[pbleighton]

I found this on the web:

http://www.abo.fi/~j...ridge/ehaap.pdf

or you can download the ehaa.pdf doc from

http://www.abo.fi/~jboling/bridge

It takes EHAA and puts all of the 19+ hcp hands into 1C, so it is a 2 way club, and adds some conventions and treatments. 1D response to 1C shows < 6 hcp. Strong hands are shown by either jumping on rebid, or 2C if the response is 1H, 1S, or 1M (which it will be about 70% of the time). 2C and 2D are inverted minor responses to 1C.

EHAA has interested me before, but it seemed not precise enough in its bidding. I wonder what you think of:
1) The accuracy of this revised system. Can it be reasonably competitive?
2) The 2C through 2S openings are weak, played as semi-mandatory with 5+ cards. Online, with no regulations to worry about, what is the best use of these openings? I thought of Frelling 2D and 2H (maybe 2S, though I have reservations about it), with 2C either some sort of Frelling/Ekrens 2 suited structure (clubs and a major, clubs and Ds or Hs, or clubs and another).
3) It uses 10-13 as a NT range. Maybe 11-14 is better, to reduce the NT rebid range?
4) If I want to use this as a 5 card system, it seems easy enough to do so, adding strong NT as a hand type. It would then become "Polish EHAA", though Polish uses strong NT vs. weak.

Peter

[Free]

I don't like the 1C-1D-1NT auction. It's balanced 14-19HCP, which is a very big range! Normally 1NT should be a strong version IMO.
Also the 2 level openings are crap! What use is it to bid 2C with 5-11HCP and 5+C? There are several methods of level-2 openings which are way better: frelling twos, ekren, dopto, 2C-2D-multi with muiderberg or reversed (rainbow or wilkosz),... My favorite with a big club opening: Lorenzo! If you play that Vulnerable you're a real daredevil, but NV it's not a big risk. All 2-level openings are 0-7HCP and obligated. That way your system opens about allways, except with 8-11 HCP ;D

[mycroft]

I have been looking for a sane version of a "polish" EHAA 1C for a while - I'll go look and see if I can stomach it. Here's what I think about EHAA in general, though, after about three years of playing it (ok, blame me, I'm not Eric Landau!)

1. Why play EHAA? *It's fun*. Trust me, it's fun. Every Hand *is* an adventure.

2. Why not play EHAA? It's totally different from "standard", even though it's pretty much basic 1950's Goren. The 2 bids and the 10-12 1NT do a lot to change your thoughts.

Also, sometimes it *does* crap out on you. But usually not with big minuses - as Eric's wife says, the "EHAA death result" is +200, not -200 - 2M+3.

3. The key to the 2 bids is you *always* bid them. If you cheat, and only do it if you feel safe, or open 1 with a freak 10-count, or try to get "cute" with AKQxxxxx - the system will bite you. There is a disadvantage to very wide-ranging 2 bids (that +200 I mentioned before being most of it!), and you *have* to take the benefits that go with full-hog bidding.

When your 2 bids can be 86432 (2C-2D all pass, -1 with 4H on for them) or AKJTxxx and an outside K (3Dx=), or even -- KQT9x AQTxxxx x (5Dx+1, with 4S making their way, yum!), the opponents *will* guess wrong sometimes. And even if they don't, when you open 1NT or 2x on 50% of the hands, they're in for a lot of hard work to get back to average.

4. One thing that I found with the 2 bids, and it takes a *lot* of mind-twisting to deal with; *Opener is usually captain*. Responder's bidding is pretty much codified - unless you have the hand to go slam-hunting (have I told you yet about the "only one in the field" slams EHAA gets to because they're opening that JTxxx suit?), and you have to stick to the coding, at least for the first round; but opener frequently bids again, or shows a second suit "on the way" that works best (2D-2NT; 3S-4S anyone?), or judges that he has a "good" EHAA 2-bid for 2H-3H; 4H, or an "excellent" EHAA 2-bid for 2D-(2H)-3D-(3H); 5D, or... You will improve your judgement playing EHAA 2-bids (as well as getting lots of practice with crappy 5-2 fits!).

5. One of the really wonderful things about EHAA is the confidence you can place in opener's 1-of-a-suit openers and the opening pass. 1-bids are *sound*; you can double for penalty knowing partner will not have a shapely 10-count. Playing 4-card Majors, too, cuts down on the number of conventional doubles you need play, so take advantage of this, and enjoy telling partner "respectfully, sir, I believe they have made a mistake coming into *our* auction."

Conversely, when partner passes as opener playing EHAA, you have a much clearer (if bleaker) picture of partner's hand than the rest of the room. 0-5, or 6-9 balanced, or 6-12 4441. That's it. Nice, eh? Eric's book has a fair bit of description of passed hand bidding that takes advantage of this fact. I've even played a third-seat 8-15 1NT opener (legally, in the ACBL, even); "No conventions? We can't make game, we don't need no steenking conventions!" (We did play that 3C showed invitational values and clubs, and 3D INV with diamonds - the fact that they were guaranteed to be 4441 was a consequence of the opening *pass*, not anything conventional in the bid!) Also, you learn (quickly!) to be careful competing opposite an EHAA pass, again, because it's so much more precise.

So, what do I think of EHAA? I play it - a lot - and I win with it. I haven't had the confidence to play it in a team game (the rare bad board is a *bad board*, and I don't feel like inflicting it on innocent teammates), and it does work better at MPs, where frequency is king, than IMPs, where one bad board can kill 10 overtricks; but it is fun, and it is sound, and it is sensible. All you have to do is play "very undisciplined" weak 2 bids (and manage to make clear to the opps that that doesn't necessarily mean "weak"!)

Again, I haven't looked at the site, but I'm surprised 1C-1D; 1NT is 14-19. EHAA ranges are usually 13-ok 16, good 16-bad 19, and 19-20. Unfortunately, 1D in the ACBL has to be forcing to be conventional; that might skew the available options.

OTOH, putting all the "NGF balanced hands" into 1NT after a 0-6 isn't as screwy as Free suspects; wide range isn't a problem if no game exists (it is a problem if the opps double with good expectation that they have more points than you do - that would be my worry).

If you want to try some practice (I'm sorry, I only play "standard EHAA" out of the book for now), leave me mail, maybe we can hook up some day. or look for mycroft/silvercat - about half the time it'll be EHAA.

Michael.

[Free]

Right, I didn't get the part that 1C-1D is one way, never natural with 6+HCP. Otherwise it would be bad.

Now I think you still might miss games if you ALLWAYS bid 1D with any 5 pointer to stick to the system. But then again, I never played it and I read it pretty fast so it could be a good system, could be a bad system too.

Have you ever played this system against good players? Because I think your weak-2 openings won't hold me out of game, and won't put me in an impossible game...

[pbleighton]

Free writes:
"Have you ever played this system against good players? Because I think your weak-2 openings won't hold me out of game, and won't put me in an impossible game... "

I'm sure that you are a good player, but do you guess right every time?

Michael -
1) I'd like to play sometime - I'm pbleighton online too - warning though I am VERY intermediate ;D
2) Do you never open 3 level preempts in EHAA? If so, why not?

Peter

[Free]

Quote

I'm sure that you are a good player, but do you guess right every time?

No, I don't HAVE TO guess. Playing good-bad-2NT solves allmost all problems after a weak-2 bid. But ofcourse we have to play at least at level 3 then...

[pbleighton]

"No, I don't HAVE TO guess. Playing good-bad-2NT solves allmost all problems after a weak-2 bid. But ofcourse we have to play at least at level 3 then... "

...and down one is good bridge, especially against a preempt! ;D

[Free]

Hmmm, I think I'll change that line... Everybody rips it out of the context!

[hrothgar]

Hi All

I was off enjoying the great outdoors for a few days, so I've been somewhat remiss in posting. Hope that folks enjoyed the break, cause I'm back.

I used to play EHAA semi-seriously in a couple partnerships.
There are some aspects of the system that I liked very much.
There were more that I didn't so I pretty much stopped playing EHAA.

Plain and simple, I don't like the EHAA style weak 2 opening bids.

EHAA used the bids 2C/2D/2H/2S to show hands with 8-12 HCP and 5+ cards in the bid suit.
This opening range by far the most common 5 HCP opening range in bridge.
Bidding systems should be designed to allow partnerships to explore for game accurate with these hands. This can't be achieved following a hyper undisciplined opening at the 2 level. [For what is worth, bad results with EHAA Two were what convinced me to start studying highly disciplined/highly frequent preemptive styles and (eventually) to develop the Frelling Two bids.

I'd have a lot of worry combining EHAA with a strong club opening.
EHAA is already a very sound opening structure.
While the strong club opening will certainly discipline the constructive openings, my gut feeling is that those hands are too rare to balance out the loss of the natural 1C opening bid.

[pbleighton]

Richard - welcome back - we missed you - it's been far too fractious around here wiithout your soothing presence

I'm interested in this system because I have become very interested in "Extreme Preempting" recently. My partner and I have been becoming more and more aggressive, and so far the results have been excellent, as well as FUN. I am attracted to EHAA (not least because it's GCC legal, and I can play it at my club), but I am also interested in other alternatives, particularly Frelling and Lorenzo (NV).

I think the "Polish EHAA" structure could be used with other weak two structures, though the 1 of a suit opening requirements would have to be loosened a little.

Richard, if you had 2C available to you as weak, what would you do with it? 4+ clubs and 4 of a major seem a natural extension of Frelling, but would you do something else?

I have spent some time looking at Boling's structure, and I have one VERY big problem with it . After a 1H, 1S, or 1NT response to 1C, he advocates 2C as showing the strong hand, with the responder usually bidding 2D to allow a natural bid. This means that the 1NT rebid is either min with clubs or 14-17 bal. This is not only inaccurate, but it would occur very frequently.

I think the Polish approach of using 2D as an artificial game force, and leaving 2C as natural is much better. I suggest the following:

Opening Bids (not including weak 2s)

1C - 12-18 hcp, 4+ Clubs, or 14-18 Bal, or 19+
1D - 12-18 hcp, 4+ cards
1H/1S - 12-18 hcp, 5+ cards
1NT - 10-13 hcp
2NT - 20-21 hcp

Bidding After 1C

1D - 0-5, any shape
1H/1S - 6+ hcp, 4+ cards
1NT - 6-9 hcp, may have long diamonds
2C - 10+ hcp, 5+ cards, no 4 card major
2D - 10+ hcp, 5+ cards, no 4 card major
2C - 10+ hcp, 5+ cards
2H/2S - 0-5 hcp, 6+ cards
2NT - 10-11 hcp, bal, no 4 card major
3C - 6-9 hcp, 5+ cards, no 4 card major
3NT - 12-15 hcp, bal, no 4 card major

Bidding After 1C-1H/1S

1S - 12-18 hcp, 4+ cards
1NT - 14-17 hcp
2C - 12-18 hcp, 5+ cards
2D - 19(18)+ hcp, artificial game force
2M - 12-15 hcp, 5+ cards
2 Other Major - 19+ hcp, 5+ cards
2NT - 18-19 hcp
2C - 12-18 hcp, 5+ cards
3C/3D - 19+ hcp, 5+ cards
3M - 16-18 hcp, 4+ cards
3NT - 20+, if you want to bid it
4M - 19+ hcp, 4+ cards

Bidding After 1C-1NT

1S - 12-18 hcp, 4+ cards
1NT - 14-17 hcp
2C - 12-18 hcp, 5+ cards
2D - 19(18)+ hcp, artificial game force
2H/2S - 19+ hcp, 5+ cards
2NT - 18-19 hcp
2C - 12-18 hcp, 5+ cards
3C/3D - 19+ hcp, 5+ cards
3NT - 20+, if you want to bid it

There are then only three weaknesses with the above I can see versus 2/1 (playred with a sound opening style) in the bidding of 12-18 hands:
1) The 1NT response may have long diamonds, and you may wish you could bid 1D on these hands. OTOH, the 2D bid handles the long diamond invitational of GF hands better than a 1D response, as it denies a 4 card major and is more difficult for the opps to bid over.
2) You lose the strong NT. More than made up for by the weak NT, IMO, but that is a subject for another thread.
3) After a 1C opener, you cannot reverse (you can't in PC either). These hands are very rare, and with 18 hcp, it's pretty safe to use the 2D artificial game force.

Against these disadvantages, you have the limited range of the 1D, 1H, and 1S openers, and the guarantee of 4 cards in the 1D opener. I think the 1D opener in particular is quite superior. The combination of 4+ cards, weak NT, and inverted minors should be very powerful.

I think (though I haven't tested this yet) that this structure will bid the 19+ hcp openers overall at least as well as 2/1 (not that this is saying much). The strong 2C opener is IMO dreadful, and the 19-21 hands can be passed out, and are clunky to bid even when they are not.

What do people think of this?

Peter

[hrothgar]

Richard, if you had 2C available to you as weak, what would you do with it? 4+ clubs and 4 of a major seem a natural extension of Frelling, but would you do something else?

This is a somewhat delicate subject for me, since it touches on an area that I spent a lot of time grappling with before being forced to admit to failure. The issue crops up as follows:

If you chose to use the 2C opening to show clubs and a major, it leaves you with 2 different ways to show hands with clubs and a major. (You can open in clubs OR you can open in the major). This makes life REALLY complicated.

At one point in time, I was working on a competitive structure over NT openings that was designed as a super-version of DONT. Any overcall in a suit promised a two or three suited hand. Playing normal DONT a 2H overcall promises the majors. Playing Super DONT, a 2H overcall promised Hearts and another suit (the overcalled could have Clubs or Diamonds)

I was trying to define a good structure by which the order that the suits were show could be used to codify additional information about shape. I failed miserably to come up with a structure that I was really happy with.

With this said and done: I've never been in the position to have a "free" 2C opening.
If I did, I would probably multiplex something like the following:
[Please note, designing a response structure to cater for this opening would take QUITE some time)

2C = 4+ Clubs and 4+ cards in another suit: either

4+ Clubs and 4+ cards in a major
With a 4 card major and 5+ Clubs prefer to open 2M
With 4 clubs and a 5+ card major, prefer to open 2C

OR

4+ Clubs and 4+ Diamonds (Opener intends to pass the 2D pass or correct)
Could be 4432

OR

5+ Clubs and 5+ Diamonds (Opener intends to raise the 2D pass or correct bid)

This bid with have a fearsome opening frequency, encompassing

4432s with clubs and Diamonds
4432s with clubs and Hearts
4432s with clubs and Spades

5431s with clubs and diamonds
50% of 5431s with clubs and hearts
50% of 5431s with clubs and spades

plus a few 5-5s and 6-4 patterns

[pbleighton]

Richard -

Another question on your first post:

The bad results you refererred to in you experience of EHAA twos - how did they work at matchpoints?

[hrothgar]

I wasn't happy with the results at either MPs or IMP.

Responder never seemed to be well positioned to judge the limit of the two hands.
We had way too many -50/-100s when responder invited and push the pair past the safety level. Equally significantly, we had a LOT of +170s when we played 2M +2.

The 2S opening could be anything from

65432
AK
Q32
432

to

AKQxxxx
x
xx
Kxx

to

AQxxx
KQxxx
x
xx

There's no way for responder to make an intelligent decision

[keylime]

Here's my memories of EHAA...be forewarned, some of them are joyful, and some very painful.

The form of EHAA I used is known as Southern EHAA, basically a forcing club method with super light openings for the limited bids. I will state very directly that is you are a LOTT fan, EHAA is a method you need to run from, and run into the area code opposite your state into the next country. However, if you like your bridge fast and loose like most of my generation does with their liasons, then EHAA will probably interest you.

In the intermediate events I played in, if anything, the poor opponents were absolutely befuddled by the concept of a light opening system (LOS for short), and especially at IMPs, they would not overcall or make a balancing bid. Often this led to 4-5 IMP swings. Futhermore, over the strong club opening, whenever they dared to even enter the auction (which at the lower end, normally doesn't happen: once again, they think the 1C is really a 2C opening with more strength), it did not deter us from reaching the optimum contract. If anything, it made the play easier.

However, at events where the competition was of a higher grade, EHAA was an open invite to be penalized. My first GNT qualifier was a nightmare. I spent most of that evening trying to extracate ourselves from 800's and up because the opponents were not at all detered by a LOS. If anything, they became more emboldened to act forcefully.

The most painful example I can think of occurred toward the end of my play with EHAA. I opened a weak 2 in spades on 7xxxx (in EHAA, ANY five card or longer suit is acceptable as a weak two bid). LHO passed, partner passed, and RHO doubled. I passed, LHO passed, partner redoubled for rescue, and RHO passed. I'm on a 5-3-3-2 shape, I have no where to go, and I'm in deep trouble. I imagined a 2NT bid up which was doubled by LHO, and partner bailed into 3D on a 4-2. We were doubled again, and we ended up with ZERO tricks. That's right folks, down 13 doubled AND vulnerable for a cool 3800 big ones. I will not disclose how many IMPs were lost on this hand, but rest assured, it was a very high price to play for the "honor" of opening a weak 2 that should never see the light of day.

Directly due to this poor showing, I started work on Key Lime Precision, and look at my adventures in EHAA with cautious eyes and mind.

A further note to mention...I can't name 5 pairs that have played in either the European and/or World Championships the last three years that have used a LOS (I think of the Magic Diamond crowd from Finland, a pair from NZ, but that's about it). It seems to me that the good player looks at LOS (and strong forcing pass methods) as an invitation to destroy its users. Any thoughts?

BTW, KLPV11 will be released around 20 September.

D.

[hrothgar]

A further note to mention...I can't name 5 pairs that have played in either the European and/or World championships the last three years that have used a LOS (I think of the Magic Diamond crowd from Finland, a pair from NZ, but that's about it). It seems to me that the good player looks at LOS (and strong forcing pass methods) as an invitation to destroy its users. Any thoughts?

I think that you fundamentally confuse cause and effect.

True Light Opening Systems like "Suspensor", "Mini-Major" and "No-Name" disappeared from the bridge scene because they were ruthlessly suppressed. Talk to any of the principles involved: The top Poles, Swedes, and Antipodeans all state explictly that they stopped playing strong pass systems because of discriminatory systems policies. Left to their own devices, they would still be playing these system.

Today, bidding theorists need to spend most of their time figuring out how to cope with latest inane set of system regulations rather than focusing on actual system design. Many people become completely dispirited by the intrinsic catch-22 that is in place. System designers are free to develop whatever new methods they want, so long as they suck. However, let anyone develop a "good" new method and it will prompltly get banned since this threatens the status quo.

In Europe, Light Opening Systems have been gutted by all the "Rule of 19" nonsense. [Here in the States, players advocate the rule of 20 as a judgement system to recognize when to open a distributional hand. However, in much of Europe this has explictly been adopted as part of the regulatory structure]

In North America, I have the option to open a 4333 eight count if I want to, however, Ayatollah's Correct Bridge Lessons [ACBL] bans all of the tools that I need to achieve decent results. Light Opening Systems require relays, transfer positive response, or some other type of science to achieve good results. However, these methods are, once again, not allowed in most events.

Plain and simple: If Light Opening Systems were inferior, we would't need to see all added regulatory baggage designed to make the world "safe" for SAYC and 2/1 GF.

[hrothgar]

The form of EHAA I used is known as Southern EHAA, basically a forcing club method with super light openings for the limited bids.

Seems strange to call this EHAA:

Traditionally, EHAA was defined by

4 card majors
Ultra Sound 1 level openings (13+ HCP)
9-12 HCP 1NT opening [changed to 10-12 due to regulatory pressure]
8-12 HCP weak 2s on 5 card suits
NO strong artifical forcing openings

To me, the most significant characteristic was alwyas the fact that the bids between 1NT and 2S were centered on the "sweet spot" in Probability Density Function defining hand strength.

Southern EHAA voliates lots of these conventions.

Light Opening Bids [I am assuming that the undisiplined weak 2s became even weaker]
A strong club for good hands

[keylime]

It is a little strange to call a forcing club with a LOS as a form of EHAA, but it was quite popular in the day here in the southeastern United States. I know of one pair that plays it still; they reside in the Hot Springs area of Arkansas.

First thing that would aid the discussion is an appropriate definition for a LOS. I define it as a method that opens hands commonly on hands that are normally overcalled on (working definition only mind you, but it's a starting point).

I do to a point agree that theorists these days are attempting to create methods/systems that work within the confines of the governing rules. The last major set of developments I can think of bidding wise here in ACBL Land were support doubles and fit jumps (someone correct me if wrong here). The GCC does attempt to satisiate the status quo of 60 plus overactive geriatrics that want to play so-called "real bridge" Problem is, they don't realize that Vanderbilt's first method used a forcing club and furthermore, the Euros are a lot more progressive in approach.

I do remember the rule of 19 from my travels in Europe. It seemed to me that in the British Isles this was frowned upon by some. Elsewhere on the mainland continent, it was looked upon with apathy.

I like opening very shapely eight counts personally.

I think LOS are in some ways inferior. If one really thinks about it, any treatment that is "destructive" (I use the word loosely), doesn't it not more often than not get poorer results? That's something I'd do an mathematical model for the membership on just to see.

Speaking of LOTT folks, my post on an empirical formula for calculation is still up, and I am almost done with an equation for those freak hands.

D.

[pbleighton]

Dwayne -

Would you provide us with a brief summary of Southern EHAA - at least the description of the opening bids?

Peter

[keylime]

Peter,

Here's a basic idea of what I played for Southern EHAA:

1C - 16+, forcing club
1D - 13-15 balanced OR 11-15 unbalanced with diamonds
1H/S - 4 card majors, 12-15 HCP
1NT - 10-12 ALL SEATS
2C - 3 suited hand, 10-15 (can NOT use this as a weak 2 in clubs, it's not allowed at all)
2D/H/S - preemptive, can be 5 carders, 5 to a bad 11 HCP
2NT - minor two suited hand, 10-15
3C - club preempt
3D/H - transfer preempts 1st/2nd (no longer GCC legal, at time it was), regular 3rd and 4th.
3S - regular preempt, BETTER quality than transfer preempt 1st/2nd chair, in 3rd/4th standard
3NT - Gambling, no outside A or K
4C/D - NAMYATS, 6 or fewer losers
4H/S - standard preempts

The forcing club structure used rudimentary transfer positives (it was the starting point for Key Lime Precision, remember). It lacked a lot of sophistication. EHAA is for those that bid boldly direct to game.

[hrothgar]

2C - 3 suited hand, 10-15 (can NOT use this as a weak 2 in clubs, it's not allowed at all)

Not sure what you mean by this

A weak 2C bid is natural
Allowed at any/all levels within North America