[jillybean]

hotShot, on Mar 4 2008, 04:11 AM, said:

If you play in a regular partnership and often compete with pairs that play:

2/1, precision, polish club, Acol, SEF/Forum D, <you name it>

You will benefit, if you understand all implications of opps auction.

2/1 does not have a generic advantage over other systems, if they are not simplified to fit the needs of beginners.

To play successful bridge you need to:

1. Improve your partnership understanding
2. Improve your declarer play (this also helps you to defend better)
3. Improve your leads
4. Improve your partnerships signaling
And if you have done all of the above
5. Discuss system optimization.

I dont have a serious, live partnership.

[vuroth]

jillybean2, on Mar 4 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

I dont have a serious, live partnership.

I'm starting to get the impression that this is the single most difficult step....

[Codo]

2/1 per the book is zillion times better as sayc per the booklet.

Whether 2/1 as it is played on BBO is much better then that what is called SAYC here is another question and the answer is far from clear. (I would prefer to play sayc with some gadgets with a stranger to play 2/1 with him.)

But it is very important to learn the system which is actual in your area. If anybody plays 2/1 learn it. Else, don´t. Use your time for more usefull practice.

But actually I believe that Roberts 5 advices are of much more value then any bidding system will have.

First of all: Find a serious and steady partner. If you cannot find one, improve your judgement, your defence and your declarer play. IF you have one, find a system.

[jillybean]

vuroth, on Mar 4 2008, 07:58 AM, said:

jillybean2, on Mar 4 2008, 09:55 AM, said:

I dont have a serious, live partnership.

I'm starting to get the impression that this is the single most difficult step....

I think youre right and I likely wont find a serious partnership until my daughter is grown up I'd like a daytime online partner and the occasional club game but that is hard to find! Its not all gloom, I do get a game with a some of the good players now and then.

[Cascade]

The main reason to play 2/1 or any system is that that is what your partner wants you to play. In fact that is almost the only reason to learn a system.

I have played and won tournaments using:

Acol - some sort of New Zealand Standard
Acol - highly modified many variations
Standard American
SAYC
2/1
Precision
Sontag's Power Precision
Symmetric Relay
Submarine Symmetric (transfer openings)
... there maybe others I have forgotten about.

Twice I have won tournaments with promising Juniors straight out of complete beginner's classes playing nothing more than Stayman and Blackwood (in Acol - 4-card majors, weak 1NT).

The highest ever club session I scored was 78% playing one convention with an 80 year old who knew nothing else. You guess it that convention was Gerber. Not even Stayman. We played 4-card major Goren with a 16-18 1NT.

I don't know how the standards of these tournaments compare with the standards in other places but all of the ones I am thinking about here have been open entry with at least some other players in the field being reasonably competent (New Zealand Grand Masters etc) even if not national champions - some have been national champions.

The system you play is only relevent in that it is the way that you communicate with partner.

Good bidding judgement and good card-play are much much more important than what particular system you are playing.

[geofspa]

For my 2 pennyworth I agree with Wayne 100% Partnership agreements and knowing how your agreements work are worth more than any "system" of bidding.

This is very true for a regular partnership which should hold regular postmortems of their play - and practice together at the partnership tables within BBO.

Now on the other hand in pickup partnerships I am a great believer in the KISS system. (Keep It Simple i'm Stupid). I much prefer to agree any natural system with very limited conventions - Stayman, Red suit transfers, Blackwood may be 3 I would like - and if SAYC fits the bill for you then stick with it.

Geof

[han]

I don't believe that a team of gerber-only players can win the Vanderbilt these days. I agree that other skills are more important but let's not pretend that system is not at all relevant, it is.

[Cascade]

han, on Mar 6 2008, 11:28 AM, said:

I don't believe that a team of gerber-only players can win the Vanderbilt these days. I agree that other skills are more important but let's not pretend that system is not at all relevant, it is.

I don't want to burst Kathryn's bubble but I don't think there are many Beginner/Intermediates who have the immediate aim of winning the Vanderbilt.

Even so ...

I still believe agreements are much more important than the front end system.

[jtfanclub]

Cascade, on Mar 5 2008, 05:48 PM, said:

I don't want to burst Kathryn's bubble but I don't think there are many Beginner/Intermediates who have the immediate aim of winning the Vanderbilt.

And yet, there I shall be next Sunday.

[blackshoe]

What results do you get playing SAYC? Are you consistently in the money? Are you consistently under 50% at MPs? If the latter, there's a problem. It may or may not be the system you play, though. Keep track of your bad boards. Examine them with an eye toward [i]why]/i] they were bad. If it was a bidding problem, then it may have been system – there are unbiddable hands for any system. Or it may have been a misunderstanding on the part of one or both of you. You can work on fixing that without changing system. Look at your defense – are you communicating okay? Do your inferences make sense? Does your declarer play need work? All of these things should take precedence, imo, over a change of system.

That's not to say I think SAYC is a good system - of all the systems I know, including some but not all of the ones I know not at all well, SAYC is last on my list. I'd almost rather play MOSCITO, a system I know hardly at all.

[whereagles]

SAYC is playable. Its shortcomings aren't enough to make a decisive difference in overall performance. 2/1 also has its shortcomings.

[vuroth]

blackshoe, on Mar 5 2008, 06:26 PM, said:

That's not to say I think SAYC is a good system - of all the systems I know, including some but not all of the ones I know not at all well, SAYC is last on my list. I'd almost rather play MOSCITO, a system I know hardly at all.

I think a valid question is - how many BILs now SAYC well?

I'm pretty sure that I don't, yet.

V

[the hog]

whereagles, on Mar 6 2008, 03:36 PM, said:

SAYC is playable. Its shortcomings aren't enough to make a decisive difference in overall performance. 2/1 also has its shortcomings.

What is 2/1 anyway? Some people play weird stuff like reverses not showing extra values, and sequences like 1S 2C 2D 2S as setting the suit and being a slam try! Others play more workable stuff. Some play serious, some play frivolous and some don't play either. Some bid 1H 2C with a 4324 hand others don't.

[han]

Agree with the Hog.

[rogerclee]

I voted for yes, but:

If you are a beginner: Do not learn 2/1. There are so many other things that I am sure would improve your game by tons before learning system stuff. Learn how to bid in a competitive auction. Learn when to invite game and when to accept game. Learn how to defend properly and count. Learn how to deal with preempts. Don't worry about system; it is the least of your worries.

If you are an intermediate player: Learn 2/1. It is basically so standard that finding partners to play SA is actually much harder. This is not to say that learning 2/1 will dramatically improve your game; I guarantee you it will not. It is just a practical matter that you really need to play 2/1 to form new partnerships. If you really are an intermediate player, you should have no trouble learning the basic mechanics of a 2/1 system.

[skjaeran]

rogerclee, on Mar 7 2008, 03:46 AM, said:

If you are a beginner: Do not learn 2/1. There are so many other things that I am sure would improve your game by tons before learning system stuff. Learn how to bid in a competitive auction. Learn when to invite game and when to accept game. Learn how to defend properly and count. Learn how to deal with preempts. Don't worry about system; it is the least of your worries.

If you are an intermediate player: Learn 2/1. It is basically so standard that finding partners to play SA is actually much harder. This is not to say that learning 2/1 will dramatically improve your game; I guarantee you it will not. It is just a practical matter that you really need to play 2/1 to form new partnerships. If you really are an intermediate player, you should have no trouble learning the basic mechanics of a 2/1 system.

I totally agree with the first paragraph.

The 2nd paragraph I also agree with, if you play in the ACBL or online. If you play f2f in most parts of Europe 2/1 won't make it easier to form new partnerships - what would will vary.

In Norway you should learn Norwegian Standard - basically a modernised Acol-based system, 4c suit up-the-line bidding (5443 opening style) and 2/1 F1 to be able to play with most people or a 2/1 light 5cM T-Walsh to play with the best juniors (this approach is spreading).