What Systems Do I Play?

If you're blogging about bridge, this question will crop up sooner or later. People naturally wonder what bidding systems are my favorites (presume, it also creates some sort of credibility in the eyes of the readers). In matchpointed pairs (MPs), nothing beats good old Acol as far as I'm concerned. Four-card majors, flexible openings in biddable suits, a variable notrump (12-14 non-vulnerable,13-15 vulnerable) and weak-2s in majors, no modern 2-bids of dubious value. 2 ♦ is an Acol-2 and 2 ♣ an Acol-2 in a major or a game-force in clubs. Pretty simple.

But I do not play four-card major systems with pick-up partners. It is a rule I seldom break, if ever. With someone I have just met, I usually play 5-card majors (know all flavors, so no problem there).

At IMPs or teams let us say, we usually stick to a loose Polish/Precision derivative we call Super Red. For the real curious, here are the opening bids and responses to 1 ♣ (usually this is what interests people most):

1 ♣: 16/19+, various hands OR 11-13 flat (without shortage)
1 ♦: 11-18, 3+♦ (usually 4+♦)
1 ♥: 11-18, 5+♥
1 ♠: 11-15, 5+♠
1NT: 14-16, balanced.
2 ♣: 11-15, 6+♣ (may contain a side 4-card suit) OR 5♣-4M-22, 14-15 (if unsuitable for 1NT)
2 ♦: 11/12-15, 4-4-1-4, 4-4-0-5, 34-1-5 shapes.
2 M: weak-2s
2 N: 20-22, balanced.

* Take special note of the red suit ranges, 11-18.

Responses to 1 ♣

1 ♦: 0-7, negative.
1 M: 8+, 4+M, longer minor possible
1 N: 8-11, balanced
2 m: 8-11, 5+m; denies 4M
2 ♥: 11/12+, 5-4 minors
2 ♠: transfer to 2NT, game-force
2 N: 12-13, balanced
3 m: 10-12/13, 6-card minors, good suit, spread out values.
3 M: 4-7, 7+ in M
3 N: 14-16, balanced.

This pretty much sums it up.

Read more...

On Major Suit Raises

Four of a major: the Holy Grail of bridge! Naturally, this has led theoreticians and practitioners alike to improve the common raise structure, namely the limit raises to three and four. Three so called improvements seem to be popular:

Bergen raises

Marty Bergen has come up with a few exotic (my opinion, no pun intended) shapes and/or types of raises by utilizing three of a minor responses as mixed and three-card raises and thereby getting rid of rarely used jump shifts.

Apart from the fact that I have difficulty in understanding which is which, I can not say I like the idea. Making responder bid anything but no-trumps or 2/3 M gives opponents a cheap opportunity for a lead directing double. You reach a theoretically correct game (or stop short) only to go down because the defenders find the right lead (failing to double is also a clue). Oh, and that new pre-emptive 3M raise of 0-5 points with a bunch of trumps. I simply could not find such partners who would raise to three like that.

Jacoby/Stenberg 2NT raises

This seems like a good idea within the confines of 5-card majors and 2/1 game force. Several variants fly by but my favorite is the one showing a GF raise. I am not fond of mixing the so called invitational raises here. I do not want to know if partner has an extra trump or a singleton somewhere if I'm not slammish. By the time you learn it, you are already committed to four, so what's the purpose? Better play it (if you must) as pure game force to investigate a probable slam. One good (and simple) variant is Schmittberg.

Good/bad raise to 2M

Or healthy/poor raise as they say. Now, this one is good. The typical limit of raising to two is wide and it is good to know whether partner has a sound raise or not. Some do it via a 1NT, some disguise it in 2m (and adding really minimum hands with support); your choice, your style. The bottom line is it works and is worth the extra effort.

An unseen plus of differentiating good and bad raises is it keeps the bidding open with a few trumps and a sub-minimum hand. If you can not bid a natural Acol-2, i.e. if you're playing weak-twos, you will benefit from it immensely when partner does not pass with three points and three trumps.

Read more...

Where can I Learn Bridge?

When Lori Cordeiro said "I don't play bridge. My parents tried to teach me when I was younger, I just did not get it. I'm glad you enjoy it!", it suddenly occurred to me that some of you might be interested to learn the game. What will you do when you get older?

Well, teaching the game here is beyond the scope of this blog but I can surely give a few links along the way, that will help you start. What I can do, however, is answering your questions either in the Q and A section or as a separate article. Most of the bridge tutoring sites are static, some are really dated and you may not find someone to ask for a clarification most of the time. If that is the case, think of this place as a last refuge and I will do my best. Now, without further ado...

For the novice I can really recommend Richard Pavlicek's site for bridge players. In addition quizzes, articles, bidding practice, polls and contests, puzzles and humor, Richard also teaches bridge on-line. Starting from the basics, he very nicely wraps up the essentials of the game in a clear and efficient manner;

Bridge is by far the greatest card game of all, and it can provide immense challenge and enjoyment for the rest of your life. This lesson is intended for the complete beginner, one who knows nothing, or almost nothing, about bridge. If that is you, read on.

Where to begin? Bridge is more complicated than other card games, and beginners are sometimes discouraged by this. Relax! After this lesson you will understand the card play involved and be well on your way to becoming a bridge player. Take your time! There is no hurry. And have a deck of cards handy.

I concur his last advice, have a deck of cards ready.

Read more...

Flat Hands, Flat Choices

♠ AQJ3 ♥ KQ2 ♦ KT9 ♣ 953

Bidding:

West	North	East	South
	p	1NT	p
2♦	p	2♥	p
3NT	p	?

You start with a strong (15-17) notrump, your partner bids 2♦ as a transfer. You complete the transfer with 2&hearts, having nothing extra. Partner raises to game with 3NT. Your turn...

First the full deal:

	♠ T94 ♥ 86 ♦ QJ843 ♣ T84
♠ 652 ♥ T9753 ♦ A75 ♣ AQ		♠ AQJ3 ♥ KQ2 ♦ KT9 ♣ 953
	♠ K87 ♥ AJ4 ♦ 62 ♣ KJ762

Much have been said about sticking to notrumps with flat distributions like this one, a meagre 4-3-3-3. So, your initial reaction could be passing the 3NT bid.

The hand is taken from Cap Volmac 1995 and all pairs choosing the notrump game regretted their actions, down one, losing 12 imps, after the obvious club lead. Others correcting to the heart game had an easy ride.

The only clue, if any, is the three small clubs which should a be deterrant for choosing the notrump game. True, you can come up with a West hand with which 3NT will be the right choice but statistics is not always "damn lies".

An interesting exercise could be how the weak (12-14) notrumpers would fare. The auction would probably start 1♣ - 1♥ -1NT (presumably showing 15-16 points) and deviate considerably depending on each pair's style. Some would resort to check-back Stayman and discover the 8-card heart fit. In those auctions, West will decide on the final contract and almost all Wests are going to choose the superior 4♥ game.

Bridge has always had its subset of shooters and a few would no doubt bid 3NT after 1♣ - 1♥ - 1NT, to lose eventually.

Read more...

Nuisance One Spade

It is usually accepted by most that artificial systems, especially strong club openers are superior to natural systems. Leaving this discussion aside, there is one thing you should not do when defending against such systems: giving them a comfortable, uncontested auction. You must have some sort of convention as a good measure.

Perhaps, the simplest of them all that requires no change to your over-call style is the Nuisance 1♠. The convention is simple: you switch the meanings of pass and 1♠. After a strong 1♣ you over-call 1♠ with all hands that you will normally pass and pass with all hands you will bid 1♠.

Nuisance 1♠ is no burden on memory and effective against most of big club systems. Residents of ACBL land should first check if it is legal in ACBL sponsored events.

Read more...