[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-July-27, 16:58, said:

And why do u think i opened 2 NT at the first place ? But if i am forced to open 1♣ and pd bids 1♦, this is your bid.

Our main disagreement is basically that you think it's worth the full 20, I don't with the stiff K so have to open 1m.

After going astray several times opening these 1♣ we switched to 1♦ and it's been much better since.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-27, 17:33, said:

Our main disagreement is basically that you think it's worth the full 20, I don't with the stiff K so have to open 1m.

No i dont think it worths 20 hcp, i think this hand worths more than 20 hcp, i am very surprised to see someone who think it worths less than 20 hcp. You made me curious and i checked the credible sources to value this hand

Of course you entitled to disagree, but here what they say;

KNR = 20.70

ZAR= 37 (almost 21)

Kleinman = bad 21



You are too busy to dump values of a stiff K and ignore the fact that this hand also has AKQx and AJT9 suits

[nigel_k]

MrAce, on 2011-July-27, 20:12, said:

No i dont think it worths 20 hcp, i think this hand worths more than 20 hcp, i am very surprised to see someone who think it worths less than 20 hcp. You made me curious and i checked the credible sources to value this hand

Of course you entitled to disagree, but here what they say;

KNR = 20.70

ZAR= 37 (almost 21)

Kleinman = bad 21



You are too busy to dump values of a stiff K and ignore the fact that this hand also has AKQx and AJT9 suits

KNR is generally good but overvalues 4441 shapes. If you take the given hand and make some changes you can get KQ75 2 AJ92 AK43 = 19.25.

[MrAce]

nigel_k, on 2011-July-27, 21:24, said:

KNR is generally good but overvalues 4441 shapes. If you take the given hand and make some changes you can get KQ75 2 AJ92 AK43 = 19.25.

So u want me to think KnR overvalues,Ok, how about zar, how about Kleinman ?

Perhaps you guys should ask yourselves if you undervalue stiff honors, and undervalue by a lot !

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-July-27, 20:12, said:

No i dont think it worths 20 hcp, i think this hand worths more than 20 hcp, i am very surprised to see someone who think it worths less than 20 hcp. You made me curious and i checked the credible sources to value this hand

Of course you entitled to disagree, but here what they say;

KNR = 20.70

ZAR= 37 (almost 21)

Kleinman = bad 21



You are too busy to dump values of a stiff K and ignore the fact that this hand also has AKQx and AJT9 suits

There's a good reason I said that, as I posted above, the minor suit cards are nice. If you're going to make 3N, how many flat 5 counts give you a prayer ? The issue is the entry problems a stiff K give you opposite a weak hand. Unless partner has the J♣, you're very unlikely to have the entries to lead up towards the diamonds twice (if partner has no ♦ honour)and have a heart stop. Give partner say xxx, AQxx, xxxx, xx, plenty to raise to 3N, but it's horrible on the likely heart lead.

If partner has 4 spades, I may well have done the wrong thing, but for 3N, I think partner will need a 7 count most of the time, particularly if he doesn't have the ♣J which he'll only have about 1/4-1/3 of the time if he has 5-7. In a weaker hand, where if we're in 3N, partner will have more cards, the stiff K problem is a lot less so AJ109 twice and a stiff K is worth more than 13, but the bigger the hand (and hence the less partner will have) the bigger the problem gets.

I'd be very interested to see some simulations with/without 4 spades, and see the average point count required from partner to make 3N/4♠. You'd need to adjust slightly for unerringly finessing Kx(x)(x) ♦ the right way, but then the opps will always play the heart suit to best advantage so that may be a wash.

If partner has ♥ Jxxxxx, you may well also get to the wrong game if you open 2N.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 01:40, said:

There's a good reason I said that, as I posted above, the minor suit cards are nice. If you're going to make 3N, how many flat 5 counts give you a prayer ? The issue is the entry problems a stiff K give you opposite a weak hand. Unless partner has the J♣, you're very unlikely to have the entries to lead up towards the diamonds twice (if partner has no ♦ honour)and have a heart stop. Give partner say xxx, AQxx, xxxx, xx, plenty to raise to 3N, but it's horrible on the likely heart lead.

If partner has 4 spades, I may well have done the wrong thing, but for 3N, I think partner will need a 7 count most of the time, particularly if he doesn't have the ♣J which he'll only have about 1/4-1/3 of the time if he has 5-7. In a weaker hand, where if we're in 3N, partner will have more cards, the stiff K problem is a lot less so AJ109 twice and a stiff K is worth more than 13, but the bigger the hand (and hence the less partner will have) the bigger the problem gets.

Sorry, but all this you wrote + 1$ = cup of coffee for me. The outcome of the contract we land has VERY LITTLE to do with this pre-auction hand analysis.

The more i read what u just wrote, the more i am laughing to be honest..."if pd has 4♠...if pd doesn't have the ♣J which he will have 1/4 1/3 of the time...entry problems. Jesus ! I would not care less if u open 1♣ or 1♦ or if ur pd has entries or ♣J or 4♠.

I can use everything u wrote negative vs a crystal clear 2 NT that you would happily open without stiff honor.

You said you disagree with me about the full strength of hand, i brought you 3 different objective results from 3 different sources. You dont wanna take it and write a long book about what this hand should open and why, thats fine, i just don't find it interesting to be honest.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 01:56, said:

Sorry, but all this you wrote + 1$ = cup of coffee for me. The outcome of the contract we land has VERY LITTLE to do with this pre-auction hand analysis.

The more i read what u just wrote, the more i am laughing to be honest..."if pd has 4♠...if pd doesn't have the ♣J which he will have 1/4 1/3 of the time...entry problems. Jesus ! I would not care less if u open 1♣ or 1♦ or if ur pd has entries or ♣J or 4♠.

I can use everything u wrote negative vs a crystal clear 2 NT that you would happily open without stiff honor.

You said you disagree with me about the full strength of hand, i brought you 3 different objective results from 3 different sources. You dont wanna take it and write a long book about what this hand should open and why, thats fine, i just don't find it interesting to be honest.

You brought a load of "objective results" from soures that have nothing to do with real bridge that I don't have any confidence in whatsoever. I care about results at the table. I'm pretty sure that a simulation will show that opposite a flat 5 count 3N is way odds against, and probably marginally odds against opposite a flat 6 count, but I have no way of running the simulations. If game is odds against opposite a 6 count and odds on opposite a 7 count, I'd say it's "worth" about 18.5, and that's my estimation.

I'd be very happy to be proved wrong by simulations as I'd actually learn something useful. I would add that partner and I respond on pretty much every 5 count and sometimes a bit less when short in the suit opened, so I will not miss 4♠ if partner has 4 of them and a 5 count.

If partner has a bit more and is looking at a slam, I have plenty of ways of catching up later (in the method I play, I can rebid 1♠ over 1♥ quite happily and there's lots of space), but most of the time this hand is a partscore/3N/4♠ hand.

You will also get into some truly laughable 3N contracts via 2N-3N or 2N-3♣-3♦-3N like say opposite Axx, xx, xxxxx, Jxx, 7 tricks, 8 on a heart lead away from the ace, 5♦ on one trump honour onside and not 4-0.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 02:54, said:

You will also get into some truly laughable 3N contracts via 2N-3N or 2N-3♣-3♦-3N like say opposite Axx, xx, xxxxx, Jxx, 7 tricks, 8 on a heart lead away from the ace, 5♦ on one trump honour onside and not 4-0.

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 02:54, said:

You brought a load of "objective results" from soures that have nothing to do with real bridge that I don't have any confidence in whatsoever. I care about results at the table.

Is this how you care about "At the table... real bridge" whatever that means

What do u open Kxx Kx AJT9 AKQx ? 2 NT correct ? And can u please tell me how would you avoid ending up in funny 3 NT when pd has Axx xx xxxxx Jxx ? Actually lets do this, with the OP hand, how would you find 5♦ ? Lets say u opened 1♦ and pd bid 3♦ will u bid 5♦? And what if pd has xxx Ax xxxxx Jxx ? It will be a laughable 5♦ when 3 NT is on perhaps ? As you see i can send back everything u write for this 4441 2 NT opener, to the 4432 2NT u happily open. In some cases i may even make it worse where u open happily 2 NT with a xx in a suit, where a stiff K could be better.

Anyway i forgot we are not in A/E and edited my post. Open what u want to open m8.

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 05:32, said:

We have;

A-2NT openers
B-1♦ openers (divided into subgroups)
B1-1♦ followed by 3♣
B2-1♦ followed by 2♠
B3-1♦ followed by 2 NT
B4-1♦ followed by 3 NT
B5-1♦ followed by 1 ♠
C-1♣ openers (which will also be divided depending on response style, such as what their pd bids with 4♥+5♦)
etc etc

As you see, opening 1 minor does not have 1 happy path that everyone agrees with. Good luck with simulation and applying all this to the hands manually. Of course simulation will always know to start with ♥A lead too knowing that i have stiff K






Is this how you care about "At the table... real bridge" whatever that means ...Watch now what happens to hands created for forum use at the table. (or vice versa)

What do u open Kxx Kx AJT9 AKQx ? 2 NT correct ? And can u please tell me how would you avoid ending up in funny 3 NT when pd has Axx xx xxxxx Jxx ? Actually lets do this, how would you find 5♦ ? Lets say u opened 1♦ and pd bid 3♦ will u bid 5♦? And what if pd has xxx Ax xxxxx Jxx ? It will be a laughable 5♦ when 3 NT is on perhaps ? As you see i can send back everything u write for this 4441 2 NT opener, to the 4432 2NT u happily open. In some cases i may even make it worse where u open happily 2 NT with a xx in a suit, where a stiff K could be better

On the modified 2N opener you post, 5♦ ain't great either (38% ?), you aren't making if you have 2 diamond losers or the A♥ is offside so nothing like as big a loss.

And I avoid 3N easily with the original hand 1♦-2N(5+♦ 5-8)-3♣-3♦(flat broke)-3♠(stop)-4♦-5♦, on the case with ♥Ax partner bids 3N instead of 4♦ and I'll happily pass.

[helene_t]

wow it wouldn't occur to me to open 2NT. While the good club suit and the ten of diamonds somewhat compensates for the stiff king, making it evaluate as (at least almost) 20 count, I need a decent 20 count to open 2NT. I am used to playing sound responses (unless we have some gadgets after a 1♣ opening we don't respond on modest 5-counts) and a 2NT rebid is forcing. Playing standard methods where a 2NT rebid isn't forcing I can see that it is probably best to open 2NT on modest 20 counts, especially if one upgrades balanced hands frequently so that a 2NT rebid becomes 17+ - 19.

But even so, I still prefer 1♣ followed by 2♠ with this hand.

[jillybean]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 05:32, said:

Anyway i forgot we are not in A/E and edited my post. Open what u want to open m8.

Please don't dumb down your replies simply because this is not the A/E forum. I want A/E responses, I'm not interested in
how someone thinks beginner should treat a problem.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 06:08, said:

On the modified 2N opener you post, 5♦ ain't great either (38% ?), you aren't making if you have 2 diamond losers or the A♥ is offside so nothing like as big a loss.

And I avoid 3N easily with the original hand 1♦-2N(5+♦ 5-8)-3♣-3♦(flat broke)-3♠(stop)-4♦-5♦, on the case with ♥Ax partner bids 3N instead of 4♦ and I'll happily pass.

LOL, i forgot human mind is so stubburn and can be so creative to cover up the lack of hand evaluation

[Cyberyeti]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 09:21, said:

LOL, i forgot human mind is so stubburn and can be so creative to cover up the lack of hand evaluation

You think like a machine in a bad way, absolutely no common sense. 2N 20-22 is a complete abomination, I have the option of a good 19-21 2N and wouldn't even open that because I don't think it's worth it.

I'm being "stubborn and creative" using the system I've played for 15 years am I ?

1♦-2♦ inverted F3♦ 9+ with 5 or 10+ with 4
1♦-2N 5-8 5+♦ may be a 4 count with 6
1♦-3♦ 0-4 5+♦

I can see only one or two possible reasonably normal hands (QJ10x, xxx, xxx, Jxx may do it, but playing good 19-21 2N I'd probably pass and not find 4♠), yes some hands with 7 clubs may do it, where you have a 70%+ chance of a gain opening 2N rather than 1♦ playing the system I play (4 card ♦ btw). There are hands where you might gain opening 1♣ but there are also corresponding hands where you lose.

I also particularly dislike opening 1♣ if not playing my own system and 1♦ shows 4 where 1♣ only shows 2, much prefer to let partner know I actually hold a real suit.

[Zelandakh]

jillybean, on 2011-July-28, 08:47, said:

Please don't dumb down your replies simply because this is not the A/E forum. I want A/E responses, I'm not interested in
how someone thinks beginner should treat a problem.

Jilly, if you are really interested in some high-level methods of dealing with this hand type then you might give this link a look-over. Please be warned that it is well beyond anything I would suggest for B/I in general but at least might give you a flavour of what is possible. It is possible to simplify this scheme slightly (I believe Chris missed a trick here) but dealing with 3-suiters this way is always alot of (memory) work for a very small subset of hands.

[MrAce]

jillybean, on 2011-July-28, 08:47, said:

Please don't dumb down your replies simply because this is not the A/E forum. I want A/E responses, I'm not interested in
how someone thinks beginner should treat a problem.

Sorry Kathryn but i disagree with this for couple reasons.

First of all if someone wants A/E responses, why is this in B/I forum ?

Second, i agree that A/E posters can be helpful to B/I players, but this should be made by simple-standart methods, and with consideration to their level. Not by getting into DEEP and THEORETICAL debates with each other. The reason i say this, because to me BEGINNER means someone who just learnt the rank of suits, who can follow the suit and can barely count the number of cards played from each suit, let alone spots. Beginner means someone who hasnt even decided yet, if he/she likes this game or not.

Considering the fact that there might be beginners trying to learn something in these forums, with the debates and discussions we perform here, if keeps on the way it has been, they will be CONFUSED, OVERWHELMED, INTIMIDATED and eventually BORED.

Having said this, i taught bridge for so many years, and i learnt 1 thing. There is ONLY 1 thing that a mentor needs to achieve when it comes to beginners, and this is to be succesful at the task to make them LOVE this game. Simple as is. Because by human nature, people continue doing and/or get good at things that they LOVE. And i dont think we are doing our part in B/I forums to achieve this, not blaming anyone specific, but some of us and by putting myself at the top of the list.

[aguahombre]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 14:25, said:

First of all if someone wants A/E responses, why is this in B/I forum ?

Questions, the answers to which are probably of most interest to B/I players, certainly belong in the B/I forum. Answers from A/E posters to those questions are helpful to B/I players who really are looking for answers, when explanations are included and clearly articulated.

Answers to this type of question are less helpful to other A/E players, who have already formed their dogma and preferences of style --then altered the rest of their system to compensate for holes created by their choices.

This is the second time your point as been brought up; the first time, someone else gave a similar reply as mine.

[jillybean]

MrAce, on 2011-July-28, 14:25, said:

Sorry Kathryn but i disagree with this for couple reasons.

First of all if someone wants A/E responses, why is this in B/I forum ?

The A/E forum is for A/E's to discuss A/E topics, not for the rest of us to ask questions simply because we want an A/E
answer. As the B/I description states.. For our novice to intermediate members to discuss issues and share advice (and for more skilled players to answer questions .

A while ago there was a push to get the mundane questions out of the A/E forum in the hope that it would become a place for the true
experts to discuss issues, although this hasn't happened. After being asked, I've kept my questions out of the A/E forum. I don't care where I post, it the thoughtful, detailed, answers that have not been dumbed down that I am looking for.

I don't see any beginner's asking questions on here. Perhaps the volume of material is overwheling, the replies can be intimidating and off putting at times, I don't know why more people dont post here as it is a fantastic resource IMO.

[jillybean]

Zelandakh, on 2011-July-28, 12:03, said:

Jilly, if you are really interested in some high-level methods of dealing with this hand type then you might give this link a look-over. Please be warned that it is well beyond anything I would suggest for B/I in general but at least might give you a flavour of what is possible. It is possible to simplify this scheme slightly (I believe Chris missed a trick here) but dealing with 3-suiters this way is always alot of (memory) work for a very small subset of hands.

Thanks. I have seen some of Chris Ryalls methods before, very interesting and creative. When I am old/bored enough to spend the time to learn these systems and have a system nut partner willing to do the same, I may take it up.

[MrAce]

Cyberyeti, on 2011-July-28, 10:14, said:

I'm being "stubborn and creative" using the system I've played for 15 years am I ?

1♦-2♦ inverted F3♦ 9+ with 5 or 10+ with 4
1♦-2N 5-8 5+♦ may be a 4 count with 6
1♦-3♦ 0-4 5+♦

IF you think, ignoring the original posted hand and creating a hand that fits your argument, especially by giving xx vs your stiff is a common sense

IF you think ignoring and rejecting 3 TOTALLY different and INDPENDENT sources from each other is a common sense

IF you think after giving a long lecture about the percentage of ♣J, frequencies of a flat 5-6 hcp hand, asking for simulations which has to apply all the hands generated to all the different openings, overcalls and then plays and defends for you, as if you have a laptop available at the table, AND THEN using words like "At the table..Real Bridge" in same post is common sense

IF you think writing convention sequences as u wrote above in B/I forums is common sense

What the hell... write me down for not having one

[MrAce]

jillybean, on 2011-July-28, 14:51, said:

The A/E forum is for A/E's to discuss A/E topics, not for the rest of us to ask questions simply because we want an A/E
answer. As the B/I description states.. For our novice to intermediate members to discuss issues and share advice (and for more skilled players to answer questions .

I am with you and Aguahombre on this % 100. But i strongly doubt thats whats going on here. People don't seem to understand what BEGINNER means imo. Last thing they need is a hand where even the A/E players can not agree what to open and what to rebid. Last thing they need to learn is how many different treatments out there to handle this hand. Last thing we want them to think that they need to know the % of ♣J to decide what to open, 1m or opening 2NT with 4441 for that matter.

jillybean, on 2011-July-28, 14:51, said:

I don't see any beginner's asking questions on here...

I am not a bit surprised.

jillybean, on 2011-July-28, 14:51, said:

For our novice to intermediate members to discuss issues and share advice (and for more skilled players to answer questions .

I dont read this as you do probably, it aint my native language and i may be wrong , but i always thought this meant to say " intermediate and novice players can discuss issues and more skilled players can answer their questions" but nothing in this sentence makes me think it encourages heated theoretical debates among more skilled players.