[Free]

Actually Richard, you are just summing up the advantages of strong ♣ systems, which use 1 strong relay (here 1♠) after limited openings. Because almost all biddings in a natural system are forcing, and not in a strong ♣ system, the last one automaticly has more places to play.

[the hog]

"More importantly is to get good defensive carding, since 50% of time you will be defending."

I don't think so!

[csdenmark]

The_Hog, on Mar 11 2004, 06:31 AM, said:

"More importantly is to get good defensive carding, since 50% of time you will be defending."

I don't think so!

And rest of the time you are dealing with interferences!

The BEST system is one which is designed to handle both

[Free]

I'm not used to agree with Claus, but this time he's 100% right!!

[the hog]

Claus misunderstood. My comment meant that if you are defending 50% of the time, you are playing losing Bridge.

[EricK]

The_Hog, on Mar 10 2004, 11:49 PM, said:

Claus misunderstood. My comment meant that if you are defending 50% of the time, you are playing losing Bridge.

Possibly true in general, but here is what happened last night at the club.

Out of 24 boards, we played 12 they played 12. We ended up with 20 plus scores, and of the 12 hands we defended we defeated 11 of the contracts. In only one of these defended contracts did we have a higher contract we could make (and we only defended on it because partner pulled the Pass card out by mistake!). We could have defended on one of the hands we went down on, and would have defeated that contract too!

Eric

[helium]

hrothgar, on Mar 10 2004, 12:49 PM, said:

Trpltrbl, on Mar 10 2004, 06:38 PM, said:

And another thing you have to keep in mind, is that certain systems you can't play in a lot of places. Again you are better of playing a natural system with maybe a better way to evaluate your hand. I really like the Zarpoints system
Go with that and you'll see.

Mike 

What Trpltrbl doesn't seem to appreciate is that relay methods are a "means" rather than an "end" in and of themself. I play MOSCITO a lot. However, I have found that I relay with relatively few hands.

"Artificial" systems like MOSCITO are much more honest in that all the "strangeness" is localized. In the case of MOSCITO, the system requires a strong club opening, trnasfer openings, and uses relays with certain strong hand types. However, the vast majority of the system is designed for a simple, natural, bashing bidding style.

Furthermore, while I agree with Trpltrb's basic point that a bidding system should be designed to permit considerable flexibility regarding where to play, I think that it is ludicrous to claim that a 2/1 style evaluates well using this type of metric.

Just for fun, lets compare a standard 2/1 style with MOSCITO.
The 2/1 bidder has just opened 1S, showing 5+ Spades
The MOSCITO player has just opened 1H, showing 4+ Spades

[Please recall, Trbltrp is the one who established the evaluation criteria]

1NT Response
Playing 2/1, 1N is forcing
Playing MOSCITO, 1N is natural and non-forcing
Advantage: MOSCITO

2C Response
Playing 2/1, 2C game forcing
Playing MOSCITO, 2C is natural and non-forcing
Advantage: MOSCITO

2D Response
Playing 2/1, 2D is game forcing
Playing MOSCITO, 2D is natural and non-forcing
Advantage: MOSCITO

2H Response
Playing 2/1, 2H is game forcing
Playing MOSCITO, 2H is natural and non-forcing
Advantage MOSCITO

Bids from 2S up are going to evaluate as neutral
Both systems treat them approximately the same.

In short, your nice natural 2/1 structure doesn't evaluate too well using your own selection criteria

hmmm blis tell me what is forsing using moscito?
so fare nothing on 1-2 level

[Trpltrbl]

The_Hog, on Mar 10 2004, 04:31 PM, said:

"More importantly is to get good defensive carding, since 50% of time you will be defending."

I don't think so!

25 % you are declarer, 25 % you are dummy. Wonder how you would call the other 50% But I know what you are trying to say If you can't defend you will never ever win in bridge, if your bidding sucks and you defend good you still have somewhat of a chance.

Mike

[hrothgar]

helium, on Mar 11 2004, 11:09 AM, said:

hmmm blis tell me what is forsing using moscito?
so fare nothing on 1-2 level

After a 1H opening, showing 4+ Spades, the following bids are forcing

1S = Relay. Strong, artificial and forcing
2N = 4+ Spades, Game invitational value
4C = Splinter
4D = Splinter
4H = Splinter

[mikestar]

Trpltrbl, on Mar 10 2004, 03:38 PM, said:

And another thing you have to keep in mind, is that certain systems you can't play in a lot of places. Again you are better of playing a natural system with maybe a better way to evaluate your hand. I really like the Zarpoints system
Go with that and you'll see.

Mike 

I think part of Mike's comment is being missed. I believe he means that your method of hand evaluation is as important as your system. Mike Lawrence wrote an entire book about this, extending Jeff Rubens work considerably.

I would assert that a partnership playing plain vanilla 2/1 but having expert hand evaluation skills will mop the floor with a pair playing the lastest version of MOSCITO or Polish, but whose evaluations skills are limited to Goren Point Count.

[the hog]

"25 % you are declarer, 25 % you are dummy. Wonder how you would call the other 50%"

No, you misunderstand, a strong pair will play more than 50% of the hands is what I am saying. If you only play 50% of the hands you are not aggressive enough in the bidding.

Re the hand evaluation debate, Mikestar, you are definitely right. but I would question whether any method of hand evaluation, be it Goren point count or Zar points can match hand evaluation based on judgement.

[mikestar]

The_Hog, on Mar 11 2004, 09:48 PM, said:

Re the hand evaluation debate, Mikestar, you are definitely right. but I would question whether any method of hand evaluation, be it Goren point count or Zar points can match hand evaluation based on judgement.

Agreed. A truly expert pair evaluating their hands using expert judgement will beat any pair using any counting method. But quite likely they won't beat a pair using Zarpoints as badly as a pair using Goren Points (assuming Zar's claims are resonably accurate)--the more sophisticated point count method fakes expert judgement better. And that's what all counting methods are about: HCP, losers, distributional points, Truscott's assets, etc. are all attempts to simulate expert judgement for the player who does not yet have it.

[the saint]

Table presence.....

You can be the best technician on the planet, but if you have the table presence of a chair leg then you will be kicked around all over the place. Guessing Queens, knowing when to save, pass or double, when to psych, when someone has psyched you. I know a whole load of rubber players who play no system (and I mean no system) at all and regularly rack up the scores based on great cardplay and table presence. You cna develop it to a degree, but some are just born with it. Know your opponent and get inside his head , then what can he do to hurt you? (Unfortunately I don't have an evil laughing emoticon to press my point home.....)

Alan

[dugite]

As far as I can see the best system is the one that you enjoy playing the most.

If you find one system doesn't suit your style try another.And then another untill you hit on the one that suits you best.It might be helpful to play the systems that most in your area play(unless you have a regular partner--then go for the most fun one)so you can always find a compatable partner.

Some areas and clubs have restrictions as to what may be legally played so it is best to check with the authorities.

I have never played an "authentic"system but have added on,invented and stolen a few ideas from this system or that system to form a composite.

As an aside.People seem to need to know the name of your system.Not sure why but they do.When I start at a new table I give the blurb of "5 card majors--short club--16-18 1NT--transfer preempts--myxomytosis 2's--reverse count and attitude--revolving odd/even discards--weak openings in 3rd seat--weak1NT in 4th seat--PORI and PODI--Roman Jump Overcalls".Our convention card is always on the table too.Often the ops say "OK Thx but what system?"When I say one of my own they get hot and bothered and moan(1 even called the director)but if I make up a name like NOSTRO or ORSON(both names I have used being made up of part partnership names)they are content and say"Thx never heard of that one"

I started with a very rudimentary form of ACOL(we won the 1st two weeks and were then told--That is not ACOL Our system evolved to acol with 5 spades,then acol with 5 card majors, it then underwent a complete mutation to about what it is today(changing and losing partners along the way)

Each system seems to draw different sorts of people so find the one that suits you and go for it!If you find your chosen system doesn't suit chuck it away and find a new one untill you find your place in the big scheme of things.

Online is the best place to learn a new system.Have ie running in the background with a bridge site ready with bidding and treatments for your chosen system,put on your profile that you play it and then consult the open webpage to check what is going on(you can always pretend a bad connection if you are too slow

Bye

[Yzerman]

Hi all, just thought I would add my favorite 2 systems in order of preference. Mind you, I am familiar with and have experimented with MANY systems and the systems I propose as my favorite are selected because of;

1 - Ease of distinguishing FORCING, INVITATIONAL, NON-FORCING auctions
2 - Flexibility
3 - Effectiveness
4 - "False Economy", meaning the fewest number of bids to describe hand types
5- "Naturalness" of auction - meaning you bid what you got )

Primary System -

2/1, 11-14 NT, xfers, 2 way checkback (a MUST), inv minor GF, criss-cross in minor for invites, with lots of fit jumps/bids.

Advantages -

1 - Very efficient, openings are easily defined on rebid
2 - Powerful negative and positive inferences in auctions
3 - Very simple to differentiate forcing, non-forcing, invitational auctions
4 - Excellent for finding minor suit slams (cause of the 1m opening on 15-17 hands)
5 - Finding a fit is much more simple, less emphasis on points and more on fit

Disadvantages -

1 - 15-17 hands opened with 1m can be preempted easily and effectively
2 - The natural risk of opening 1NT with 11-14 points
3 - Inability to play 2C after 1N rebid (2C is relay)
4 - Marginal difficulty handling "constructive" minor hands (inv=gf, criss cross=inv)

Secondary System -

Polish Club (WJ), 15-17 NT, PRO (polish style checkback), use of 2NT as trigger for forcing auctions.

Advantages -

1 - Powerful negative and positive inferences in auctions
2 - Opener 2nd bid describes hand type effectively (range/hand type defined in 2 bids)
3 - Ability to bid suits in 2/1 auction naturally with minimal points (no 2/1 GF)
4 - 1D opening ALWAYS has diamonds
5 - Relatively simple to differentiate forcing, non-forcing, invitational auctions

Disadvantages -

1 - The 3/4/5 way 1C opening can be preempted easily
2 - 2/1 responses are NOT game force and create some level of doubt in auctions
3 - 1NT is NOT forcing and can be uncomfortable response to 1M on occasion

Those are my observations and preferences, thanks for the opportuntity to respond.

Regards,
Michael A Lucy

[Gerben47]

How about you choose to play Polish Club with 2/1 GF? That leaves you with only one disadvantage under "secondary system"

Gerben