[hrothgar]

For anyone who doesn't know, MOSCITO stands for

Major
Oriented
Strong
Club
In
Trouble
Often

I'm taking the libert of providing a link to my MOSCITO notes.  I think that they are fairly comprehensive.

http://web.mit.edu/~...www/moscito.doc

[keylime]

Those notes are nice - also recommend going over to the GIB site (http://www.gibware.com) where there is a shorthand version of sorts for MOSCITO.

[mishovnbg]

If opening with 4 card majors is so good why almost all top world players dont play it? Answer is simple - because is not good. Even italians and french players, they have great experience in "canape" systems, give up - no blue clubs, roman clubs...

[hrothgar]

Quote

If opening with 4 card majors is so good why almost all top world players dont play it? Answer is simple - because is not good. Even italians and french players, they have great experience in "canape" systems, give up - no blue clubs, roman clubs...

5 card majors has become the dominant basis for bidding system designs throughout most of the world. Today, the vast majority of top pairs have switched to playing 5 card major based methods. There are certainly some holdouts [Hamman and Soloway, Helgemo, Auken - Von Arnim, the Hacketts, an assorted but of Swedes, Brits, and Aussies], however, most people seem to have gravitated to some 5 card major variant.

Personally, I believe that this has relatively little to do with whether 4 card majors or 5 card majors are superior in theory. However, there is an enomous correlation with playing 5 card majors and

(a) Finding partners to play with
( Finding clients to partner with

Standards ratify what is popular.
It is naive to argue that standards select the best approach.

Please consider VHS versus Betamax or any one of a variety of other examples of standard formation from business literature.

[luis]

Hi,
I'm a Moscito player form Buenos Aires, Argentina. I play a version based on German-Moscito very similar to other Moscito structures.

I know Richard from okb but I'm not playing there anymore (I use BBO now)

If anybody is interested the version I play uses (adjusted to match several regulations):

1c: 15+ any
1d: 10-14 denies 4h/4s, any
1h: 4+h denies 4s 10-14
1s: 10-14 unbalanced 4+s denies 4h
1N: 10-14 balanced with 4/5 spades
2c: 10-14 5+/4+ in the majors
2d: 10-14 three suited hand with 4/5 clubs
2h: Weak 2 in hearts (0+) or 10-14 three suited with short clubs, so always 4+h
2s: Weak 2 in spades (0+)
2N: 8-11 at least 5/4 in the minors
3c: Weak 5+c, 5+other
3d: Weak 5+d 5+h/s
3h: Weak 5+h 5+s
3s: Gambling
3N: Weal 5+c 5+d
4x: Preempts

We use relays over all the openings, Rubensohl in many (most) situations and many artificial jumps and support bids.

[pbleighton]

"5 card majors has become the dominant basis for bidding system designs throughout most of the world. Today, the vast majority of top pairs have switched to playing 5 card major based methods. There are certainly some holdouts [Hamman and Soloway, Helgemo, Auken - Von Arnim, the Hacketts, an assorted but of Swedes, Brits, and Aussies], however, most people seem to have gravitated to some 5 card major variant.

Personally, I believe that this has relatively little to do with whether 4 card majors or 5 card majors are superior in theory. However, there is an enomous correlation with playing 5 card majors and

(a) Finding partners to play with
( Finding clients to partner with

Standards ratify what is popular.
It is naive to argue that standards select the best approach.

Please consider VHS versus Betamax or any one of a variety of other examples of standard formation from business literature."

You've made it clear in many (interesting) posts that you consider MOSCITO to be an excellent, if not the best system.

MOSCITO is, as I understand it, a relay system. Do you feel that 4 card majors are viable without either a relay system approach, or at least a highly structured approach which mixes relays with detailed partnership agreements about various natural bids.

[hrothgar]

Quote

MOSCITO is, as I understand it, a relay system. Do you feel that 4 card majors are viable without either a relay system approach, or at least a highly structured approach which mixes relays with detailed partnership agreements about various natural bids.

The reason that MOSCITO uses relays has NOTHING to do with the fact that the system uses 4 card majors. 4 card major systems are perfectly workable without relays.

MOSCITO uses relays because MOSCITO uses a very light opening style. Opposite a limited opening bid that promises
~ 9 - 14 HCP, its essential to optimize the response structure to win the part score battle. This, in turn, requires either relays or transfer positive responses.

As for detailed partership agreements:

Both 4 card major systems and 5 card major systems will work better with detailed partnership agreements.

[the hog]

"5 card majors has become the dominant basis for bidding system designs throughout most of the world. Today, the vast majority of top pairs have switched to playing 5 card major based methods. There are certainly some holdouts [Hamman and Soloway, Helgemo, Auken - Von Arnim, the Hacketts, an assorted but of Swedes, Brits, and Aussies], however, most people seem to have gravitated to some 5 card major variant."

5 card Majors are easier to handle in competitive situations eg it is easier to raise with 3. On the other hand if you play 4 card Majors, you can open with a M far more frequently and this has a greater pre emptive effect. Having just returned from the Autumn nationals, I can say that the majority of players were using 4 card Majors, (Acol), and both teams that made the finals had 4 card Majorites among them.

To say that 4 card Ms is "not good" is a silly argument. It just depends what you are used to and what is the norm in the area in which you play.

[mishovnbg]

I dont think that argument for majority of top players dont play 4 major openings is silly. Exceptions only establish rule. Remark that it was played many time and was rejected, not because was forbidden like strong pass. And was rejected by top italian pairs that play many years same systems. If somebody dont like truth, it is his oun business. Evolution dont ask us what do we like, it just make her job. I can give u a lot of arguments for both, but just will say why Moscito is attractive for players in my opinion.
It replace some of advantages of forbidden strong pass systems. It is sometimes difficulte to handle by most of normal players, because it open in 4 major when it can have side longer minor suit and take out dbl over is not "clear", because shortage in such side suit. For me isnt difficulte, i just said that at tournamet many of players is just for "pleasure" and have only simple agreements. Reason to forbid strong pass is same. I mean distributional, major oriented bids, alternative bids as in my lovely Lambda(also 4 major, hehe).
Relays are also difficulte to understand by normal players. Ofcourse u describe to opp what answers mean, but they dont know for example what other alternatives u have if u dont make relay. Also some restrictions (law, time for play) can prevent opp to have same information as u. It is simple against laws of duplicate bridge.

[the hog]

I think you misunderstood. What I said was that people tend to play what others in their group play. eg if you have a group of Acol players around you, you play Acol. The same argument applies to 4 or 5 card majors - you generally adopt what your peers play. Most Americans play standard or similar, so that is what is taught to beginners. As I stated it is also easier in competitive situations because most are frightened witless by the thought of playing in a Moysian.

Richard has also pointed out that most of the top British players play 4 card Ms. You will also note that there tends to be a different philosophy today in those who open 4 or 5 card Majors. 4CM are often coupled with aggressive get in/get out quickly tactics. The Hackett twins exemplify this style. You play 4CM because you open the bidding at a higher level. It is a lot more difficult to bid over 1S rather than 1C if you open on Kxxx Axx xx AKxx .

5CMajorites are generally more conservative in their approach. These comments are, of course, broad generalisations but you can see the tendencies. Look at the approach-forcing methods practiced by many American players, and note how conservative are the French. Incidentally there are still many top Italians who play 4CM big C systems.

As to what is better??
Degustibus non est disputandum.

[mishovnbg]

Sorry, if I misunderstood. But, if u saw topic is "Moscito", not "Acol". And discussion is not about natural systems. Playing natural system with 4 major and weak NT opening like Acol is my favourite.

[Rado]

Hi all,
Would you please quote some world top 100 pairs using "Moscito" or similar?

thanks, Rado

[the hog]

"Hi all,
Would you please quote some world top 100 pairs using "Moscito" or similar?

thanks, Rado "

Marston-Burgess when they played together were DEFINITELY in the top 100 in the world. I would say in the top 30. Their Cavendish results were excellent and they spearheaded some fairly weak Australian teams to good wins in the Bermuda bowl etc. Burgess is one of the finest card players I have ever seen. Unfortunately they no longer play together. However the question is a little unfair, Rado, as how many play Moscito anyway?

[pbleighton]

Since the thread has veered to what top pairs play, I will try a scaled-down version of a question I asked in another thread, apparently in a far too detailed/ambititious manner.

I gather from the replies that the large majority of top pairs in the world play 5 card majors, though the exact percentage is in dispute. So:
1) Of those who play 5 card majors, are a) natural or some sort of forcing club/forcing diamond systems more common, and how much more common?
2) Of those who play 4 card majors, what are the most common systems, apart from Blue Team Club?
3) Terminology question - if a system uses 5 card majors, and has a forcing club which is strong only, is it considered to be a Precision varaiant?

[mishovnbg]

1) I havent exactly statistics. I just want to notice that top pairs still playing 4 major opening, play it many years. Change system = lose years may be :-.
2) Most common natural 4 major system: Acol, alive yet :-*!
3) Terminology: if u can open natural 1CL/DI bid and normal use it, if CL/DI is longer then 4 major - u dont play 1X strong opening system(precision). Hey, i didnt said that else u play precision

[the hog]

1) Of those who play 5 card majors, are a) natural or some sort of forcing club/forcing diamond systems more common, and how much more common?
2) Of those who play 4 card majors, what are the most common systems, apart from Blue Team Club?
3) Terminology question - if a system uses 5 card majors, and has a forcing club which is strong only, is it considered to be a Precision varaiant

Peter,

Best is to get hold of a World championship book and have a look at what representatives play. This is a bit flawed as not all nat reps are the best players in the country, (what with sponsors etc), but it will have to do.

Off the top of my head - no staistics to back this up - I would say by far the majority play a 5 card M standard or 2/1 system; the Poles, some Eastern Europeans, the Swedes and the Italians play 5CM nebulous Club; the Brits seem to be playing versions of "The Science" - 4CM 14-16NT, very aggressive. Then you get the rest - a few Precisioners eg Chagas, Meckwell, Groetheim-Aa who play Viking club, some Hungarians, Russians eg Petrunin. Finally the maniacs - New Zealanders with T-Rex, some Aussies with Moscito and maybe one or two forcing pass pairs. The last few Aussie sides also had a few pairsplaying a Polish club variant.

In answer to 3) Probably. eg Viking Club is a sort of relay Precision style.

One other thing of interest to you may be the 2 bids that are used. Many of the Europeans use Ekrens or Vilkosh or some 2 suited openings. Versace-Lauria use 2H to show a weak 2 in H or S, Groetheim uses 2H as a weak 2 or an assorted 5-6 poit hand. US players are far more conventional in their choice of 2 level openings.

[pbleighton]

"One other thing of interest to you may be the 2 bids that are used. Many of the Europeans use Ekrens or Vilkosh or some 2 suited openings. Versace-Lauria use 2H to show a weak 2 in H or S, Groetheim uses 2H as a weak 2 or an assorted 5-6 poit hand. US players are far more conventional in their choice of 2 level openings."

Yes - one more reason to love the ACBL. I have looked into weak twos at

http://www.cavendish...bridge/weak.two

Any other good sites?

I like Ekrens (never played it), and am intrigued by Frelling, though unknown suits make me a little nervous (they make the opponents nervous too, I suppose ). What is youe experience with two suited weak twos? One poster (at another forum) said that when he used openings which showed an unknown suit(s), that his partners would guess wrong "with depressing frequency"

[the hog]

What is youe experience with two suited weak twos? One poster (at another forum) said that when he used openings which showed an unknown suit(s), that his partners would guess wrong "with depressing frequency"

I have played these virtually forever. RCO, (Rank colour odd), or OCR twos are easy. It is almost always possible, (about 90% of the time), to determine which 2 suits opener holds.

Ekrens, (2D or 2H for the Ms), works well as it forces the opps to start competing at a farily high level.

2D Multi is played by virtually everyone here and is fairly easy to compete against. I cannot understand why the Americans are paranoid about this bid. It is a useful opening, though as you can use your 2H/S openings for other stuff. The mini multi where 2D only shows a weak 2M and no strong option is nasty, as it is non forcing and puts more pressure on the opps.

In the last 3 months we have started playing 2H as a weak 2 in either Major. This is more difficult to handle, but we have got excellent results with it, (and one absolute disaster on the weekend where I passed 2H and we were cold for 4S lol). In general though this bid is a winner, provided you are prepared to play a very disciplined 2H opening when vulnerable. (I'll leave you to work out the reasons for that).

We have also toyed with Wilkosz - "edited thanks to RW's spelling correction" - 2D is some 2 suiter except both ms. VERY nasty for the opps. There is a good write up of this on Chris Ryall's site.

The concept of either/or can also be extended to overcalls if you wish. We play canape overcalls over the opps m suit openings. eg
(1C) 1D shows at least 3 Ds and an unspecified 5 card M. Note the effects of this; the opps have lost their negative x, as they also have no idea what M suit overcaller has shown.

Of course you have to be aware that the ACBL has banned many of the convetions I have described above.

Cheers
Ron

[hrothgar]

Quote

We have also toyed with Vilkosh - 2D is some M-m 2 suiter. VERY nasty for the opps. There is a good write up of this on Chris Ryall's site.

Two quick comments:

Its spelled "Wilkosz"

And it could be both majors