[plaur]

Tomorrow I will be playing 5 team matches of 12 boards each, with a partner I have never played with before. We will have 5-10 minuttes max to agree systems.

What would you say is most important to discuss and agree on?

Which misunderstandings and disasters can be avoided with quick agreements?

[kenberg]

First and foremost: Almost any convention or system that you cite by name will mean different things to different people. So unless you have time to check out what they mean when they say that they play convention X, be very wary of agreeing to it.


When I play individuals, which I do and which IO enjoy, I usually suggest that we play SAYC with Capp and nmf.

The above line already shows what I meant earlier. You cannot assume that "Let's play SAYC" "OK" means that you are playing Capp or nmf. You can also not assume that you are not. State your preference, see if he agrees.

Determine when transfers are on. RHO opens 1D, you over call 1NT, pass, partner bids 2H. What's it? Are you sure? If you agree to play Texas, check out when that one is on. You open 1N, LHO bids 2D, partner bids 4H. Still on? I play it on if the interference is 3C or less. Partner might have a different idea.

IF you play Bergen, is it on over a double?


You get the idea. A few conventions where you are certain when they are on or off.


Ask what he leads from QT93 against suits and no trumps.

This sort of thing will probably take up mist of the time available.

One more thing: In situations like this I like to tell my partners that as far as I am concerned they are always free to make the bid or play that they think to be right. A relaxed partner will be a better partner.

[Echognome]

Play the most standard system you can. For me, it would probably be 2/1 GF.

The questions I would ask would be:

"What's your style for preempting?"
"What's your style when overcalling?"
"What's your style for cuebidding?"

And then I'd add a few conventions I want to be sure of: Lebensohl, inverted minors, 2-way nmf, four suit xfers after 1N, woolsey after they open 1N, rkcb 1430, standard jacoby.

Something like that anyway.

[andy_h]

If in doubt, jumps are?
If in doubt, doubles are?
And preferred style of carding (primarily attitude or count?)

[bid_em_up]

plaur, on Oct 2 2009, 12:27 PM, said:

What would you say is most important to discuss and agree on?

Leads and carding.

You can expect to defend approximately 1/2 of the boards. Both players must be on the same wavelength or the defense will be a disaster. There will be a lot of hands in the bidding where there is no problem whatsoever. You will pass throughout, have 1M-2M-4M, or 1N-3N auctions etc. I would be surprised that when playing 60 boards, more than 10 of them actually presented a bidding problem when using basic bidding methods.

I would go so far as to suggest that you need little more bidding agreements than NT ranges, types of transfers, negative doubles, and type of blackwood being used in order to get through the first round, at the end of which you normally will have a little more time to discuss anything else.

[hrothgar]

The most important question to ask is "Do you play stolen bid doubles"
I most certainly do not advocate playing standard bid doubles. However, this question is the easiest way to understand what you (might be) in for.

I would follow this with three statements

"When in doubt, its fit showing"
"When in doubt, double is for takeout"
2NT is never natural

after which you can get down to the important stuff (Leads + carding)

[Lobowolf]

hrothgar, on Oct 2 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

The most important question to ask is "Do you play stolen bid doubles"

I agree...and if he says "yes," feign stomach flu. A caddy can always fill in in a pinch.


ok, less facetiously... good advice in here so far. Make sure you're on the same page as far as jumps in previously bid suits. Nail down whether you're playing Drury, and what sort.

For maximum safety, it's beyond your agreements and into your bidding - if you have two reasonable choices, but one is potentially confusing, pick the unambiguous one. If 4♣ (spinter) is a 10 out of 10 bid, and your regular partner would know it's a splinter, you might want to bid 4♠ even if it's only an 8 out of 10, if there's any chance you think he might take 4♣ as Gerber.

If you have any partners in common, ask if he has a card that he plays with person X; you might be able to use your knowledge of the common link as a proxy.

[awm]

Ask if your partner has a card that he likes to play with one of his most regular partners. Usually it's easier to start from that and ask a few questions and/or suggest a few changes, rather than try to start from scratch and go over everything in 10-15 minutes. Of course, make sure that the card in question is a relatively "standard" one and not something really complicated.

I agree that the most important thing to discuss is your carding. Comes up all the time, way more important than bidding conventions. A few things that people seem to mess up:

(1) Which conventions are "on in competition"? Are transfers on over 1NT/2NT overcalls for example?

(2) What do jump shifts show? Is it different in competition? By passed hand?

(3) Come up with a simple rule about doubles; it doesn't have to be "optimal." A rule like "all doubles below 4♠ are takeout-oriented and all doubles 4♠ and up are penalty/cards" is fine.

(4) How do you play overcalls in "sandwich seat?" In particular, 1X-P-1Y-1NT/2X/2Y?

I agree that things like preempt style are important, but it's often hard to get a straight answer from people about this (they say stuff like "normal" or "weak jump"). An awful lot of people haven't thought about/discussed cuebidding style (this includes some pretty established partnerships below the expert level), and while it's nice to have agreements there I don't think I'd make it part of my "ten minute discussion."

[HeavyDluxe]

Great advice above! Keep it simple (SAYC, 2/1, or BWS as a base), agree to a few key conventions, discuss competitive and defensive bids, and nail down leads/carding.

Have fun! And good luck, Peter!

[pooltuna]

Lobowolf, on Oct 2 2009, 02:20 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Oct 2 2009, 02:12 PM, said:

The most important question to ask is "Do you play stolen bid doubles"

I agree...and if he says "yes," feign stomach flu. A caddy can always fill in in a pinch.

Hmmm ....No sheep in a wolf's clothing here.

[mike777]

My first question would be "What is your opening bid style"?

[Mbodell]

The most important thing is carding and defense. As others point out you defend half the time and that is where the biggest place that pickups usually and regularly lose.

The best way to get on the same page is to play a card that one of you regularly plays. It is easier if only one of you is trying to remember what you play. The better person in the partnership (or the better memory/bidder) should offer to play a card that the other person regularly plays. Even if it means 4♣ is always Gerber and all x are stolen bid doubles!

[plaur]

Thanks all.
I played with Steen, 20+ years of experience, a good player and a pleasant partner. Our team finished a bit above average. Steen and I ranked as 4th best pair in the multi. Results were online even before I got home http://www.bridge.dk/4200/Klub1/Turneringe...Stilling60.html
DCA, MUD, attitude primary signal.
We agreed to a total five(!) convs: Stayman, Jacoby Transfer, 1430, Michaels and XY-NT(= two-way). Even with this simple system Steen managed to forget XY-NT in one of the first boards

1♣ 1♠
1NT 2♣* all pass
*two way: xfer to ♦ planning to bid 2♠ invit

---

Was I wrong to show this hand as invitational ?

[Phil]

Carding, standard approach and defenses to 1N first.

Don't spend 8 of your 10 minutes on "responses to 1N".

Continue to refine the card as the round goes on, unless you are online (well, you can IM during breaks, just don't tell anyone I gave you the idea )

[HeavyDluxe]

plaur, on Oct 3 2009, 01:39 PM, said:

I played with Steen, 20+ years of experience, a good player and a pleasant partner. Our team finished a bit above average. Steen and I ranked as 4th best pair in the multi.

Congrats, Peter!

[plaur]

HeavyDluxe, on Oct 3 2009, 03:45 PM, said:

Congrats, Peter!

Thanks Brian. The team didnt do as well as hoped. Its 16 teams swiss, winners qualify and 2nd may get qualifying matches. I had a lot of fun though. To bad I dont have anyone to play Bob's system with. I do miss having a partner to play a system with that many solid agreements. I have two reg partners but havent used nearly as many hours praticing bidding as we did with Bob. I miss that, but do enjoy offline play more than online.

[andy_h]

plaur, on Oct 4 2009, 05:39 AM, said:

Thanks all. 
I played with Steen, 20+ years of experience, a good player and a pleasant partner. Our team finished a bit above average. Steen and I ranked as 4th best pair in the multi. Results were online even before I got home  http://www.bridge.dk/4200/Klub1/Turneringe...Stilling60.html
DCA, MUD, attitude primary signal.
We agreed to a total five(!) convs: Stayman, Jacoby Transfer, 1430, Michaels and XY-NT(= two-way). Even with this simple system Steen managed to forget XY-NT in one of the first boards 

1♣ 1♠
1NT 2♣* all pass 
*two way: xfer to ♦ planning to bid 2♠ invit

---

Was I wrong to show this hand as invitational ?

What's the 13th card?

And well done =)