[matmat]

jdonn, on Jul 2 2007, 03:32 PM, said:

I don't understand either of those memory aids. I have always learned 3♦ is bad hand good suit and 3♥ is good hand bad suit. The memory aid is good hands bid more than bad hands! Yeah that's a tough one lol.

is there a corollary that says that good players bid more than bad players?

[foo]

matmat, on Jul 2 2007, 03:47 PM, said:

jdonn, on Jul 2 2007, 03:32 PM, said:

I don't understand either of those memory aids. I have always learned 3♦ is bad hand good suit and 3♥ is good hand bad suit. The memory aid is good hands bid more than bad hands! Yeah that's a tough one lol.

is there a corollary that says that good players bid more than bad players?

Perhaps not =more=, but =sooner and more accurately=. Especially with hands whose playing value is not reasonably represented by HCP.

[jillybean]

=sigh=

[Echognome]

Funny. I learned the memory aid of L-SPA (and given that I was living in a town called Leamington Spa at the time, it was easy to remember):

L - Lousy
S - Suit
P - Points
A - All

Piece of cake.

[blackshoe]

jdonn, on Jul 2 2007, 03:32 PM, said:

I don't understand either of those memory aids. I have always learned 3♦ is bad hand good suit and 3♥ is good hand bad suit. The memory aid is good hands bid more than bad hands! Yeah that's a tough one lol.

I like the memory aid I learned from one of Ron Klinger's books - The Modern Losing Trick Count, I think: 12123. A good suit, in his methods, has 2 of the top 3 honors; a bad suit has only one. So 12123 equates to bad hand, bad suit; bad hand, good suit; good hand, bad suit; good hand, good suit; solid suit.

Works for me.

[awm]

I've found ogust to be really useful. In the modern game a preempt can be a pretty lousy suit, and finding this out is usually a high priority for partner. If your preempts are always "two of the top three" then ogust is probably a waste of time.

I remember the responses because they're based on frequency. A good suit should be more likely than a good hand, since preempts are "supposed" to have decent suits and not a lot of outside cards. So the lower bid (3♦) shows the good suit and the higher bid (3♥) shows the good hand.

My preferred definition for a good suit is that it "has play for one loser or less opposite a small doubleton." How much play is play depends on the colors; for example KJ9xxx might qualify as a good suit at white as there is a chance at one loser even though it's less than 50%, whereas at red the minimum would be something like AQTxxx (needs one of two cards onside and a reasonable break). In any case this definition is nice because partner knows that with ace or king and one he can run the suit (at red) or at least has a decent shot at running the suit (white), and also knows that with two or three small we should have decent odds at only one trump loser.

[Double !]

OGUST is the response structure that I usually play, however I have found response structures that involve transfers to be interesting. There is also a response structure called "Feature-Ogust" where 2NT asks for feature (whatever constitutes a feature) and 3♣ asks for hand and suit quality.

I guess I'm in the minority but, until I learn a better method, I strongly prefer coded 9s & 10's, even with J-denies. For me, the gain that the information that such leads and failure to make such leads give me have out-weighed any information that they have given declarer. I also find that, over time, it has helped reduce brain-drain, especially when I am in the process of falling asleep at the table (a frequent occurrence). However, when it all comes out in the wash, nothing is still more important than counting, paying attention to partner's cards, and keeping track of what cards have been played.

DHL

[Al_U_Card]

the version I supplied was not what I learned as standard. I just like it better.

[Double !]

Jlall, on Jul 2 2007, 12:04 AM, said:

You might as well show declarer your hand if you're going to play coded tens and 9s.

BTW unless you need to play something amazing at trick 1 or 2 you will almost always have the chance to signal whether you have led from an interior sequence or not. However, if declarer has the guess you won't signal either way and declarer will misguess. If you have to get it right at trick 1 or 2 you can often figure it out anyways, or what you need partner to have. You are very rarely on a pure guess, and even if you are you will get it right half the time. Actually, I can honestly say I've never had a hand come up on defense where I needed coded 10s and 9s to work out the hand. I can recall 2 hands that I've made that I would have gone down in because i had AQx opp xxx and they led the jack playing this stupid convention, and that is obviously in a much much smaller sample space.

Justin,
I recall one hand that I played against you and, i think, David G where one of you led the jack of a suit, partner got in, and returned the suit, permitting me to make the contract. I remember your comment to your partner after the hand was over, saying something to the effect that "we gotta code this s**t". I thought that you meant using coded 9/T/J leads. Maybe I was wrong, perhaps you had some other "s**t" coding in mind. Just the same, that might have been the only contract that I made against you guys during the set and, as usual, you crushed us.

DHL

[finnigan1]

The thing that represent the main crux of the position with Ogust is that ;
yes it tells about hand and suit quality.
But the con is; that with 2 NT asking for feature and 3 ♣ asking for a
singleton or void allows a better location of values and shortness.
Mind you should partner ask for a singleton/void and it is a ♣ with a decent
set weak 2 bid 3 NT indicates a singleston ♣ vs 4♣ as a void.
As for the journalist leads [coded 9's & 10's] ; as a declarer , I would gladly
take it as it rectifies the distribution early on allowing to rectify the count at trick 1.
Personally these leads give up 75% advantage to the declarer.
Where as an attitude/neutral lead with soft values to protect will hinder the
chances of success on a contract, less action from the defenders early at the
right time will force a declarer to do it's own dirty work himself/herself .
As a general rule vs suit 1st - 3rd- 5th , attitude and neutral [trump]
vs NT 2nd-4th-6/5th attitude and neutral leads
Will more often payout for the defense, but of course the auction will also dictate
a given lead , for example 3 suits are bid by ops. with a fit in a minor the 4th suit
would be indicated if my hand has 3 or less in the said suit.
Afterall the lead is critical as to wether a contract sucsseeds or not
and should not be a robotic lead, but with a plan.

[skjaeran]

I haven't played Ogust (I've alwayes referred to it as "Blue Club" though) for a very long time. It's more or less standard to ask for singleton over a weak two in Norway (except that most play Multi). I'd like to play both (2M-2NT=singleton ask, 2♥-2♠/2NT-3♣=Ogust), but haven't been able to convince recent partners to do so

Playing the Smith signal (reversed), some of the upside from coded 9/10 and Journalist leads is of little value, since both partners are able to signal whether they like the lead or not before regaining the lead. Of course, this doesn't apply to third hand decisions at trick one.

[SoTired]

Best way to remember OGUST rebids:

12123 = Number of top 3 honors in your suit. 3C = bh, bs. 3D=2 of top 3 honors is good suit, so 3D = bh, gs, etc, all the way to 3N = AKQxxx

[matmat]

best way to remember ogust is that it is right after july...
seriously though, isn't ogust one of those conventions that everyone has a pet evaluation method for?