[carl3]

When you count losers you deduct the sum of losers from 24 to get the number of tricks.
Now if both hands were distributed 4-3-3-3 this would be the same as the number of top honors.
Thus because of the "the unbalance" of the hands the number of tricks will (in general) be at
least equal to the number of top honors. This observation forms the basis for both the way to
bid and the way to choose the contract in a game that I call "Topbridge".


Topbridge. (A way to introduce bridge using a little money.)

Sit down with 3 who want to learn bridge. Clockwise (starting
with the dealer) the players say (honestly) how many tops
(=A,K or Q) they have. if you cannot say more than the bid
before (if any) you pass.


The highest bidder becomes declarer and his/her partner will
now show how many clubs, diamonds, hearts and spades
dummy has by putting them (faces down) on the table. Declarer
is also told dummy's number of tops. (If you are only 3 the cards
opposite dealer belong to dummy and it is the player who does
not have the lead who gives the information about dummy.)

The sum of declarer and dummy's tops is the "topnumber".
If this is 4 or 5 you cannot play in NT and the hand is redealt if
the declaring side has no 8+ suit.

Declarer now chooses a contract. If it is a partscore the number
of tricks contracted for must be as many as the topnumber +1 (3)
if NT (suit) is chosen. If it is a gamecontract the choice is free.
An example: If the topnumber is 8, 4 in a major is ok but not 4 in
a minor.

If the topnumber is 8 or more you are forced to play game and
even when it is 7 it is often a good idea to play 4 in a major if the
suit is 8+. Anyway the contracts may be hard but they are mostly
quite interesting.

There are so many games that distract the young nowadays so to interest
them for bridge you need a liitle money. The way to play is the following.

Put 24 coins of equal value in a pot. Start by playing a hand in
NT without any payment. In the following hands declarer and
his partner win 1 coin each from the pot if a partscore is made
and 2 coins each if it is a game. If the contract fails it is instead
the defenders who win the same money. But with 2 coins left
it is ok that the last hand may give less. If the game is played to
introduce bridge usually just one of the players provide the pot
but it could also be played as a game when ALL provide equally.

I think it would be a good idea if bridgeplayers helped to spread
this game. It could do a lot of good to introduce young players to
bridge. Especially the young chessplayers that would not care for
minibridge. It is true that without the money they would probably
not care for Topbridge either but the money is only initial. Then
they may start playing at BBO and (hopefully) also join a club.








[Z9GVRN-1WV9K]

[Gilithin]

You might want to look up the game of Minibridge, which is similar but teaches a more useful evaluation system along the way.

[carl3]

I just replied but it seems I have to do it again. When you are not in game the contracts in minibridge
are too soft and does not train the way to play the cards enough. It is important not to start teaching
bidding before the pupils have a (reasonable) skill in the play of the cards. If you go to BBO and imagine
they played Topbridge there you will see that it works quite well in spite of the strange way to bid.

[pescetom]

I think there are some good ideas in your proposal and minibridge is not perfect. Although IMO it would be better to start people with a simple bidding system that can be used in a real world auction against any opponents, not just other beginners, thus allowing beginners to join in lower level club games as early as possible and get to understand competitive auctions and play. Some Italians use (or were using before covid) a simple strong club / 5 cards in other suits / 40 HCP system, which is enough to get them through a few years and gives them mainly tools they won't have to throw away later.

IMO the reason to emphasise play from the beginning is not the hope that beginners will quickly become skilled, but rather that they find it fun whereas hand and fit evaluation may seem like hard work. In reality decent play is harder and slower to learn than decent bidding (although a majority of our "beginners" are already fairly skilled in play when they start the course and the few that really have no experience of cards and trick taking rarely continue).

[AL78]

carl3, on 2023-August-24, 00:00, said:

It is important not to start teaching bidding before the pupils have a (reasonable) skill in the play of the cards.

Depends on the definition of "reasonable" (which is subjective and opinions will differ), but that might take forever, and some of them might die of old age before they got to learning the bidding. In my experience it takes a LONG time for any beginner to have reasonable skill at anything with the exception of those who have previous card game experience and/or have a natural talent for the game. There is one woman at my club who has been playing for at least a couple of decades and still attends the beginner sessions and plays like one, and she is not mentally impaired.

[pescetom]

AL78, on 2023-August-24, 14:49, said:

Depends on the definition of "reasonable" (which is subjective and opinions will differ), but that might take forever, and some of them might die of old age before they got to learning the bidding. In my experience it takes a LONG time for any beginner to have reasonable skill at anything with the exception of those who have previous card game experience and/or have a natural talent for the game. There is one woman at my club who has been playing for at least a couple of decades and still attends the beginner sessions and plays like one, and she is not mentally impaired.

We have a couple like that, plus 4-5 that survive but never really made the grade, all the others who joined a course with no previous experience of trick-taking soon quit.
Card play is a difficult skill and (unlike bidding) not even closely correlated to IQ or effort, more like a new language or dialect: only a flexible young brain can easily establish the connections.
Plus of course if one cannot attract skilled partners or even observe skilled opponents there is a problem of GIGO.

[carl3]

Noone says anything about the little money I want to involve to get young people interested. I have tried this many times now.
Without it it is hard to get them to play at all and of course in the beginning it is just the money they are interested in but
this changes when they find that bridge can be as fun as (say) chess. I have used Swedish 5 kronor pieces and since I am always
playing myself I manage to retain some of it. What the bridgeclubs need right now is new young people and I think this is a good
way to accomplish this. Topbridge is built around this idea with the money and you can sit down and start to play almost right
away. "Bidding" is done in no time and also the choice of the contract usually doesn't take long. So PLEASE try it! Carl3

[helene_t]

This is quite similar to how my dad practiced bridge with my brother and me when we were newbies.

I like it. I would prefer HCPs instead of number of tops, though.

[carl3]

Hi Helene! Yes since hcp is something they will have to learn later anyway I would have liked that too. But
the "topnumber" is easier to relate to the number of tricks you have to take. I guess you have not
yet been to BBO and seen what happens if Topbridge was played there but another way to see it is to
"translate" the topnumber to (average) hcp adding 2 hcp for jacks. Then a topnumber of 8 becomes 26
hcp which looks familiar does it not?

I have now "used up" all the young to introduce and really hope that someone else will try my idea
somewhere else.

Best regards Carl