[ArtK78]

There seems to be a basic misunderstanding here.

While I alerted at the time I made the bid with the explanation "Kokish Relay," I added an explanation of the bid in the chat to both opps before they had bid.

So, they had a complete explanation available to them.

[jtfanclub]

ArtK78, on Jul 14 2008, 09:25 AM, said:

Yes, we play Kokish differently.

I don't buy that. You either play Kokish or you do not play Kokish. What are the opponents supposed to do when you describe the bid as Koskih- use their psychic powers to figure out that you're playing 'Kokish Differently'?

If you're going to use the name of a convention, I think it's perfectly fair for the opponents to believe that you're using the normal, standard form of the system, not something home-grown. This would be like describing a 4♣ call as 'Gerber', but neglecting to tell the opponents that the responses are 4♦ is two aces, 4♥ is 0 or 3 and 4♠ is 1 or 4. It's not fair to the opponents at all.

The opponents thought you had hearts. I suspect they thought so not because they were confused by Kokish, but because they thought your bidding showed hearts in Kokish. I have no idea why you would think that they would know what your 3NT bid meant, if your meaning of 3NT doesn't match the Kokish meaning of 3NT.

I would rule MI and adjust, I think the director gave you a break.

[han]

ArtK78, on Jul 14 2008, 11:55 AM, said:

There seems to be a basic misunderstanding here.

While I alerted at the time I made the bid with the explanation "Kokish Relay," I added an explanation of the bid in the chat to both opps before they had bid.

So, they had a complete explanation available to them.

Oh ok, I misread this part. If you explained your convention well in chat then there is no problem.

[ArtK78]

jtfanclub, on Jul 14 2008, 11:58 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 14 2008, 09:25 AM, said:

Yes, we play Kokish differently.

I don't buy that. You either play Kokish or you do not play Kokish.

I googled Kokish and found "Kokish Relays" on the Bridge Guys website. The explanation there is very close to the method that I use.

So, this comment is out of line.

The opponents were informed that the 3NT rebid showed a balanced hand of 26-27 HCP.

The basic idea of Kokish 2♥ in this sequence is that the strong hand has EITHER a strong balanced hand or a strong hand with hearts. There are variations in how a particular partnership defines later bids. Exactly how a particular partnership sets its point count parameters for later rebids is not particularly relevant (although it will be announced when bid).

[jtfanclub]

Some say that it's not a part of Kokish Relays, but a 'logical extension' thereof.

http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys/Convent...kishRelays.html

Some don't mention it at all:

http://www.bridgebum.com/kokish.php

http://home.att.net/~gandalfnf/lessons/lad...oc#_Toc41981337

Others say it shows hearts (or rather, anything but 2NT shows hearts)

http://www.pattayabridge.com/conventions/K...hRelay_main.htm

http://www.bridgehan...okish_Relay.htm

http://cuebiddingatbridge.blogspot.com/200...ting-relay.html

And not one mentions it as standard.

Those are the top 10 hits for "Kokish Relay" on Yahoo.

How about Google?

Logical Extension - 1, same as above.
Anything but 2NT shows hearts - 4
Not Mentioned - 3
Not Related - 2

[hrothgar]

Relatively minor quibble:

I think that 2♥ should be described as a puppet to 2♠ rather than a relay.

I think that a (reasonable) explanation is

"Puppet to 2!S showing either Hearts or a Balanced hand"

You should (then) explain that 3NT shows a balanced whatever

[ArtK78]

Jlall, on Jul 14 2008, 03:44 PM, said:

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

[matmat]

ArtK78, on Jul 14 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jul 14 2008, 03:44 PM, said:

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

i wonder what you're implying.

[Stephen Tu]

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

save yourself some hassle ...

[Mbodell]

Stephen Tu, on Jul 14 2008, 03:08 PM, said:

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

save yourself some hassle ...

I describe this the same way that you do with capital OR, but I always wonder if my opponents might be unsure if I mean 25+ (bal or H) or (25+ bal) or H. Or for suction stuff if I type D OR H+S if they get that I mean (D) OR (H+S) not (D OR H) + S. I mean I know reasonable people will understand, especially if they are used to these bids and have seen them before, but it is hard to tell when it is all typed and none of the visual clues from F2F are there about if the opponents understand or not.

[Cascade]

Jlall, on Jul 15 2008, 11:41 AM, said:

ArtK78, on Jul 14 2008, 04:22 PM, said:

Jlall, on Jul 14 2008, 03:44 PM, said:

I would adjust against you.

You would probably do that regardless of what the facts were.

Nope, I just really think if you are ever going to play something artificial you should explain it in a clear and concise way. I think you failed to do that, and because of that your LHO did not lead a heart.

I agree a clearer explanation would have been better.

However I am not convinced that the opponents were damaged. It seems they understood Kokish and they opening post clearly stated that the bid (2♥) was explained as being artificial.

That means that you need to come up with a good reason to lead a heart with a different explanation when you wouldn't against an artificial 2♥.

[Stephen Tu]

Mbodell, on Jul 14 2008, 05:28 PM, said:

Stephen Tu, on Jul 14 2008, 03:08 PM, said:

"Kokish Relay" = 12 chars

"25+ bal OR H" = 12 chars

save yourself some hassle ...

I describe this the same way that you do with capital OR, but I always wonder if my opponents might be unsure if I mean 25+ (bal or H) or (25+ bal) or H. Or for suction stuff if I type D OR H+S if they get that I mean (D) OR (H+S) not (D OR H) + S.

OK so make it
"H OR 25+ bal"

less ambiguous, or add a couple parentheses.

[onoway]

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them accurately,concisely and speedilly. The confusion of having to ask for an explanation of the bidding box alert, then waiting and figuring out what it is in chat and then having to sort out what to do about it puts a degree of time and psychological pressure on the opps which seems a bit unfair. I know many many less able players will simply go on in total bewilderment because of time pressures and the stress of trying to haul an explanation out of a bidder.
It has always struck me as a bit of one upsmanship to plunk a convention name into the bidding box and wait to see what the opps do about it, esp if there is reason to suspect they may not know it.

[effervesce]

onoway, on Jul 14 2008, 08:17 PM, said:

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them  accurately,concisely and speedilly. The confusion of having to ask for an explanation of the bidding box alert, then waiting and figuring out what  it is in chat and then having to sort out what to do  about  it puts a degree of time  and psychological  pressure on the opps which seems a bit unfair. I know many many less able players will simply go on in total bewilderment because of time pressures and the stress of trying to haul an explanation out of a bidder.   
It has always struck me as a bit of one upsmanship to plunk a convention name into the bidding box and wait to see what the opps do about it, esp if there is reason to suspect they may not know it.

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed! Then it would solve all such MI situations, saving director time, aggravation, etcetc.....


Seriously, where would you draw the line? Include stayman/transfers, nothing else? Jacoby? Two way checkback? Inverted minors? In any case, we're playing with players all around the world. Are you going to stop Polish players playing a Polish bidding system? English and New Zealand players from playing Acol? Chinese players from playing precision? Oh wait, SAYC is the only 'natural' system and everything else is 'artificial' and 'designed to confuse their opponents'.

[1eyedjack]

The line would be drawn by the TD at some arbitrary point according to his judgement. His judgement would not be unanimously popular and those who do not like it would vote with their feet. Those remaining may well have a more enjoyable and arguably fairer experience.

[helene_t]

effervesce, on Jul 15 2008, 03:17 AM, said:

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed! Then it would solve all such MI situations, saving director time, aggravation, etcetc.....

Seriously, where would you draw the line? Include stayman/transfers, nothing else? Jacoby?

I don't think formal rules about this are called for. ACBL tourneys follow the GCC, period. However, it is fair point IMHO that players should refrain from using conventions they cannot speedily explain in an understandable way. This is not about formal rules. It's just about good sportmanship.

[vuroth]

effervesce, on Jul 14 2008, 09:17 PM, said:

onoway, on Jul 14 2008, 08:17 PM, said:

I wonder if people should perhaps not use bids requiring an alert in speedball tournaments if they find themselves unable to define them  accurately,concisely and speedilly.

What a brilliant idea! Why don't we all play stone-age bidding methods-no conventions allowed!

I smell a strawman....

[jtfanclub]

Cascade, on Jul 14 2008, 07:39 PM, said:

However I am not convinced that the opponents were damaged. It seems they understood Kokish and they opening post clearly stated that the bid (2♥) was explained as being artificial.

Because if you read the links I put in my post, most people seem to agree that when playing Kokish.

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-2NT
is balanced, and

2♣-2♦-2♥-2♠-anything else
shows hearts