetric structure over the 1D and 1H opening bids. Once again, a very basic symmetric structure is used.

 

Step 5: Handling interference during a relay auction.

 

Finally, add in the "extras", including the 1S/1N/2C openings and the preemptive structure. At this point in time, the system is "playable".

 

Normally, serious players want to switch over to the optimized version of the system within 2-3 months.

[luis]

I'm going to make one last post on this topic, though I wonder why I bother given that the students are such experts that they already know what MOSCITO should and should not include.

 

Why did you get sooooooo mad? Rich? Pls cool down, we are just trying to figure out an easy scheme, a compromise between an optimal version of moscito and an easy to learn version. I think that the first thing that we have to admit is that neither of us is the owner of the truth. I have my personal opinions about what is best for the system and what is best for newbies to the system but as I posted I can set aside many of my ideas if we agree on a different approach.

But we'll need a lot of patience and opinions should be allowed since we are all equals.

 

Besides that once a basic way to start learning the system is defined each student or partnership can change or evolve the areas of the system that he wants, IMO a system cannot make a parnership do better unless the system is adapted to the players styles, what they like to do, what they don't like, etc. That's why there're so many flavours and conventions of SAYC and that's why there're so many versions and approaches to Moscito. We are only trying to agree on a standarized version that will be used to LEARN moscito then is up to the players and their partners.

 

I can't see why we can't keep posting and discussing without fighting, we are all civilized bridge players I guess....

[trefl44]

For last 4 years I play Moscito at all times with my regular partner. We started from German, then we deviated to terrorizing Terrorist , touching slightly GIB. We studied Rene's notes, we ordered Nigel's book and we went through Richard's material.

 

With this package I can say one thing for sure in support to the latest hrothgar post. To be a successful Moscito bidder you have to have (in this order):

- logical, frequency based limited openings structure (1nt - 10 or 11 to 14 balanced),

- effective, frequency based developments after limited openings (1nt response to play, precise, nevertheless aggresive raises, 10-12 invitational and exploratory responses),

- intervention handling structure,

- symmetric, easy to remember pattern-type relays after 1c (German or Nigel is should be good enough).

 

I would gladly leave any other stuff for later.

 

Please count me and my partner as avid students of this very interesting Moscito course, BBO way.

 

-

[luis]

From trefl's post we can use "yet" another structure that can be as good as the one I proposed or better:

 

1c: 15+

1d: 10-14 no 4M

1h: 10-14 4+h

1s: 10-14 4+s

1n: 11-14 BAL no 5M

2c: 10-14 Majors

 

Then all the balanced hands are dumped into the 1NT opening, this ensures that the 1d opening is unbalanced and 1h/1s if balanced are 5332 with 5M. Parnterships will be allowed to use their favourite weak NT approacj (or strong NT approach) to deal with the 1NT opening and the relay structure over 1x will be simpler.

What do you think?

 

Luis

[inquiry]

I'm going to make one last post on this topic, though I wonder why I bother given that the students are such experts that they already know what MOSCITO should and should not include.

 

 

 

Richard, I am extremely disappointed you feel this way. But seeing that you do, I give up all efforts to pull you guys together to produce an "SAYC-like" (by that I mean a simple version with a little more meat than honeymoon moscito) that can suit you, Richard. .

 

As it was, my comments were primarily suggestions Here is my suggestion as an interested student." Since starting this thread, nothing much productive had happened (best was Rene participating and Luis's explanations of some bids I made). So I thought rather than waiting for a consensus that was certainly never coming as it was plodding along, I would offer the suggestion that you and LUIS decide on the basic system. To get the ball rolling I made suggestions I thought that had pretty much agreed upon (the type of relays, the terminator, etc), including 1H opening bids showing amazingly, hearts (see below). Even then, if you and Luis thought an opening 1D bid should show hearts, I could have lived with it. But I have no desire to participate when facing such an attitude you expressed in the quoted post.

 

So Richard, do as you wish. For me, I am no longer going to participate in the development of a basic moscito system.. Instead, I will choose a system designed by one player, maybe Luis's or maybe German, and use that and hope to find partners who will be willing to read the same notes I read. At least if I play Luis's system, he can provide online tutoring to me, and I will be willing to share what I learn with others here in the BBO forum. Those interested in what you play, Richard, can always read your notes, which are are clearly among the most extensive available anywhere.

 

Now for others reading this thread, I will point out what this "argument" (hostilities?) is over. There is simply no such thing as "moscito". All the players play it a little (or a lot different), and even those guys change their system, tweaking it here or there. Since the beginning of this thread, I have been advocating that the people who volunteer to teach this system narrow the variability, and produce one system so that all instructors and all teachers could play with each other using a standardized form of the bidding system. With this in mind, in the original days of the system, a first/second seat pass with Moscito was a "forcing pass" showing a good hand. That was fairly quickly dropped in favor of an opening bid of 1C as forcing. I didn’t think our system should include that, and no one seemed to complain about that.

 

Two other modern additions to Moscito are transfer OPENING bids. That is "modern" Moscito system often use an opening bid of 1D to promise a heart suit, an opening bid of 1H to promise a spade suit, and 1S to show clubs. This is the system that Richard plays…see http://web.mit.edu/~rwilley/www/MOSCITO.htm It is also part of the system played by others here on the BBO, like Ron (The hog), and yes. the inventor of moscito Paul Marston (who plays as pm).

 

Now there is no doubt a lot of merit in such transfer opening bids, and nothing horribly wrong with such opening bids other than they are often illegal, and certainly would spring unexpected auction problems on the unwary opponent who has never dealt with them. This is exactly the kind of disruptive bidding I thought it would be a good idea not to try to incorporate into BBO play as a general practice (see my comments at reply 36 of this thread). So I suggested that the opening bid transfers not be played. This set Richard off (oddly enough too, considering he agreed not to include them earlier i

 

However, most of the "basic" moscito systems do not use such transfer bids (the "pros" use them, but we are talking about bidding a system for the casual partnership here, not what the pro's play.. Instead all these basic moscito systems use an opening bid of 1H and 1S opening bids to show the bid suit instead of as an opening transfer:

Moscito Byte http://www.gibware.com/byte.html (BTW, this is one used with GIB)

Luis's system (see earlier in this thread).

German Moscito (http://www.trsteiner.de/bridge/pdf/Moscito2002_en.pdf

Honeymoon Moscito (www.abo.fi/~jboling/bridge/honeymoon.pdf)

In fact, if you check the bridgeguys webpage which list many of these systems, not a one of them list transfer opening bids (where an opening bid of 1D promises hearts, and an opening bid of 1H promises spades). http://www.bridgeguys.com/Conventions/Mosc...citoSystem.html

 

And amazingly, despite his tirade about how I, a beginner, am trying to dictate (instead of suggest) what moscito should be, even Richard himself advocated this very same opening strategy earlier in this same thread (see REPLY #22, http://forums.bridgebase.com/in...sg4821#msg4821) where Richard said…

 

We're it me, I would suggest standardizing on the following, which I consider to be relatively simple, intuitive, and in tune with the commonly accepted system variants.

 

(1) Opening structure

1C = Strong

1D = No 4 card major

1H = 4+ Hearts, 0-3 Spades

1S = 4+ Spades, 0-3 Hearts

1N = Both majors

 

However, when I suggest the pretty much the same thing as Richard himself suggested, he tried to belittle my participation as "a beginner". I freely admit I know next to nothing about moscito, having only read about it and played against it. I furhter admit (and in fact acknowledged in the post Richard attacked) that we moscito beginners (including especially myself) should not try to dictate the requirements, which is why I offered my comments as a suggestion… heck, I even thought the opening 1BIDS were already agreed too (see repy 22 to this thread). But while I want to learn, long experience has taught me to avoid "teachers" with attitudes similar to one Richard expressed in the post I am reply too. So while I want to thank him for the offer of help, and while Richard may be a successful teacher of moscito to many players, I already know I can not learn from, nor even want to try to learn from, anyone with such an attitude towards beginners. So while I thought the needs of the many (the novice moscito students) would outweigh the needs of the few (the moscito pros), such that a basic system could be designed, I clearly was wrong. I thus fear that any attempt to reign in the free spirited moscitolites to agree on a basic, no-frills moscito as I had hoped is doomed to horrible failure as it is so very hard to overcome so devout feelings as shown in Richards latest reply. So again, count me out of the effort to build a basic BBO moscito.

 

So for me, I will ask an "instructor" to volunteer notes on the moscito he wants to teach. I will then play what the instructor wants to teach. This way, I can play with the instructor and any other students who he trains. The pool of players will not be as large, but overtime, the students should be able to work out the differences between at least some of the different systems and begin to play together. So, hopefully, master Luis, or master Ron, or Rene, or trefl44 will take me under their wing and teach me enough of their system so that I can a) learn to play it, and :o learn to play against it.

 

Ben

[luis]

So Richard, do as you wish. For me, I am no longer going to participate in the development of a basic moscito system.. Instead, I will choose a system designed by one player, maybe Luis's or maybe German, and use that and hope to find partners who will be willing to read the same notes I read. At least if I play Luis's system, he can provide online tutoring to me, and I will be willing to share what I learn with others here in the BBO forum. Those interested in what you play, Richard, can always read your notes, which are are clearly among the most extensive available anywhere.

 

Cmon guys stop fighting, this is not good for me nor for you the forums the system or the world. I think Richard made a rather harsh post and everybody is entitled to write something not very polite in a bad moment. Fundamentalism is bad, it goes nowhere.

 

About Moscito I want to note that I played the original German version (1n=majors), I played the new German version, and I also played the modern Aussie version. If I were to play or teah Moscito to a new pd interested I'd just start presenting options and let him choose what he likes best. I'm sure you can have great results and enjoy very much competition with any of the mentioned versions or even a mixture. In fact the basic points of the system have already been explained and discussed and many readers will already have a good understanding on general philosophy and variations that can be played.

Do you like AKQ slam points? do you like CAB? Would you like to play 4d as a terminator or "to play" ? Just discuss it with your pd, modules are exchangeable.

 

If you guys cool down I'm still here and I'm still offering my help to write notes, give some online lessons, practice and play with any of you any version of the system. I'm flexible about systems I just load a different system for each of my pd's and everything goes fine. Many times my humorous comments can be misunderstood but I'm generally a good pd and I like to keep my pd happy. I've played Richard's system with him and it is a sound system and a lot of fun, I've played the modified German version with Ana for more than two years and it has been also a sound system and fun. I've even created a modified version for Ana and her female pd here in Argentina and they like it too, I just adapted to parnership style. You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand - You must open this hand, until they got it :-)

 

Cool down, write ideas, play them and have fun.....

[hrothgar]

From trefl's post we can use "yet" another structure that can be as good as the one I proposed or better:

 

1c: 15+

1d: 10-14 no 4M

1h: 10-14 4+h

1s: 10-14 4+s

1n: 11-14 BAL no 5M

2c: 10-14 Majors

 

Then all the balanced hands are dumped into the 1NT opening, this ensures that the 1d opening is unbalanced and 1h/1s if balanced are 5332 with 5M. Parnterships will be allowed to use their favourite weak NT approacj (or strong NT approach) to deal with the 1NT opening and the relay structure over 1x will be simpler.

What do you think?

 

Luis

 

I think that the 2C opening will be a problem

More specifically, how do you show 3 suited hands with both majors?

[trefl44]

1c: 15+

1d: 10-14, 4+h

1h: 10-14, 4+s

1s: 10-14, 4+h and 4+s

1n: 10-14, bal, no 4-M unless 4333

2c: 10-14, unbal. 5+c, max. 3-M

2d: 10-14, unbal. 5+d, max. 3-M

To me the above structure is more coherent and easy to learn than some other ones mentioned in this thread.

 

Obviously, including 2d as 10-14 and diamonds takes away an option of using Multi, Ekrens, etc. but gives the rest of the openers more natural meanings.

[mishovnbg]

Hi MOSCITO fans :).

Thanks Luis for understanding ::). If you start teaching Ben to your blue legal and simplified version of MOSCITO, may be other post, count me as student too, i still like to learn different ideas than my own :).

Hey MOSCITO experts, may be better to read BEZ NAZWY/SYSTEMROZKLADOWY/LAMBDA/DELTA/REGRES/SUSPENSOR before to invent wheel again ;D?

Misho

[hrothgar]

Marston and Burgess used to play a strong pass system before WBF system regulations "convinced" them to switch to a strong club.

Left to their own devices, I don't think that this transition would have happened.

 

I certain agree that the Poles have done some wonderful work with respect to bidding theory, as have the Swedes. [i wish that more of this work was easily available in English] Some of the Polish innovations like the 4D end single have spread into other parts of the relay world.

 

With this said and done, I think that the Symmetric Relay engine that Kerr developed and Marston and Burgess popularized was an extremely significant development.

 

Systemic relay is:

 

(A) Easy to remember.

(:) Efficient. MOSCITO resolves shape at a low level.

More significanty, MSOCITO strives to resolve specific shapes with a single bid

[All 5431 shapes are resolved with a 3D bid] and links the rank ordering of shape

resolution to the frequency of the hand type. [5431 hands are more frequent than

6421 hands, so 5431 hands are resolved at a lower level]

 

I think that it is hard to overestimate the significance of this development.

[Free]

Well I'm interested in every bridge system which isn't natural and has relay systems in it. I don't know a lot from Moscito, but I'm very interested in learning it. This is the thing I would like to play:

1C = 15+

1D = 10-14, 4 card H, unbalanced

1H = 10-14, 4 card S, unbalanced

1S = 10-14, with D (no 4 card M), unbalanced

1NT = 10-14, balanced

2C = 10-14 with C (I dont know how much u'll need: 5 or 6) and unbalanced

2D = multi (weak-2M)

2M = weak, 5 card M + 4+m (= Muiderberg)

 

maybe 2NT with 10-14 and 55+m or pre-emptive or so. Using 2C and 2D to show unbalanced hands is not a good sollution I think. Just make 1NT balanced and all problems are solved with the 2C opening.

 

The only problem u still have is: 5-3-3-2 = balanced or not? I suggest when playing weak NT (10-14), no 5 card M, but a 5 card minor is allowed.

 

About all the other stuff about stopping bids and slam approach, just give me something that works :)

 

What do you guys think about it?

[hrothgar]

You raise some complicated issues:

From my perspective, one of the nicest things about MOSCITO that the system provides great lattitude for applying judgement.

 

For example, playing 1D promises Hearts:

 

IF I get dealt a 3=4=2=4 hand, I have the option to opening EITHER 1D or 1NT.

If I think that the hand is well suited for a suit contract, I'll emphasize the Hearts. If I think that the hand is better suited for NT, I'll open 1NT.

 

In a similar fashion, holding 4=2=1=6, I can either open 1H showing Spades or 2C.

Here once again, the crucial question is what I want to emphasize about the hand.

Systems that rigidly force a specific opening based on shape make the relay structures easier, however, they are much less useful during "normal" constructive bidding.

[Free]

Just give the Majors priority.

 

Look, Moscito is aperantly not a natural system. But (!), me and my partner play our own polish club system with a 1NT opening 11-14 (and 10-13 in 3rd and 4th), semi-balanced. Also 5 card M is allowed, but then we sometimes play 2OM in a 5-2 fit (we'll change that soon)... We seldom have other problems (for example with 4432 hands). So I suggest 1D or 1H tends to be NOT a 4333 or 4432. 1S and 2C also no 5332 (balanced with a minor). If you have like a 4-1-2-6 bid 1H, if you have a 4-2-3-4 bid 1NT, if you have a 5-3-2-3 bid 1H. Since 1NT is balanced, the 1S and 2C opening are totally unbalanced... After 1NT, you can have also a great relay-system to ask the shape of the hand:

 

2C = relay

2D = no 4 card M

2S = relay (2H = weak 4-4M)

2NT = 4333 or 5 card C

3C = relay

3D = 4333

3H = relay

3S/NT = 333[4]

3H/S/NT = 33[2]5

3C = 5 card D

3D = relay

3H/S/NT = 335[2]

3D = 4-4 m

3H = relay

3S/NT = 3[2]44

2H = 4 card H, maybe 4 card S

2S = relay

2NT = 4 card minor

3C = relay

3D/H = 34[2]4

3S/NT = 344[2]

3C/D = 443[2]

3H = 3-4-3-3

2S = 4 card S, no 4 card H

3C = relay

3D = 4 card C

3H = relay

3S/NT = 43[2]4

3H/S = 4 card D, 434[2]

3NT = 4-3-3-3

[hrothgar]

The issue here is the following:

 

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 2H with xxx as trump support

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 3H with xxxx as trump support

 

Life is MUCH better if the 1D/1H openings have some "bite" to them.

[Free]

The issue here is the following:

 

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 2H with xxx as trump support

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 3H with xxxx as trump support

 

Life is MUCH better if the 1D/1H openings have some "bite" to them.

 

I don't see the problem: with an unbalanced hand playing 2M will be with a 5-card or with a singleton/void in a 4-3 fit. Why not... But hey, you know Moscito and I don't so you'll have a point somewhere I guess.

[hrothgar]

The 4-3 fits play much better when the opponents can't lead 3 rounds of trump :-)

[hrothgar]

MOSCITO has its own relay structure to resolve balanced hand patterns over 1NT.

This structure kicks in after an auction like

 

1C - 1N [1C = strong, artificial and forcing]

[1N = Balanced, positive]

 

or, in newer versions

 

1C - 1D

1N

 

I only took a short glance at the structure that you are using, however, I think that I prefer the MOSCITO structure.

 

The MOSCITO structure seems easier to remember.

It also appears to resolve shape at a lowever levels throughout.

 

 

After 1NT, 2C = relay and then

 

4C = 3325 shape with 11 slam points

3N = 3325 shape with 10 slam points

3S = 3325 shape with 6-9 slam points

3H = 3235 shape

3D = 2335 shape

3C = 4432 shape with 4 clubs and 4 diamonds

2NT = Any 5332 shape with 5 diamonds

2S = Any 4333 shape

2H = 4+ Spades, 0-3 Hearts, NOT 4333

2D = 4+ Diamonds, NOT 4333

 

After

 

1C - 1N 1N = balanced

2C - 2H 2H = 4+ Spades

2S - ???

 

3N = 4=3=2=4 shape with 11 controls

3S = 4=3=2=4 shape with 10 controls

3H = 4=3=2=4 shape 6-9 controls

3D = 4=2=3=4 shape

3C = 4432 with Spades and Diamonds

2N = Any 5332 with 5 Spades

 

After

 

1C - 1N 1NT = Balanced

2C - 2D 2D = Hearts

2H - ???

 

3N = 3=4=2=4 shape with 11 controls

3S = 3=4=2=4 shape with 10 controls

3H = 3=4=2=4 shape 6-9 controls

3D = 2=4=3=4 shape

3C = 4432 with Hearts and Diamonds

2N = Any 5332 with 5 Hearts

2S = 4432 with Spades and Hearts

[Free]

True, but my relay-system is based on my extended stayman (it has some similarities to moscito: doubletons and singletons are bid from low to high, and normally high suits are bid first). With my structure, you can play weak stayman (44+ M without game interest), on the other hand, your system is indeed easier to remember...

[Codo]

Hi Ben,

 

don`t give up. Don`t take it personal. We need you.

 

Hi Richard,

 

don`t give up. Don`t take it personal. We need you.

 

I think Luis put it in the perfect words: Noone is the owner of the truth (besides me of course..). So lets try to make a basic mosquito avaiable.

 

I doubt, that we will find the perfect solution here but I am quite sure, that we need a very basic system to spread it. There is no much sense to discuss now, if we should use high shortage low or low length first or whatever.

 

There is no sense in discussing, if Richards, Sartais, Renes, Rons Luis or anyones system is better or elegant or whatever.

 

So what about the following ideas:

1. We find ONE volunteer, who give us students ONE "easy" system. I surely won`t like to learn Richards or Renes 150 pages for the seldom luck to play mosquito here...

 

Or:

Idea Nr.2:

 

We say: Luis, you tell us anything about the 1 Club opening and first rebids.

 

Richard, you tell us anything about the openings from 1D to 3 NT.

 

Rene: All later biddíng structures like s2 or spiral scan or whatever you think is neccesary

 

Ron: How can we deal with interferences?

 

Of course, I would prefer the later, but maybe this is impossible.

 

But I would be very unhappy, if this threat will be dying.

 

And maybe, we can start a second threat, where Richard, Rene et al can discuss their pro and cons about the meaning of 3 Diamond in Mosquito....

 

Kind Regards

 

Roland

[Free]

IMO, the basic moscito shouldn't be the best system ever. It should be pretty good though, but keep it simple. If people have learned this, they can always change whatever they like...