[Michael000]

mikeh, on 2014-December-30, 12:44, said:

I am beginning to suspect a troll at work.

Ridiculous

[Michael000]

mikestar13, on 2014-December-30, 13:07, said:

Apologies to others if have have fed a troll.

Read post 16 then read it again, understand clearly what I have said and then tell me what part of it is not standard modern Acol and why you think it is 'trolling'?

[eagles123]

Michael it seems that it's been clearly explained to you why cue bids are a good idea yet you are intent on arguing back!! If my only slam bidding tool available with an advanced pickup (and I see you rate as advanced on bbo) was blackwood and pray then i'd be pretty miffed but each to their own

[rmnka447]

Cue bids are part of the tool kit available for exploring for slam. There are many hands where slam can be makeable if there are not 2 off the top losers in a particular suit. Unfortunately, quantitative slam tries and keycard/ace asks may not be able to pinpoint the existence of the necessary control in that suit. Cue bidding is about the only practical way to determine if such controls exist.

If you reject cue bidding, then you'll severely limit the number of good slams that you can safely bid. This is especially true of slams based more on fit and distribution then pure HCP. They can include crossruff hands, hands with big double fits, and hands where one partner has a big fit with the other partner and an independently running suit.

[mikeh]

Michael000, on 2014-December-30, 13:50, said:

Read post 16 then read it again, understand clearly what I have said and then tell me what part of it is not standard modern Acol and why you think it is 'trolling'?

maybe you should re-read it and figure out the problem? You say that partner's 3♥ raise shows 10-15 hcp. As has been said several times, this is idiotic. You said you wouldn't make the bid with 15 (nor, I assume, with 14) since you wouldn't want partner passing, yet you repeatedly assert that in acol one can bid 3♥ with 10 or 15 (or anywhere in between). If you don't see the problem, then you are not very bright or are having a very, very tough day. If you do, then you are a troll.

[helene_t]

I am probably (well, obviously) not very well informed about control bidding but to me the Italian style feels ineffective, and first-round-first even worse.

Sometimes all I need is keycards, no problem.

Occasionally all I need is assurance that we have enough keycards and that we are not missing a control in a particular suit. Italian style works fine here, provided that we have a good understanding about which bids are control bids and which are natural. I have not made statistics on it but I am almost certain that our losses from misunderstandings about whether a bid is a control bid or not are bigger than our gains from successfully identifying whether a control is missing in a particular suit. The thing is that if we have the combined values for slam, the probability that we are missing a control in a particular suit is quite small, and if you don't help them with control bidding they might not lead it anyway. So it is mainly an issue when the opponents have bid a suit.

Much more frequently, the problem is that one or both partners have too much to sign off but too little to insist on game. Last train or frivolous 3NT works fine then.

Sometimes I would like to make a more specific slam try. Control bidding could work here, I suppose, but I just don't really see how one can combine the Italian style with a style in which control bids must show a specific feature that helps partner evaluate his hand, such as specifically shortness or specifically a source of tricks or whatever.

Then there is the problem with minor suit slams. I like minorwood, could probably be talked into kick-back, but I really don't want to go back to using 4NT for minor suit keycards. Especially at matchpoints where it is essential to be able to sign off in 4NT missing two keycards. But playing minorwood you rarely have time for control bidding prior to keycard ask, and if the choice is between the two I think minorwood is more often useful although of course there is nothing wrong with having the choice.

I must say I liked the old GIB style with help-cuit slam tries and was disapointed when it got replaced by control bids. Especially because GIB bids aces only. I want to be able to make a slam try without holding an ace. So that style is not my cup of tea.

[Stephen Tu]

Michael000, on 2014-December-30, 12:17, said:

Holding 15HCP and 4H opposite an opening of IH what would you bid – was NOT the question. If that was the question, with a minimum of 25HCP between us I would AVOID bidding 3H for risk or partner passing.

Well guess what, everyone else with 13-15 HCP also avoids bidding 3H for the same reason. So the range of 3H is 10-12-, not 10-15! I don't know how you picked up the idea that 3H can have 15 HCP. Someone taught you wrong, or you simply got confused at some point in time.

Quote

Why . . . . because if he held less than 10HCP he would have bid 2H and if he held more than 15HCP he would have bid a jump shift or some other bid that has been agreed that shows slam potential.

AND if he had 13-15 HCP, he would employ some other bid than 3H! Modern players would have a forcing raise available, perhaps 2nt, or 3nt, or conceivably both. Old fashioned Acol as I understand it has no forcing raise, so the recommended way of bidding was the "delayed game raise", bidding a new suit then jumping to 4M on the next round, to tell partner you were bidding game on power. This is quite inefficient, which is why modern players add forcing raises or switch to a different system entirely.

As for the "troll" issue, I like to apply Hanlon's razor, don't attribute to malice what is adequately explained by stupidity.

[the hog]

Michael000, on 2014-December-30, 09:42, said:

OK, so how many points does your Acol partner hold responding 3M to your opening of Acol 1M?

If the hand you shows is C D H S, I would open 1C and skip jump after partners response showing 18+HCP, that would be the invitation to go looking.

10 to 11 or maybe a bad 12, which is why it is called a limit bid.

You still have not said how you would bid the good slam and avoid the bad one.Unless you play cue bids or some form of asking bids I don't see how you can bid the slam where you have the K and avoid the one where you have 2 fast losers off the top in Hearts. Perhaps you can explain your methods to me?

The suit order of course is SHDC which is standard when setting out suits.

[Vampyr]

I have looked at several internet resources describing modern Acol, and have confirmed that after a 1M opening bid, reaponder's game-going hands are shown with a splinter (hands with a singleton) and the 3NT "pudding raise" with balanced hands with 13 -15ish HCP. Obviously delayed game bids are always possible when the hand is suitable.

Most players these days have more stringent requirements for a splinter, generally less than a HCP game-raise OR a powerful hand that plans to bid on. These players use 2NT as an unlimited GF raise, with Jacoby, natural, or other schemes for continuations. This need not replace the pudding raise; lots of people play both. Another style that is perhaps the simplest way to gain 1M-3M as a preemptive bid is to use 2NT to show an invitational or better raise.

[Fluffy]

Michael000, on 2014-December-30, 13:50, said:

Read post 16 then read it again, understand clearly what I have said and then tell me what part of it is not standard modern Acol and why you think it is 'trolling'?

Asking others to treread your posts while you ignore theirs, this attitude sounds familiar...

[Michael000]

Fluffy, on 2014-December-31, 03:02, said:

Asking others to treread your posts while you ignore theirs, this attitude sounds familiar...

Sorry about that must have missed it in the melee

[sfi]

Fluffy, on 2014-December-31, 03:02, said:

Asking others to treread your posts while you ignore theirs, this attitude sounds familiar...

I was starting to think exactly the same thing.

[the hog]

Michael000, on 2014-December-31, 03:40, said:

Sorry about that must have missed it in the melee

You STILL have not shown how you bid 6S on one hand and avoid it where you are missing the AK of H. Can't you?

[mgoetze]

Michael000, on 2014-December-29, 16:29, said:

I play at Club level and I play for my Club at Regional level and I have played at that level once a week for 15 years. I stress once a week because I know that many of my Club members play 5 days a week; I do not but I do know good players and I do know how they bid and I know I am a ‘good player.’

[...]

I have more than a dozen Bridge books and regularly look out for new publications. I would be pleased (and surprised) if you could make a recommendation of a publication that promotes a form of Acol bidding that is more ‘modern’ than that which I use.

Hi Michael,

there are two facts I would like to present to you that you probably find somewhat hard to believe:

(1) The range of skills in the game of bridge is incredibly large, and the fact that you do well at a "regional level" does not put you anywhere near what people on this forum would consider a "good player". Several regulars in this forum play in the EBU Premier League. They are significantly better players than I am, and yet still far from the level of the very best players on this forum.

(2) There are only very very few good books about Bridge bidding, and a lot of terrible ones. Chances are that a random regular on this forum knows a lot more about bidding than someone who has read 6 random books on the subject.

Now, you don't have to believe this. We could provide you with some credentials - showing you that mikeh has played in world championships or that I have averaged 3.31 Green Points per day playing in the EBU, but there is no reason for us to spend much time on it. If you want to use this forum to get better at bridge, you are the one who is going to have to accept these facts, and you will be the one to benefit from it.

If you want to continue to insist that you are a better player than most people here and that everyone telling you things is wrong ... it's your loss, not ours.

[Phil]

Quote

“How can you possibly hope to bid slams if you don’t play cue bids and splinters” . . . was said to me in another thread. OK, let’s look at how helpful they are. . .

What would you suggest using a new suit after we have trump agreement for? Its not enough to say, "this idea sucks". You must propose a better use.

Quote

Rules for Cue-Bidding Controls 1). The first cue-bid cannot take place until the trump suit has been agreed as in the sequence 1♥-Pass -3♥

.

There are other auctions where you would like to make a cue bid; take the beloved ACOL jump shift - 1♣ - 2♥ - 3♥....

Quote

First problem . . .that opening shows me less than 22HCP and the response shows me less than 16HCP so neither side has any idea that they have the necessary numbers for a slam and unless opener has a very unusual (and very rare) hand why would he think a slam is on?

As you play more, you will discover that shape is more important than points.

[Vampyr]

Fluffy, on 2014-December-31, 03:02, said:

Asking others to treread your posts while you ignore theirs, this attitude sounds familiar...

I must admit, I miss 325 with his loony bidding theory and creepy version of Christianity. I wish he would come back.

[jillybean]

mikeh, on 2014-December-30, 12:44, said:

I am beginning to suspect a troll at work.

Fluffy, on 2014-December-31, 03:02, said:

Asking others to treread your posts while you ignore theirs, this attitude sounds familiar...

sfi, on 2014-December-31, 04:38, said:

I was starting to think exactly the same thing.

I've seen this coming for a while now.

[the hog]

I think he is genuine.

[blackshoe]

Michael000, on 2014-December-29, 16:29, said:

I know that there is a range of systems and I know that they are largely geographical i.e. if you are American you play SAYC

It's amazing how many things people "know" that just ain't so.

[the hog]

blackshoe, on 2015-January-01, 13:15, said:

It's amazing how many things people "know" that just ain't so. (sic)

Are you suggesting that most US players do not play SAYC? That is not my experience on BBO.