[luis]

Quote

So Richard, do as you wish. For me, I am no longer going to participate in the development of a basic moscito system.. Instead, I will choose a system designed by one player, maybe Luis's or maybe German, and use that and hope to find partners who will be willing to read the same notes I read. At least if I play Luis's system, he can provide online tutoring to me, and I will be willing to share what I learn with others here in the BBO forum. Those interested in what you play, Richard, can always read your notes, which are are clearly among the most extensive available anywhere.

Cmon guys stop fighting, this is not good for me nor for you the forums the system or the world. I think Richard made a rather harsh post and everybody is entitled to write something not very polite in a bad moment. Fundamentalism is bad, it goes nowhere.

About Moscito I want to note that I played the original German version (1n=majors), I played the new German version, and I also played the modern Aussie version. If I were to play or teah Moscito to a new pd interested I'd just start presenting options and let him choose what he likes best. I'm sure you can have great results and enjoy very much competition with any of the mentioned versions or even a mixture. In fact the basic points of the system have already been explained and discussed and many readers will already have a good understanding on general philosophy and variations that can be played.
Do you like AKQ slam points? do you like CAB? Would you like to play 4d as a terminator or "to play" ? Just discuss it with your pd, modules are exchangeable.

If you guys cool down I'm still here and I'm still offering my help to write notes, give some online lessons, practice and play with any of you any version of the system. I'm flexible about systems I just load a different system for each of my pd's and everything goes fine. Many times my humorous comments can be misunderstood but I'm generally a good pd and I like to keep my pd happy. I've played Richard's system with him and it is a sound system and a lot of fun, I've played the modified German version with Ana for more than two years and it has been also a sound system and fun. I've even created a modified version for Ana and her female pd here in Argentina and they like it too, I just adapted to parnership style. You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand it is not an option- You must open this hand - You must open this hand, until they got it :-)

Cool down, write ideas, play them and have fun.....

[hrothgar]

Quote

From trefl's post we can use "yet" another structure that can be as good as the one I proposed or better:

1c: 15+
1d: 10-14 no 4M
1h: 10-14 4+h
1s: 10-14 4+s
1n: 11-14 BAL no 5M
2c: 10-14 Majors

Then all the balanced hands are dumped into the 1NT opening, this ensures that the 1d opening is unbalanced and 1h/1s if balanced are 5332 with 5M. Parnterships will be allowed to use their favourite weak NT approacj (or strong NT approach) to deal with the 1NT opening and the relay structure over 1x will be simpler.
What do you think?

Luis

I think that the 2C opening will be a problem
More specifically, how do you show 3 suited hands with both majors?

[trefl44]

1c: 15+
1d: 10-14, 4+h
1h: 10-14, 4+s
1s: 10-14, 4+h and 4+s
1n: 10-14, bal, no 4-M unless 4333
2c: 10-14, unbal. 5+c, max. 3-M
2d: 10-14, unbal. 5+d, max. 3-M
To me the above structure is more coherent and easy to learn than some other ones mentioned in this thread.

Obviously, including 2d as 10-14 and diamonds takes away an option of using Multi, Ekrens, etc. but gives the rest of the openers more natural meanings.

[mishovnbg]

Hi MOSCITO fans .
Thanks Luis for understanding :. If you start teaching Ben to your blue legal and simplified version of MOSCITO, may be other post, count me as student too, i still like to learn different ideas than my own .
Hey MOSCITO experts, may be better to read BEZ NAZWY/SYSTEMROZKLADOWY/LAMBDA/DELTA/REGRES/SUSPENSOR before to invent wheel again ;D?
Misho

[hrothgar]

Marston and Burgess used to play a strong pass system before WBF system regulations "convinced" them to switch to a strong club.
Left to their own devices, I don't think that this transition would have happened.

I certain agree that the Poles have done some wonderful work with respect to bidding theory, as have the Swedes. [I wish that more of this work was easily available in English] Some of the Polish innovations like the 4D end single have spread into other parts of the relay world.

With this said and done, I think that the Symmetric Relay engine that Kerr developed and Marston and Burgess popularized was an extremely significant development.

Systemic relay is:

(A) Easy to remember.
( Efficient. MOSCITO resolves shape at a low level.
More significanty, MSOCITO strives to resolve specific shapes with a single bid
[All 5431 shapes are resolved with a 3D bid] and links the rank ordering of shape
resolution to the frequency of the hand type. [5431 hands are more frequent than
6421 hands, so 5431 hands are resolved at a lower level]

I think that it is hard to overestimate the significance of this development.

[Free]

Well I'm interested in every bridge system which isn't natural and has relay systems in it. I don't know a lot from Moscito, but I'm very interested in learning it. This is the thing I would like to play:
1C = 15+
1D = 10-14, 4 card H, unbalanced
1H = 10-14, 4 card S, unbalanced
1S = 10-14, with D (no 4 card M), unbalanced
1NT = 10-14, balanced
2C = 10-14 with C (I dont know how much u'll need: 5 or 6) and unbalanced
2D = multi (weak-2M)
2M = weak, 5 card M + 4+m (= Muiderberg)

maybe 2NT with 10-14 and 55+m or pre-emptive or so. Using 2C and 2D to show unbalanced hands is not a good sollution I think. Just make 1NT balanced and all problems are solved with the 2C opening.

The only problem u still have is: 5-3-3-2 = balanced or not? I suggest when playing weak NT (10-14), no 5 card M, but a 5 card minor is allowed.

About all the other stuff about stopping bids and slam approach, just give me something that works

What do you guys think about it?

[hrothgar]

You raise some complicated issues:
From my perspective, one of the nicest things about MOSCITO that the system provides great lattitude for applying judgement.

For example, playing 1D promises Hearts:

IF I get dealt a 3=4=2=4 hand, I have the option to opening EITHER 1D or 1NT.
If I think that the hand is well suited for a suit contract, I'll emphasize the Hearts. If I think that the hand is better suited for NT, I'll open 1NT.

In a similar fashion, holding 4=2=1=6, I can either open 1H showing Spades or 2C.
Here once again, the crucial question is what I want to emphasize about the hand.
Systems that rigidly force a specific opening based on shape make the relay structures easier, however, they are much less useful during "normal" constructive bidding.

[Free]

Just give the Majors priority.

Look, Moscito is aperantly not a natural system. But (!), me and my partner play our own polish club system with a 1NT opening 11-14 (and 10-13 in 3rd and 4th), semi-balanced. Also 5 card M is allowed, but then we sometimes play 2OM in a 5-2 fit (we'll change that soon)... We seldom have other problems (for example with 4432 hands). So I suggest 1D or 1H tends to be NOT a 4333 or 4432. 1S and 2C also no 5332 (balanced with a minor). If you have like a 4-1-2-6 bid 1H, if you have a 4-2-3-4 bid 1NT, if you have a 5-3-2-3 bid 1H. Since 1NT is balanced, the 1S and 2C opening are totally unbalanced... After 1NT, you can have also a great relay-system to ask the shape of the hand:

2C = relay
2D = no 4 card M
2S = relay (2H = weak 4-4M)
2NT = 4333 or 5 card C
3C = relay
3D = 4333
3H = relay
3S/NT = 333[4]
3H/S/NT = 33[2]5
3C = 5 card D
3D = relay
3H/S/NT = 335[2]
3D = 4-4 m
3H = relay
3S/NT = 3[2]44
2H = 4 card H, maybe 4 card S
2S = relay
2NT = 4 card minor
3C = relay
3D/H = 34[2]4
3S/NT = 344[2]
3C/D = 443[2]
3H = 3-4-3-3
2S = 4 card S, no 4 card H
3C = relay
3D = 4 card C
3H = relay
3S/NT = 43[2]4
3H/S = 4 card D, 434[2]
3NT = 4-3-3-3

[hrothgar]

The issue here is the following:

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 2H with xxx as trump support
MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 3H with xxxx as trump support

Life is MUCH better if the 1D/1H openings have some "bite" to them.

[Free]

Quote

The issue here is the following:

MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 2H with xxx as trump support
MOSCITO systemically raises 1D to 3H with xxxx as trump support

Life is MUCH better if the 1D/1H openings have some "bite" to them.

I don't see the problem: with an unbalanced hand playing 2M will be with a 5-card or with a singleton/void in a 4-3 fit. Why not... But hey, you know Moscito and I don't so you'll have a point somewhere I guess.

[hrothgar]

The 4-3 fits play much better when the opponents can't lead 3 rounds of trump :-)

[hrothgar]

MOSCITO has its own relay structure to resolve balanced hand patterns over 1NT.
This structure kicks in after an auction like

1C - 1N [1C = strong, artificial and forcing]
[1N = Balanced, positive]

or, in newer versions

1C - 1D
1N

I only took a short glance at the structure that you are using, however, I think that I prefer the MOSCITO structure.

The MOSCITO structure seems easier to remember.
It also appears to resolve shape at a lowever levels throughout.


After 1NT, 2C = relay and then

4C = 3325 shape with 11 slam points
3N = 3325 shape with 10 slam points
3S = 3325 shape with 6-9 slam points
3H = 3235 shape
3D = 2335 shape
3C = 4432 shape with 4 clubs and 4 diamonds
2NT = Any 5332 shape with 5 diamonds
2S = Any 4333 shape
2H = 4+ Spades, 0-3 Hearts, NOT 4333
2D = 4+ Diamonds, NOT 4333

After

1C - 1N 1N = balanced
2C - 2H 2H = 4+ Spades
2S - ???

3N = 4=3=2=4 shape with 11 controls
3S = 4=3=2=4 shape with 10 controls
3H = 4=3=2=4 shape 6-9 controls
3D = 4=2=3=4 shape
3C = 4432 with Spades and Diamonds
2N = Any 5332 with 5 Spades

After

1C - 1N 1NT = Balanced
2C - 2D 2D = Hearts
2H - ???

3N = 3=4=2=4 shape with 11 controls
3S = 3=4=2=4 shape with 10 controls
3H = 3=4=2=4 shape 6-9 controls
3D = 2=4=3=4 shape
3C = 4432 with Hearts and Diamonds
2N = Any 5332 with 5 Hearts
2S = 4432 with Spades and Hearts

[Free]

True, but my relay-system is based on my extended stayman (it has some similarities to moscito: doubletons and singletons are bid from low to high, and normally high suits are bid first). With my structure, you can play weak stayman (44+ M without game interest), on the other hand, your system is indeed easier to remember...

[Codo]

Hi Ben,

don`t give up. Don`t take it personal. We need you.

Hi Richard,

don`t give up. Don`t take it personal. We need you.

I think Luis put it in the perfect words: Noone is the owner of the truth (besides me of course..). So lets try to make a basic mosquito avaiable.

I doubt, that we will find the perfect solution here but I am quite sure, that we need a very basic system to spread it. There is no much sense to discuss now, if we should use high shortage low or low length first or whatever.

There is no sense in discussing, if Richards, Sartais, Renes, Rons Luis or anyones system is better or elegant or whatever.

So what about the following ideas:
1. We find ONE volunteer, who give us students ONE "easy" system. I surely won`t like to learn Richards or Renes 150 pages for the seldom luck to play mosquito here...

Or:
Idea Nr.2:

We say: Luis, you tell us anything about the 1 Club opening and first rebids.

Richard, you tell us anything about the openings from 1D to 3 NT.

Rene: All later biddíng structures like s2 or spiral scan or whatever you think is neccesary

Ron: How can we deal with interferences?

Of course, I would prefer the later, but maybe this is impossible.

But I would be very unhappy, if this threat will be dying.

And maybe, we can start a second threat, where Richard, Rene et al can discuss their pro and cons about the meaning of 3 Diamond in Mosquito....

Kind Regards

Roland

[Free]

IMO, the basic moscito shouldn't be the best system ever. It should be pretty good though, but keep it simple. If people have learned this, they can always change whatever they like...

[luis]

Hi,

I've created a set of system notes for a BBO-Moscito preliminar version, I think it's very easy to learn yet powerful.
You can download the file (bbo_moscito.rtf) at this yahoo group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/moscito/file...System%20Notes/
Comments and corrections are welcome.

[inquiry]

Quote

Hi,

I've created a set of system notes for a BBO-Moscito preliminar version, I think it's very easy to learn yet powerful.
You can download the file (bbo_moscito.rtf) at this yahoo group:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/moscito/file...System%20Notes/
Comments and corrections are welcome.

Hi Luis.... .

Nice little file, 26 pages, few words, easy to follow. I caught two typos. On the opening bid of 1H you say it shows 4+hearts but then say it denys 4hs.... I know you meant 4S... and then a random sentence after 1D opening bid with one word... Any.

Maybe you should title it "proposed BBO moscito" or "draft 1 BBO moscito" or something. As others may have different view of what such a version should be. However, if anyone wants to try this version out... look me up, this is what I am learning.

ben

[luis]

Thanks for the corrections and of course it is just a proposal, many will disagree with the principles that I applied. But at least we have a short summary of a system that can be used to play online without missunderstandings and the benefits of relays, light openings, 4 card majors, denial cuebids and so.
I focused in minimization of misunderstandings, dual bids and other techincalities that can lead to problems.
I'll be ready to practice this version online with you and others that may be interested.
If you or someone want to add to extend the system you can do it and then agree with your pd on the differences over the document.
Thanks for reading, let's see how it goes at the table :-)

[the hog]

I do not like criticising, because at least you have done something about putting notes on line. Also while I am very pleased we have finally got some notes on-line, Luis, I am disappointed that you used Neill's relay structure and not Symmetric, and also totally ignored any suggestions anyone else made, eg (End signal, change to the commonly accepted H/M/L shortage rather than L/M/H changes to opening bids to make them more effective) etc.

The structure you published is played by a small minority only - NZ, and Aussies for example, who constitute by far the majority of Moscito players, would find it totally alien. I can understand you wishing to push something that you already play, because it is easier for you and because it is legai in your federation; however Luis, these are not good reasons for trying to push this version as a bbo standard.

If I were asked I could honestly not recommend anyone learning this. Some of us proposed compromise structures NOT based on transfer openings and yet still far closer to what is commonly played rather than the structure you detail. (I understand Ben's objections to the t/f opening scheme).

I could also not recommend anyone learning a system which has 3 opening bids to show S or a combination thereof, and where a constructive hand with both Ms starts at 2C. (Ekrens is a different story). Why start the auction at a higher level when you have the boss suits? These features are not representative of good system design.

All this makes it a lot harder for those who would wish to adopt the Symmetric structure later on, or play a system using Symmetric relays or adopt a more effective system after having played this one for a while. It also probably means that any hope we had of getting together a cohesive Moscito group is now totally dead.

Such is life.

[inquiry]

Quote

It also probably means that any hope we had of getting together a cohesive Moscito group is now totally dead.

Another convert... This is very similar to what let to my tirade in reply 59. The essential quote..." So again, count me out of the effort to build a basic BBO moscito. "

However, I want to commend Luis. If someone wanted to build an "sayc" (by that I mean simplized version) of moscito, they should take a look at Luis's document for how to document it. Don't like luis's relay structure? Suggest an alternative and document it in a similar easy to follow manner. Don't like three different opening bids to show spades (the master suit), propose something else and document it.

I am going to play Luis's system because it is simple to learn and documented well enough for me to give it a try. Would I prefer a version of moscito that the "pro's" here could agree on that wasn't too complicated to learn as an example of the system. Sure, I would prefer that. But from my reading of different moscito systems on line, and from the actions of the various advocates here... there is no such thing as the "moscito".

Wtih you out Ron, maybe someone else will pick up the challenge and make a short document like Luis's that offers alternative ways to bid moscito that works. But Richard seems too invested in his very complicated version, and only you, luis, and Richard have the history of posting here to suggest the follow through to complete such a project.

But, thanks again Luis, I am fully versed in your version and looking forward to an opportunity to try it again.

Ben