hrothgar Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 I’ve been getting a number if questions about Frelling Two Bids and how they seem to be working out. The Hog and I trotted them out during an IMP Pairs tournament last night. I figured that I’d provide people with some hand records, as well as making a few comments about the strengths and weaknesses of this method. First things first: The Frelling Two Bids cropped up 4 times in 15 boards, or close to 27% of the time. We score a total of +16 IMPs on these boards, so we averaged about +4 IMPs per board. Hand 1 Dealer NorthWhite versus White [table][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]32JT96596AQ96[/td][td][/td][tr][/tr][td]QJ9764Q7KJT27[/td][td][/td][td]5A842AQ848432[/td][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]AKT8K3753KJT5[/td][td][/td][/table] Auction 2H* - (P) – 2S** - (3S?)P – 3NT – X – All pass Explanation 2H: Systemically, the 2H opening shows 4+ heads and either (4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs). Systemically, the North hand should be passed.2S: 2S is pass or correct. This was a very conservative action. If opener holds a perfect minimum for the opening we could have game. I’ve found that it pays well to sandbag with hands like this one planning to Penalty double an aggressive intervention. Result: +10.56 IMPs Hand 2 Dealer EastRed versus White [table][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]K74KQK9853AQ2[/td][td][/td][tr][/tr][td]853AT6QT643J6[/td][td][/td][td]Q96J9854AJT53[/td][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]AJT27327K9874[/td][td][/td][/table] Auction (P) – 2S* - (P) – 3S**(P) – 4S – All pass 2S systemically shows either 6 spades with 6322/6331/7222 shape OR 4+ Spades and 5+ Clubs The 3S raises forces partner to bid 4S with a six card suit and invites 4S opposite a maximum hand with Spades and Clubs. North had the option to bid 2NT as an asking bid, in which case South would rebid 3H to show a maximum black 2 suiter with a 3 card Heart fragment. North would then have the option to place the contract in 3NT Result: +4.46 Hand 6Red Versus WhiteDealer East [table][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]T63QJ9842Q32Q[/td][td][/td][tr][/tr][td]KQ75VOIDAT974AKT9[/td][td][/td][td]82AK73K865763[/td][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]AJ94T65JJ8542[/td][td][/td][/table] Auction: (P) – 2S* - (X) – P(3H) – (P) – 3N – All Pass 2S once again showed either Spades or the Spade/Club 2 suiter Result: +7.32 Hand 15White versus White Result – 6.15 [table][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]K54K98QJT5375[/td][td][/td][tr][/tr][td]8AJ7K72AKQ643[/td][td][/td][td]JT63642A984T9[/td][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]AQ972QT536J82[/td][td][/td][/table] Auction 2H* - (X) – P – 2SP – (3NT) 2H = 4+ Hearts and 4+ Spades or 5+ Clubs Here, the Frelling 2 bid pushed the opps into a 3NT that no-one else found. North had a blind opening lead. A heart lead rates to be bad, however, its unclear whether South holds Clubs or Spades. Such is life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Hi, I think perhaps these hands don't show that much for the Freeling two bids, other than shooting fish in a barrel who have no clue how to defend against it. An example of that is the first and last hand. The last shows that sometimes the fish shoot back. First hand. To double 2H with that 1-4-4-4 hand and 4 hearts is just wacky. But they could surive that. Over 2S, West with six to the QJ could dbl or pass, or believe your partner and bid 3D. I think I would wack 2S, you would run to 3C and when that comes back to me undoubled, I would bid 3D. 3D E/W would be a nice win for them. 3C NS depends upon if you make it... a small win for them if you don't and a modest pick up for you if you don't. Hand 2 is no great victory. All the players are in either 3NT or 4S, both making. You picked up only because a few in the field don't know how to bid at imps. Hand 3 rather than being a VICTORY for Freeling should be a huge loser. It allowed your opponent to find and hook the Diamond Queen from partner. He wins 5D, 2S, 2C, and 2H. That is 3NT making 5 for a cold matchpoint top, and a pick up of 6 imps for them. The fact that declerer, after FINDING the diamond Queen only managed to win 2H, 1S, 3D and 2C and go down (yes... declearer threw both his good diamonds away on the AK of hearts,,, and then stranded the DIAMOND 8 in dummy) is hardly something I would be waving as a bidding victory for your system. ;) Finally on hand 4, contrary to your statement that "no one else found 3NT", 7 pairs stumbled into it. 3NT is laydown from your RHO side, but here Ron could have set it with a low Spade lead at trick one when it is wrong sided. Thanks for posting the hands. But the results have more to deal with quality of opposition here rather than the wonderfulness of the convention. But I noticed something... you picked up so many imps on these four boards, that you average on the other 11 boards was not so good... so using the logic of imps/board...keep freeling, throw away the rest moscito. ;D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Couple comments: Pairs events are all about shooting fish.I'm not sure who said it (Hamman perhaps?), that a Team match is like two bokers climbing into a ring and slugging it out. Pairs is like climbing into the ring and competing to see how many drunks you can punch out in a set time limit. I beleive that the Frelling Twos are good against either fish or strong pairs. You milage may vary. As you point out, our overall results were failry average. Our major losses consisted of the following: We lost 10 IMPs when Ron made a misclick (he clicked on 1NT rather than relaying and we missed a game) We lost 6 IMPs when we played in 3C rather than 4S on a hand being discussed in another thread.We lost 5 IMPs when I misdefended 3NT and failed to continue with Hearts.And (sigh) we lost 4 IMPs on a bidding misunderstanding when we were using different relay structures over 1H openings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Couple comments: Pairs events are all about shooting fish.I'm not sure who said it (Hamman perhaps?), that a Team match is like two bokers climbing into a ring and slugging it out. Pairs is like climbing into the ring and competing to see how many drunks you can punch out in a set time limit. I beleive that the Frelling Twos are good against either fish or strong pairs. You milage may vary. In discussing your opening 2 bids specifically, Fred said Many players who use such systems do so in order to gain an edge, not because of the superiority of the methods, but because of their opponents' likely unfamiliarity with them (I am not suggesting that Richard or any other specific people have these reasons for choosing to use such methods)."http://forums.bridgebase.com/in...msg2829#msg2829 In fact, the shooting fish comment I made was geared just towards this issue fred raised himself. I would like to see where Freeling is "a superior method" based upon reaching the right spot, not based upon the opponents total unfamilarity with it. Imagine, two people doubled 2M with a void in one case and a singleton in the other in the unbid major. I think you should try to find examples of where Freeling worked because it is superior or because it gives quality opponents with modern weapons difficults. Not hands where blind sheep threw themselves to the wolfs. I finally adopted multi-2D becasue I found that Lucas (mulderberg) 2H/2S made me bid better. I reached better part-scores and games. I thought at first the convention was just "fish shooting"... but it is not. It causes real problems that good players have trouble dealing with, and most unprepared treat it as normal weak twos quite adequately. ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 In fact, the shooting fish comment I made was geared just towards this issue fred raised himself. I would like to see where Freeling is "a superior method" based upon reaching the right spot, not based upon the opponents total unfamilarity with it. Here we go again. There is NOTHING in the Laws of Bridge that mentions anything about bidding to the "right spot".There are, however, scoring table that define how many points different contracts are worth. I'll score +300 for setting a non-vulnerable contract by two tricks. I score +420 for making 10 tricks in a major suit game. Yesterday, I mentioned that North Americans have created a fetish surrounding "Constructive Bidding". By this, I mean that many North Americans project exterior morals onto the game. Good scores that occur because a partnership accurately describes their hand to one another have value. Good scores that occur because the opponents were prevented from being able to explore an find their best spot are disparaged. Of course, there are exceptions. North Americans place enormous value on the small set of preemptive methods that American experts are most comfortable with while doing their damnest to ban anything/everything else. Personally, I find the very notion that there is a "right spot" for any given hand very foreign. Judging a contract in isolation from the bidding is very naive. 3NT might be an outstanding contract after a simple, uniformative auction. At the same time, there is true beauty to making an slam off a cahsing Ace/King after psyching a cue bid. I'm very happy to miss the "par" contract on a given hand if it means that I can blast to an accpetable contract in a single bid and force the last guess on the opponents. In any case, you're welcome to whatever set of external biases that you like, but don't try to project them on the rest of the world. Personally, I am quite comfortable playing Frelling 2s against any level of competition.My own experience is that the methods are quite sound. Personally, I prefer using mathematical simulations to "validate" methods. Its possible to extract a much larger corpus of hands much quicker than relying on playing out hands. I spent a lot of time [my own and my PCs] devising this structure. I'm quite happy with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 17, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 Here is another interesting hand from yesterday's tournament.I think it is an excellent illustration regarding some of the topics that we've been debating Board 12Red versus WhiteWest Dealer [table][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]KT8649832KJ32VOID[/td][td][/td][tr][/tr][td]AQ3AKJ7954K72[/td][td][/td][td]J7Q654JT865Q7[/td][tr][/tr][td][/td][td]952TAT86AQ943[/td][td][/td][/table] The auction (1NT) - X - (P) - ? 1NT was 15 - 17X was "Lionel", promising 4+ Spades and 4+ cards in an unknown suit. Advancer has two difference choices of bids: Option 1: Bid 2C as pass or correct. The doubler will pass holding clubs or rebid 2D/2H to show his second suit. 2C allows the partnership to play 2S if the partner shows the majors, while allowing you to find either an 8+ card Diamond fit or a 9+ card club fit. Option 2: Bid 2S immediately. I consider the 2S bid to be clear cut. Partner almost certainly holds both majors. If I bid 2C, pass or correct, odds are that the only thing that I am doing is providing the opponents with additional information about my shape for no good reason. Furthermore, if partner does have a minor then the opponents have an 8+ card heart fit. We won't be able to buy the hand in 2m. All arround, it seems best to bid an immediate 2S, and force the opponent's to decide whether or not to complete. If you do land in a 7 card fit, then at least it will be hard for the opponents to know whether or not to double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 17, 2003 Report Share Posted August 17, 2003 In any case, you're welcome to whatever set of external biases that you like, but don't try to project them on the rest of the world. Personally, I am quite comfortable playing Frelling 2s against any level of competition.My own experience is that the methods are quite sound. Whoops, looks like a touched a nerve. Sorry. What I was trying to say is that don't show how you "tricked" or "took advantage" (my words, of course, not yours) your opponents who lacked a clue with how to deal with Freeling 2D bid as examples of how it works. Sure in the real world, you can spring such seldom used convention on people and then watch them fall apart. But that proves nothing. Three of your four examples fell into this category. I don't mind that you play it in the real world. I myself believe in let pretty much anything go. But, the problem with ADVOCATING it as superior, winning strategy, I think it is encumbant to show that it works better than alternative methods against good opposition. Anything can beat up on the novices and the beginners. That is my point. And the quote you place in red is from FRED. My issue isn't us reaching our best spot.... it is does it WORK well against the prepared opponent. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Your Frelling 2-bids are interesting. The 2D and 2H bids seem like reasonable bids that could work well, similar to Ekrens (I haven't had much experience with Ekrens but feel similarly that it could be a good bid). Your 2S bid, on the other hand, I don't understand at all. It seems that you will often have disasters when responder has medium strength hands short in spades (<2) with moderate to long (3+) clubs (whether responder decides to try 3C [or whatever the bid to get to 3C opposite the 4-5 hands is] or not). How well preemptive bids work is not simply based on what percentage of the time they get you to a fit (and how often you get to make them)... it's also based on how well they "work" when they do "work" and also how often you have disasters with them (and how frequently the bid gives away useful info to declarer). Reasonable opponents will have difficulty over preempts, but not to such a large extent that if you have regular disasters with them (e.g. what I mention above with respect to your 2S bid) that the gains will exceed the losses. It's not clear to me how well your 2D/2H bids work when they give your opponents difficult decisions compared with how often the weak 2's work in this respect, and also how often your bids give away useful info to declarer (something 2-suited bids are much more prone to do than 1-suited bids, in my experience). These things are of course much harder to test than how often a fit exists (and I'm not necessarily claiming that your bids size up unfavorably to more standard bids). I'd be interested in hearing more about how they have been working (successes and failures) and perhaps trying them myself, but I must agree that the info is only useful when your opponents know how to deal with them reasonably (either X = 13-15 bal or X = takeout of known suit, with all overcalls natural) and are decent players. As for the specific examples you give: 1. This board, with the significantly more reasonable bidding (on the part of your opponents) of: 2H - (P) - 2S - (P)3C - (P) - P - (P) seems like a moderate success for your system, as you've nicely found your fit and have made it difficult for the opponents to find their (diamond) fit. 2. 3NT seems reasonable too (perhaps better), and i'd bid stayman with South after a standard 1NT opening from North (after 3 passes), so I'm not sure this is such a gain. 3. I have to agree that on this board your bid seems to have given away info about the diamond suit and that you're worse off for having opened. 4. I'd have overcalled 3C with West's hand if X is takeout of hearts... if X is 13-15 bal (or too strong to overcall, of course) I would perhaps double, but may still bid 3C. I'm not so sure the loss is your fault here (if the opponents overcall 3C, they will probably not get to 3N). Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfgauss Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 When I was talking about the 2S opening, I meant "<= 2" spades (not "< 2")... sorry for the typo. Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 The 2S opening is certainly the most "controversial" part of the Frelling 2 opening style. I've had a number of partner's who grudgingly accept opening 2D/2H on a 4432 who none-the-less balk at a 2S opening that could either show single suited hands with Spades or two suited hands with Spades and Clubs. First, I want to point out that this is actually a relatively benign "Chimera". Some of the top Italian pairs have been experimenting with a 2S opening that is either a single suited hand with Spades or 9-11 HCP balanced. Even I get a little nervous about this one. [i'm still trying to figure out how the response schedule to works.] Second, responder is usually quite well positioned. I did a number of Monte Carlo simulations trying to figure out the best course of action over the 2S opening with different hand types. In particualr, i was trying to model what responder should bid with hands with 2 Spades and 3 clubs or a singleton Spade and 3 clubs. The simulations demonstrated convincingly that responder should advance to 3C (pass or correct) holding 3 clubs. The 5431 patterns are so much more frequent than single suited hands that even relatively skewed distributions in the black suits don't effect the base probabilities. Even if responder holds a hand like 1=5=4=3, opener is still odds on to hold the 4=x=x=5 pattern. With this said and done, if opener denies a 5+ card club suit, I did find useful for him to rebid in a 3 card fragment rather than correcting to 2S. This picks up a surprising number of residual 8 card fits. There are, of course, nasty hand patterns. 5422s or 5-5-2-1 with 2-2 in the black suits are the worst for this method. Luckily, this don't come up all the often. When they do, pass smoothly and hope that the opps balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Thanks to the few of you who sent me messages about the issue of springing unfamilar conventions on the unprepared. But, let me make my position here clear. I am trying to suggest that unfamilar conventions can't be played. Heck I play a lot of them myself. My comments to Richard herein have nothing to do with the "morals" of using such tactics, or the "legalities" of using them. I actually favor a pretty much anything goes with proper pre-alerts. My position is that I want to be able to hold my own against TOP NOTCH competition. To do so, I want to learn and use tools that improve my results against world class players. What do I care if some tool will allow me to rip up club-level players if when I get into a serious battle against quality opponents these same tools that worked so well in winning my local events got me chewed up and spit out by the big boys? This is my issue.... does Freeling work as well or better than alternative 2H/2S bids in the heat of world class competition? Does open 2S with maybe 4S and bunches of clubs or 6 spades and few clubs ever cause you more problems than it is worth (I can just imagine opening 2S weak, partner having few spades and 4 clubs puts bids us to 3C and we get manhandled doubled. That was my point, which clearly seems to be lost in my post.... I want to know how well it works against competent, prepared opponents. Reaching the right spot is not so important, getting better results on average is... but showing me statistics against the likes of the opponents in the original post in this thread is not proof to me. I want to beat the FRED's, the RADO's, the BG's, etc, so anything I use has to work to my adavantage against competition like that. After all, someday, I would like to think that I might be able to hold my own in such company...and using inferior tools (if it is inferior) is not the way to do that. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted August 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 does Frelling work as well or better than alternative 2H/2S bids in the heat of world class competition??? Needless to say, there are few "universal" truths in Bridge.Top players can't even make up their minds which of the following is better - 1C = "Natural"1C = Strong1C = "Variable" (Polish, Carrot)1C = Artificial - let alone which one of a wide variety of preemptive structures is best. With this said and done: I do know a number of strong pairs who are using methods similar to the Frelling 2 bids. The 2D and 2H openings are obvious members of the Ekrens "assumed fit" family of preempts. This opening style has gained a lot of popularity in North Europe. My understanding is that some similar methods are used Down Under. If anything these are less disciplined. [For anyone who cares, I chose the name Frelling Two bids as a homage to the original "Smeg Twos". For anyone who doesn't understand the naming convention, I heartily recommend catching up on both Red Dwarf and Farscape] With this said and done: As I mentioned earlier, I'm not necessarily convinced that popular adoption or even adoption by top experts is necessarily the right way to be judging whether or not conventions are "sound". I'm not sure whether the mental skills/disciplines that are required to excel at bridge necessarily overlap with those required to design bidding systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 18, 2003 Report Share Posted August 18, 2003 Thanks to the few of you who sent me messages about the issue of springing unfamilar conventions on the unprepared. Well Ben, the question is "How do you prepare for Myxomatosis twos, or Frelling Twos or Tiroler Berg?" All of these methods are perfectly legal here, and are played even in pairs events. Furthermore, we don't have to supply a defence - we only need to supply defences for "yellow" methods eg Hums such as T-Rex. (Yellow methods are only allowed in teams events of 14 boards +). And you know something, even lols cope. The reason I guess, is that because we have exposure to these methods, people aren't worried about them. I've said this before, but restricting these methods is the root cause of the unfamiliarity when you are finally confronted by them. No one blinks an eyelid when I play transfer Moscito here, yet even on Sat on bbo someone whinged about our bidding "being a lottery." Its what you are used to, I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inquiry Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 Hi Ron, Did you READ my post you quoted? I am not concerned about odd new methods. Good players cope just fine (and as you said, even many not so good players do too). I was thanking them for "supporting the view", but pointing out that they misunderstood what I was trying to do. I don't mean to attack it a "cherry picking" even it is, I want to know how it works against good/prepared players versus other bids you give up to use it. Ben Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the hog Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 Yes Ben, I did read your post and I think you misunderstood the direction of mine. (Don't be so touchy.) I wasn't criticising your view, what I was asking is "how do you make people more aware and capable of coping with these methods in a largely restricted environment?" It is clear from some of the emails that you have received that some are concerned about being confronted by unfamiliar methods. My point is that these methods are unfamiliar precisely because they are disallowed in the States. Here in Aus they are not unfamiliar and hence the level of "angst" is much lower. I don't know what the answer is. Maybe as more bridge is played on line, exposure will be greater and people will be more relaxed by the unfamiliar. At the moment from what I read even from top US players, I hardly think that your federation in likely to relax its restrictions. Ron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Posted August 19, 2003 Report Share Posted August 19, 2003 even on Sat on bbo someone whinged about our bidding "being a lottery." Its what you are used to, I suppose. From the moment we start a relay-auction, people don't understand and they say it's a crazy system, that THEY don't know what system it is,... I just don't care anymore about comments of other people, as long as we can use our system for us and not against us it's fine by me. And about this frelling-two bids: this 27% frequency is probably not representative, but I'm not sure about that. And defending against it isn't that hard I guess: Dbl=opening followed by good-bad 2NT scheme. After a double, you find your fit and play the level you think is best. It's like any weak-2 opening which can be several things.I actually don't see the big advantage oposite the multi-2D and Muiderberg-2M. And these hands can be bid out exactly with relay systems. I even think these openings have about the same frequency as frelling-two bids. I probably will test them sometimes because everything that helps to get a better score should be used :) And if you really want some exotic 2-openings with an extreme high frequency, check this out: Lorenzo (I play that only NV in 1st and 2nd hand:2C = 0-7 HCP, 4+C, no 4-card M, no longer D2D = 0-7 HCP, 4+D, no 4-card M, no equal length/longer C2M = 0-7 HCP, 4+M, can contain longer minorCombine this with a strong-1C opening and your system looks very different: if you pass, you have 8-10 HCP ;DMy experience with these openings is that partner allmost allways passes, even with 17HCP and singleton. Opponents allways bid (unless they're real noobs) and most of the time go to game. Then the strong hand can double really hard! It wouldn't be the first time I write +1700 ;DRemark: this Lorenzo thing IS a lotery... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.