[Winstonm]

Quote

I actually became an ACBL Lifemaster

I pretty much abadonded the ACBL when they watered down the requirements so much even Canadian barristers could become life masters.

[jdonn]

TimG, on Mar 6 2008, 09:33 PM, said:

I think you'd be surprised how infrequently conventions come up and also be surprised at how infrequently it is important to to know things like whether you're playing limit raises or forcing raises, whether 1NT is forcing or not, or even whether you're playing 4-card or 5-card majors.

It's funny. I specifically remember the first time I agreed to play 2/1, it was a club game with my grandfather some years ago. After the session I realized not a single 2/1 bid or forcing notrump had even occured.

[han]

han, on Feb 9 2007, 12:55 PM, said:

I don't believe your stories. I'm not claiming that you are lying.. just saying that I don't think the stories are true.

I used to make good post.

[Zelandakh]

TimG, on Mar 6 2008, 09:33 PM, said:

I think you could sit down with an unknown partner, say "strong NTs?", have partner agree, and expect to have a reasonable game.

I think you'd be surprised how infrequently conventions come up and also be surprised at how infrequently it is important to to know things like whether you're playing limit raises or forcing raises, whether 1NT is forcing or not, or even whether you're playing 4-card or 5-card majors.

This might be possible across the pond, but in the UK I would suggest that this is optimistic indeed. It would be a very short match where weak vs strong vs Benji 2s did not come up, for example

As for what constitutes esoteric, I think this depends entirely on your partner. When I play in the Acol Club I get pained comments for using such 'weird' stuff as Unassuming Cue Bids. Goodness knows what would happen if the idea of a forcing 1NT or forcing raise was ventured!

As for the frequency of conventions, surely that's entirely dependant on what conventions you play. If you play 2/1 and invert 1♠ and 1NT replies to a 1♥ opening I'd suggest this is going to come up...alot!. Not to mention the nebulous 1♣ opening when playing short club instead of better minor! The same is true of things like Stayman (or one of several 'equivalents'), weak 2s, 4th suit forcing, take-out doubles, and many may others.

Heck, even opening leads are a convention!

So if 'reasonable game' is akin to pub bridge I agree; if you mean it to imply bridge at even club level I would be inclined to disagree, unless you have a number of implicit agreements built in (such as SAYC).

(-: Zel :-)

[ASkolnick]

Two different points:

I think it is just a question of how well does your partner field what I call "balls in the dirt?"

Most people don't discuss every possible auction on every hand, but certain people have a better ability to derive the answer following the same line of thinking.

The Meckwell question, with one partner I would never make that bid because he would always get it wrong then come up with the appropriate meanings. This is why I think he plays precision and must follow a strict series of rules to derive the answer. Another partner I would always make the call because I am sure he would be able to derive it on the fly.

2) Midnight games - You will notice that attendance or even creation of midnight games are down since the game started taking on some serious values. It used to be the purpose of a midnight game was to have a 5 man team so someone could go get the beer. That doesn't mean you wouldn't try, but it may be the time to try some new gadgets in a "not as competitive" event. The problem was once you started awarding master points as if it was a serious event, you had different types of people attending.