[inquiry]

Mishovnbg is BACK!!! he has played at least twice this week after months of being AOL.

In honor of his return, i will redescribe this transfer opening preempts (2NT to 3D) using simple rules to describe the "strong version" of the hands.

These transfers show then next higher suit and "weak" hand or a STRONG TWO SUITER (4 losers or less, 5-5 or better) EXCLUDING the next higher suit and INCLUDING the suit opened (2NT shows "hearts" when strong). Since the strong version is fairly rare (about 1/3 as frequent as the weak version) the subsequent bidding rules must be easy to remember and must be effective or it is not worth the effort.

Here are the simple rules that make this very playable (in this post, only partner completing the transfer will be discussed, and no interference... similar rules cover the other auctions, and can be discussed if anyone is interested).

RULE NUMBER ONE: Opener's rebid with all weak hands is pass, with strong hand he shows his two suits and his number of losers. To show two suiter with spades, rebid SPADES or the opened suit (remember 2NT shows hearts when strong). Each higher level of opener's rebid shows fewer and fewer number of losers (4 is maximum number), and in most cases, with 3 losers or less the need or lack of need for a cover for a loser in the lowest side suit. All rebids that allow responder to pick between BOTH openers suits at the same level show the mininum number of losers, a bid that forces partner to go to the next level shows one less loser, and need for the cover in the lower side suit.

So the cheapest rebid that shows specific two suiters shows four losers, the next cheapest bid that shows the same specific two suiters shows three losers, and most often the need or lack of need for a cover in the lowest side suit. These can all be worked out at the table in a matter of seconds, so no memorization needed. With major two suiters, after 3H rebid (4 loser), then 3S/4H shows 3 losers, 4S/5H (2 losers), 5S/6H (1 loser). Since two suiters without spades have three possible rebids, these show need for King, then ACE then no-cover in the lowest ranking side suit.

RULE NUMBER TWO: After responder hears the opening two suiter, if he can place the contract (part-score, game, slam or grand slam) by counting sure covers and having no "maybe" covers, he signs off in one or the other of partners suits.

RULE NUMBER THREE: If responder is considering slam (or grand slam) he can investigate slam by a combination of denial cue-bidding (side suits below 4NT) and positive cue-bidding (4NT and side suits above 4NT) (note 3NT to play). Each of these are up the line. So if responder skips a denied suit, it promises a "potential cover" in that suit. (5NT by responder is always bid your better/longer suit == even late in auction). A jump to 4NT when 3S is available as denial cue-bid shows King of spades and ACE of lowest side suit. A bid of 4S when 3S is available as a denial cue-bid shows King in lowest suit, and Ace or King in spades.

RULE NUMBER FOUR: Opener tries to signoff by bidding the cheapest anchor suit if a denial cue bid shows two losers in a suit or if the opener has no use for a cover in the other suit.

RULE NUMBER FIVE: If opener does not try to signoff, he has several options. The first is if only the ACE in the other non-anchor suit is useful (then he bids the cheapest step response not in an anchor suit). Responder must SIGNOFF in game or slam if he is missing the ACE in response to such an inquiry. Or if any cover in the non-anchor is working, opener shows the presences of absenses of one or more anchor queens as follows. With both queens, he rebids in the most expensive anchor suit. If he is missing both queens, he has three rebids possible (four with both majors): he rebids 6 of the cheaper anchor suit if missing ace in the denial suit. If he has the ACE in the denial suit, and missing both queens, he rebids 5NT, or with the ACE in the denial suit, he rebids 6 of a suit below the cheapest anchor with missing both queens but six or more cards in the cheaper anchor (with both majors, 6C shows 6+h, 6d 6+S). For rules if missing just one queen, see rule SIX.

RULE NUMBER SIX: Over a denial bid or otherwise, missing one queen, openers choice depends upon available room. If there is room below five of the cheapest anchor to show the ACE ask (the cheapest non-anchor bid), and two more possible non-anchor suit bids, the cheapest bid shows missing queen in lowest suit, the more expensive shows missing queen in the higher. If only one slot exist, bidding it shows a missing queen, but does not identify the suit. If no room exist below five of the cheapest, then show missing queen by bidding above it. If two slots above exist, use lower shows missing lower queen, higher shows missing higher.

RULE NUMBER SEVEN: If responder does not accept the signoff his cheapest rebid ask for missing queens. Anytime after opener has shown missing queens, responder not signing off ask if a distributional king is of use. A distributional king is not a real king or singleton, but rather a combination of long in one of openers two suits, short in the other and the side suit so that all the side suit can be thrown away, and then openers losers in that suit ruffed. If you make distributional king ask in a suit you have shown honor in, you are asking for king if you hold ace, you are asking for usefulness of the "queen" if you have the king (and partner didn't ask for ACE).

Here are a few example hands.

Scoring: IMP

West North East South

 Pass  Pass  Pass  3♣
 Pass  3♦    Pass  3♠
 Pass  4♥    Pass  5♥
 Pass  6♦    Pass  7♣
 Pass  7♠    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

---

3S = rule 1 cheapest rebid showing spades and diamond (suit opened), 4 losers
4H = rule 3, thinking slam so denial cue-bid at four level, 4H denies heart, shows club control (since bypassed).
5H = rule 6, 4NT would ask for club ACE, there is no "free room" to show missing queen below 5 of the cheaper suit. Opener can show missing queen in clubs by 5D and in hearts by 5S.
6D = rule seven, asking if distributional king of diamonds is (now must be distributional queen) is useful.. I know 3 of your 4 losers are: Spade AQ, something in diamonds. If you are 5-0-3-5 you can ruff ♦ in my hand
7C = third round in diamonds is WONDERFUL, pick suit
7S = our suit

Scoring: IMP

West North East South

 Pass  Pass  Pass  3♣
 Pass  3♦    Pass  3♠
 Pass  4♥    Pass  5♥
 Pass  6♦    Pass  7♣
 Pass  7♠    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

---

4S = rule 1, force partner to 5H if he likes hearts better, so one less loser than 4H, and shows need for some diamond cover.
5H = rule 3 potential heart cover, no diamond cover. Heart might be king or ace, as 4NT is reserved here to ask if diamond king is useful cover (since opener has sure need for diamond, but might be ace or king needed).
5NT = ask if ACE is of hearts (rule 5)
7C = ends auction. Club Queen and heart ACE covers two losers

Scoring: IMP

West North East South

 Pass  Pass  Pass  3♣
 Pass  3♦    Pass  3♠
 Pass  4♥    Pass  5♥
 Pass  6♦    Pass  7♣
 Pass  7♠    Pass  Pass
 Pass  

---

4C = Rule 1, black two suiter, 3 loser, no need for diamond cover
4H = Rule 3, denial cue-bid, no heart cover, possible other covers for slam (club queen ruff for one potential cover)
5N = Rule 5 missing both queens and with ACE in denial suit, jump to 5NT
7S = wow.. your three losers are two black queens and spade King. Grand might need hook or drop in spades, but this rates to have good play. If you like you can stop in six you have a lot of info on which to make your decison.

Welcome back Misho!!!

[Double !]

Ben:

Your web/blog site and descriptions of Inquiry 2/1 (as far as it's gotten) are excellent. There is a lot of good, strong, and useful material there. You are to be commended; where do you get the time to work, moderate/ be a yellow/ play, and write all of this? I study your notes and descriptions when I can (and not so many typos as a previous post might have implied.) But I have a question, actually in 2 parts.

1) Are these transfer weak/ strong openings acbl legal ( I suspect mid-chart = yes). Assuming that the answer to 1) is "yes", 2) have you devised (and submitted) recommended defenses for all of these various bids? Would someone be able to use these structures should they wish to play in an acbl-sanctioned game or event? Or is this still a work in progress?

(By the way, last time I looked, your chapter on Kaplan Conversion (aka Granville) wasn't accessible.

Keep up the excellent work, friend. You and Misho just might have come up with some better mousetraps.

DHL

[hrothgar]

I believe that this transfer preempt structure is legal at the Midchart level...
Whether you can get an entry into the defensive database is a whole 'nother kettle of fish...
Wheter you'd want to play this is a third... I (still) think that you're trading a big downside for a relatively infrequent upside.

[inquiry]

Thanks Double! And as Richard points out, it is Mid-chart legal.

Now to Richard's other comments. The complaint against "transfer preempts" puts you at a disadvantage when you hold the weak hand.

The best arguement for this was posted a long time ago by BBO gold star "Rado" who said.

• "When opening natural PRE the options for opps are DBL, suit....
  When opening transfer PRE we give 3 additional options: direct DBL, delayed DBL, DBL+DBL and low-level Que. Obviously a contradiction arises between the goal of PRE to steal space from Opps making their live harder and giving them 3 more options to describe constructively their hands. In general transfer works well when Opps are silent(constructive option), and natural is better when opps need to bid(destructive option)"

So let's address this three bites of the apple issue. First, let me say that "ultimate club" and some other systems use transfer preempts as part of the system. Second Fred's teammates (Russ Ekeblad and Ron Rubin) that won the springold, and had already qualified to play in the Bermuda Bowl play transfer preempts from 2NT to 3D (same range as MisIry) and use 3H as weak both majors, and have great success with it against world class opposition, and as Fred says, they "love it" http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?....61547

So. let's at least agree, that the concept of transfer preempts have some advantages. Now let's deal with the three bites of the apple issue raised by Rado earlier and no doubt part of Richards comments.

1) When you have just the weak hand, if the second hand passes to wait to make the takeout double, he maybe doing so one level higher... responnder doesn't have to bid only 3 of the tranfer suit.
2) If he doubles the transfer suit, to show that suit, they have to outbid you by one level if you are weak. And, if you are strong, they have just help you play the hand.
3) If they make the low level cue-bid, they just prevented the possibility of playing in three of your suit doubled.. which might have been their best spot.

So not all of these are wins. But let me share some big wins. You have a goodish two suiter and open one of a suit. Next hand jump overcalls (weak) or uses 2NT (unusual). Their bidding now makes it difficult for you in a couple of ways. Difficult to convey the stregnth/distribution of your hand. And difficult if they find a good safe. Now imagine you open at three level with transfer preempt. You have taken away the preemptive overall, you have take away 2NT unususal. And if they compete, you can easily show your distribution and power with your next bid.

And this doesn't even count the clarity removing these strong hands have to your 1x-p-1y-p-3Z auctions and to your 2C opening bids (no strong two suiters included, so no second suit five+).

With Richard's permission, I would be happy to show "the limited" hands he has held that fit into the "MisIry" strong transfers and show how the bid would have worked (good or bad), and the results of those hands. Personalizing the results is always better than using some theoretical hands.

[inquiry]

While waiting on Richard's reply, here is an example of what i am talking about. This was taken from OKBRIDGE public record.

Quote

========================================
C:\BRBR\haraldo.02.IMP-5.258.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 8/7/2005
========================================
IMP-5                        Dlr: East 
Board 258   S KT98      Vul: N-S
                H T83      
                D K52           
S 6432       C K72       S QJ75     
H KQ65                     H AJ9742   
D 98                        D 7        
C JT6        S A          C 98       
               H          
               D AQJT643  
               C AQ543    

South    West     North    East     
                                1C      
Pass     1S       2H       3D      
Pass     Pass     Pass    

Opening lead: HK    Result: Made 7
Score: 190          Points: -11.72

Ok, 3D on this monster is not great bidding. Playing MisIry,

3D - 3H
5C - 5N
6D - 7D
Pass

Where
3D = heart preempt or 2 suiter with D and without H
3H = in case
5C = rule 1, minor 2 suiter, 2 loser, no need for heart cover
5N = Bid your better minor (rule 3.. 5NT by responder always looks for best suit)
6D = best suit
7D = two losers, two covers (CK, DJ)

Here is the results from this hand...

Quote

=======================================
  # Contr   Ld  Decl     Tr  Score   Pts
=======================================
  1 3D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   190 -11.72         
  2 4D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   190 -11.72         
  3 5D    E S3  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  4 5D    E D9  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  5 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  6 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  7 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  8 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
  9 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
10 5D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
11 5D    E S2  xxxxxxx 13   440  -8.91         
12 5DX   E HK  xxxxxxx 13   750  -3.02         
13 6C    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
14 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
15 6D    E S6  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
16 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
17 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
18 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
19 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
20 6D    E CJ  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
21 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
22 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
23 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
24 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
25 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
26 6D    E H5  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
27 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
28 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
29 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
30 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
31 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
32 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
33 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
34 6D    E D9  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
35 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
36 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
37 6D    E S2  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
38 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
39 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
40 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
41 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
42 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
43 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
44 6D    E HQ  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
45 6D    E HK  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
46 6D    E S6  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
47 6D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
48 6D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
49 6D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13   940   1.42         
50 7D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13  1440  10.85         
51 7D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13  1440  10.85         
52 7D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13  1440  10.85         
53 7D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13  1440  10.85         
54 7D    W HA  xxxxxxx 13  1440  10.85         
=======================================

[david_c]

Seems unlikely that this discussion is going to turn out any differently to how it did a couple of months ago, but, never mind, I'll wade in anyway. I agree completely with Richard. Yes, transfer pre-empts have their advantages. Even so ...

inquiry, on Aug 7 2005, 03:25 PM, said:

Now let's deal with the three bites of the apple issue raised by Rado earlier and no doubt part of Richards comments.

1) When you have just the weak hand, if the second hand passes to wait to make the takeout double, he maybe doing so one level higher... responnder doesn't have to bid only 3 of the tranfer suit.

OK, so I won't use "pass then dbl" to show a take-out double. I'll play it the other way round, so that the delayed double is penalty or co-operative. Then this problem goes away.

Quote

2) If he doubles the transfer suit, to show that suit, they have to outbid you by one level if you are weak.

Sure, but I'm still in a much better position than if you were playing natural pre-empts, as then I would have to make a natural overcall one level higher.

Quote

And, if you are strong, they have just help you play the hand.

Hmm. The a priori probability of a strong hand was already rather low; if I've picked up a hand worth a natural overcall in the suit bid, then the strong option (which always includes the suit bid, if I remember correctly) is almost negligible.

Quote

3) If they make the low level cue-bid, they just prevented the possibility of playing in three of your suit doubled.. which might have been their best spot.

Right, that's a good point. It's not clear that using the cue-bid to show a "take-out double" is the best defence. But if you don't want to use the cue-bid in this way, you can still play

direct dbl = "I would have doubled a natural pre-empt for take-out"
pass then dbl = penalty
cue-bid = some two-suiter (?)

None of the problems 1, 2 or 3 apply to this. It's probably not optimal, but it's still so much better than against a natural pre-empt.

[awm]

Just a few comments on this to remind people of some conclusions from the earlier discussion.

First, the strong two-suiters are not as rare as people believe. A priori, a 5-5 hand with four or fewer losers is about half as likely as a preempt. So when these transfer preempts are opened, it will be a preempt about 2/3 of the time and a strong hand about 1/3 (in fact this varies a bit because some of the bids have more strong possibilities than others). In addition, this probability will change somewhat in seats other than first to favor the strong hands more, because it's more likely that someone would've opened in front of a preempt.

Second, most people don't have a good defense to transfer preempts. It's true that the transfer gives you a lot more bids, and this could potentially be a loss. But most people haven't discussed all the sequences, and even prepared defenses (like acbl's) tend to be incomplete and not necessarily best. Certainly in random games on BBO the transfer preempt is likely to be a huge win even on weak hands because no one will know how to defend it.

Third, the field in most BBO tournaments is not that strong. This means we have to take Ben's examples with a grain of salt -- it's true that some of these strong two suiters are hard to bid, but it's also true that a large percentage of BBO partnerships are pickup pairs and somewhat below expert level, and their results will reflect this.

[hrothgar]

Hi Ben

Feel free to mine BBO hand records for strong 5-5 hands that I've stuffed up. There are doubtlessly a lot of them. With this said and done, I'm dubious whether its valid to compare at the table results that most likely occured playing with a pickup partner with double-dummy bidding analysis. I suspect that many of the hands will boil down to displaying the benefits of having ANY kind of systemic agreement...

As I noted in the past, I think any type of analysis needs to START by examining the relative frequency of the weak and strong hand types. In all the months that you've been preaching to the great unwashed masses, you've never once provided a statistical analysis beyond mining a small number of BBO tournaments for suitable hands. Ideally, I'd like to see a Dealer Script defining both the weak and strong hand types, accompanied by a 100K simulation to define the relative frequency... (To make things easy, its perfectly all right to assume first seat opening bids so we don't need to worry about the conditional probability that 1st seat would open 2♥ given that second seat has a strong 5-5 hand. For what its worth, I think that its more likely that people will open in front of the 5-5 shape, but I could be wrong)

Last (but not least). Personally, I don't get excited by methods that are designed for "bunny bashing". Methods need to stand on their own merits. They shouldn't need to rely on the assumption that the opposing pairs are too weak to have a decent defense. As I recall, I posted a pretty reasonable defense to this method last time arorund...

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Aug 7 2005, 05:25 PM, said:

1) When you have just the weak hand, if the second hand passes to wait to make the takeout double, he maybe doing so one level higher... responnder doesn't have to bid only 3 of the tranfer suit.
2) If he doubles the transfer suit, to show that suit, they have to outbid you by one level if you are weak. And, if you are strong, they have just help you play the hand.
3) If they make the low level cue-bid, they just prevented the possibility of playing in three of your suit doubled.. which might have been their best spot.

From the looks of things, you're assuming that the opponents are playing piss-poor defensive methods over your transfer preempt...

Please track down the last set of posts on this topic and review the defensive methods that I proposed there. I think that most of your wishful thinking goes out the window...

[awm]

hrothgar,

I have already run the simulation you suggest. Over 100K hands, the results were:

Strong two-suiters: ~800 occurrences
3-level preempts: ~1600 occurrences

The constraints were as follows:

Strong two-suiters: any hand with 4 losers or fewer, and at least 5-5 in two suits
3-level preempts: Any hand with a 7 card (exactly) longest suit, 4-10 points, 7 or fewer losers

Obviously this will vary somewhat in that some 6-card preempts may be opened at the three level, some bad 7-card suits probably won't open at the three level, etc. It's hard to simulate what people will and won't preempt at the table. Also a few of the two suiters may not qualify (i.e. not clear that AK Kxxxx Kxxxx A is a transfer preempt open despite only 4 losers).

[hrothgar]

awm, on Aug 8 2005, 05:15 AM, said:

hrothgar,

I have already run the simulation you suggest. Over 100K hands, the results were:

Strong two-suiters: ~800 occurrences
3-level preempts: ~1600 occurrences

The constraints were as follows:

Strong two-suiters: any hand with 4 losers or fewer, and at least 5-5 in two suits
3-level preempts: Any hand with a 7 card (exactly) longest suit, 4-10 points, 7 or fewer losers

Obviously this will vary somewhat in that some 6-card preempts may be opened at the three level, some bad 7-card suits probably won't open at the three level, etc. It's hard to simulate what people will and won't preempt at the table. Also a few of the two suiters may not qualify (i.e. not clear that AK Kxxxx Kxxxx A is a transfer preempt open despite only 4 losers).

thanks for putting in the effort...

I do think that there are a fair number of 6331 hands that will be opened with a 3 level preempt. In particular, many players using "standard" methods don't have a weak 2♣ opening available and are forced to either pass 6331s/6322s with long clubs or open 3♣. In a similar vein, their are a lot of players who use some kind of artifical 2♦ opening (multi, Flannery, Precision, Rough/Frelling) who are also faced with a similar choice...

I'd be curious to know what impact treating 6 carders with a long minor as three level preempts have on the relative frequency. One "easy" way to estimate this would be to us BrBr and looking at 3C/3D/3H openings made on single suited hands and then calculate the relative frequency of 6 and 7 card holdings...

[inquiry]

Of the 1091 hand Richard has played in the current tournment databse on BRBR, thre were 18 hands opened 3C to 3H by either side). There were 9 hands among these that were opened by a person with a hand that qualifies for misiry strong version. Amazingly these match Marks predictions almost perfectly. 18 out or 1091 is 1.65% (he predicted 1.6%). The 9 hands was 0.82%, pretty much what Mark predicted (0.8%). And is actually higher than the the 1 in 3 to 1 in 4 estimate I calculated in the past.

Having said that, the 1091 hands, each side opened with preempt and each side had the big hand, so your FREQUENCY of having either of these would be 1/2 of that I guess.

Thanks to richard for allowing his "strong" misIry hands to be an example for us. It is true some of them will probalby be ugly, but I am sure he will have done very well on others. That would be true of all of us.

[inquiry]

Since richard was such a sport, we will start off with two of his successes with his methods...

Quote

========================================
C:\BRBR\hrothgar.04.MP-657.4.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 08-Aug-05
========================================
MP-657      newmoon    Dlr: West 
Board 4    S A9542    Vul: Both
            H 52       
lotus6      D KT        hucase     
S KJT83    C K754      S 7       
H T63                  H J74     
D Q5        hrothgar    D J9876432 
C J83      S Q6        C Q       
            H AKQ98   
            D A       
            C AT962   

16-Sep-04  7:08:17 PM
First  7:07:41 PM, Last  7:11:22 PM

North    East    South    West   
lotus6  newmoon  hucase  hrothgar 
                          1H     
Pass    1S      Pass    3C     
Pass    4C      Pass    4D     
Pass    4S      Pass    5D     
Pass    6C      Pass    Pass   
Pass   

Opening lead: D5    Result: Made 6
Score: 1370       

On this first hand, 1/3 of the field, including richard, found the nice 6C contract. Playing MisIry, auction would be...

3C - 3D
3H - 4S
4NT - 5D
5S - 6C
Pass

3H = heart club two suiter, 4 losers
4S = King diamonds, ACE or king of spades
4NT = Asking if Spade control is ACE
5D = yes spade ace, looking for missing queens (hearts in particular)
5S = missing club queen
6C = enough.

Quote

=======================================
  # Contr  Ld  Decl    Tr  Score  Pts
=======================================
  1 5DX  N HA  brianofoz 0    0  50.00         
  2 5C    W D5  dirtbag  12  620  3.12         
  3 5C    W DQ  turbomom 12  620  3.12         
  4 3N    E D7  chocsdog 12  690  15.62         
  5 3N    E S7  kili0    12  690  15.62         
  6 3N    E D7  anai    13  720  28.12         
  7 3N    W SJ  vida_z  13  720  28.12         
  8 5DX  S HA  Taunus    8  800  37.50         
  9 4DX  S DA  sonrisa  6  1100  46.88         
10 4DX  S HA  kto tak gr6  1100  46.88         
11 5CX  W DQ  cra2004  13  1150  56.25         
12 6C    W D5  hrothgar 12  1370  78.12         
13 6C    W DQ  ISP      12  1370  78.12         
14 6C    W DQ  sessiz  12  1370  78.12         
15 6C    W DQ  pthomp  12  1370  78.12         
16 6C    W D5  blue eyes12  1370  78.12         
17 6C    W ST  sogram  12  1370  78.12         
18 5DX  S HA  galt      6  1400 100.00         
=======================================

The second one, involved blasting to slam. Turns out with 4-1 diamonds, no grand slam can make with a club lead. To defeat 7NT from North, it takes club Queen lead, very unilkely. MisIry would get you to the 68% grand slam in diamonds (needing 3-2 diamond split) or to the grand slam in Notrump (which as you see actually did well in practice), via one of the following two auctions.

3D - 3H
4S - 5NT
6S - 7NT

4S = Rule 1, spade/diamond two suiter, need club cover
5NT = trick to investigate suits
6S = better spades (AKQJx or AKQxxx or longer. With five-five you would bid 6D
7NT = you have AKQxxx of spades, AKxxx(x) of diamonds and x or Kx of clubs with a heart void. I can bid "sane" 7D or matchpointee 7NT.

We haven't covered the simple rules for when partner raises your suit. Obviously you can't show everything as easily as if he didn't due to lack of room. Each bid compressess the earlier responses. The only difference is, now the "losers needing help" are converted.

3D - 4H
4S - 4NT
5H - 5NT
6S - 7NT/7D

4H = (rules not yet stated for when the suit is raised, like here. The simple rule is the cheapest two suiter showing bid includes all the hands up to that bid. So 3S rebid here shows 4, 3, or 2 losers needing club control).

4S = The cheapest bid deny needing help in the raised suit. The more expensive show need for help in the raised suit. Over 4H "raise", 4S shows 4, 3 losers or 2 losers no need for heart.

4NT = no longer shows upper cover either (since no heart cover is needed, that would be "foolish". Here it probes number of losers).

5H = two losers
5NT, 6S as original auction

Is a 68% grand slam in diamonds worth it? At matchpoints for sure. At imps?

All the remaing one later...

[inquiry]

Now lets turn our attention to the other hands...

Easy slam missed on this on in either major.

Quote

========================================
C:\BRBR\hrothgar.05.MP-657.3.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 8/8/2005
========================================
MP-657      Eugen1968  Dlr: South
Board 3    S AQT83    Vul: E-W
              H K96     
atc32      D AKT43    Bayum     
S K5        C          S 976     
H T5                    H 872     
D J976      hrothgar    D 852     
C AJ743    S J42      C KT62     
                H AQJ43   
                D Q       
                C Q985     

5/27/2005 11:35:33 AM
First 11:35:00 AM, Last 11:40:52 AM

South    West    North    East   
atc32    Eugen1968Bayum    hrothgar   
Pass    1S      Pass    2S     
Pass    3D      Pass    4S     
Pass    Pass    Pass   

Opening lead: H7    Result: Made 7
Score: 710         

=======================================
  # Contr  Ld  Decl    Tr  Score  Pts
=======================================
  1 4CXX  E C3  sbtal    9  -400  0.00         
  2 6H    E H5  nahuel  11  -100  16.67         
  3 4S    W S7  lev07    13  710  50.00         
  4 4S    W H7  Eugen196813  710  50.00         
  5 4S    W H7  cgsmss5  13  710  50.00         
  6 6S    W H7  charlesgo13  1460  91.67         
  7 6H    E CA  jmzelis  13  1460  91.67         
=======================================

MisIry would be...

3D (vul) - 3H (partner has to be two suited red versus white with this heart suit
3S -

3S = Rule 1, 4 loser, major two suiter
4C = Rule 3, denial cue-bid in clubs (I can see two sure, so slam try is in order)
4H = Rule 5, do you have the heart ACE?
5H = Rule 6, asking if distributional king helps (since partner asked for ACE,
this really ask if queen or distributional queen is useful, see other examples)
6C = heart works for me
6S/6H = I guess 6S in real like.

Next one is a game thing.

Quote

IMP-137      Dlr: North
Board 1        S 86543    Vul: None
                  H T542     
Aida_Mk_Nl  D J6            iandy65   
S AQ72      C 94            S KJT9     
H 86                              H 93       
D AT987    hrothgar        D KQ43     
C K8          S                C 753     
                H AKQJ7   
                D 52       
                C AQJT62   

1/8/2005  4:41:11 PM
First 4:40:19 PM, Last 4:46:01 PM

West    North    East    South   
Aida_Mk_Nl        andy65  hrothgar     
          Pass    Pass    1C     
1D      Pass    1S      2H     
2S      Pass    Pass    3H     
Pass    Pass    Pass   

Opening lead: DA    Result: Made 4
Score: 170       

Missed 4H, unlucky. No way to stay out of it iwth three loser hand and heart fit playing MisIry...

3C - 3D
3NT - 4H
Pass

Interference (hard to believe), makes little difference on this hand.

=======================================
# Contr Ld Decl Tr Score Pts
=======================================
1 4HX S DA supercarl11 690 10.06
2 5HX S H6 _sedirx 11 650 9.56
3 4H S H6 CEO 12 480 6.61
4 4H S SA EdoWell 11 450 6.06
5 4H N H3 roma1 10 420 5.28
6 4H S DA Geert 10 420 5.28
7 4H S DA contra 10 420 5.28
8 5SX E HQ maistora 9 300 2.89
9 4SX E HK Clyde B 8 300 2.89
10 3H S DA hrothgar 10 170 0.06
11 3C S S2 AliceDK 10 130 -0.83
12 5S W C4 MishoVnBg 9 100 -1.56
13 4SX E HK mp1 9 100 -1.56
14 5H S DA rokk1 10 -50 -4.44
15 5H S DA Igor TS 10 -50 -4.44
16 5CX S SA nurit333 10 -100 -5.56
17 5HX S H8 rozi 10 -100 -5.56
18 6HX S DA ACPSY 10 -300 -8.50
19 4SXX S DA dambu 4 -2800 -21.50
=======================================

Here is another one, I think Richard did fine on... be sure to check out his eloborate and descriptive bidding

Quote

IMP-341    free        Dlr: East 
Board 6    S Q        Vul: E-W
              H AKT98   
drkvas      D AKQ76    nomanacero 
S A95      C J6        S KT764   
H Q632                    H 7       
D 54        hrothgar    D 982     
C QT85    S J832      C 9742     
              H J54     
              D JT3     
              C AK3     

3/2/2005 10:41:53 AM
First 0:38:58 AM, Last 0:46:36 AM

North    East    South    West   
drkvas  free    nomanacerohrothgar
          1C!1    Pass    1H!2     
Pass    1S!3      Pass    1NT!4   
Pass    2C!5      Pass    2H!6     
Pass    2S!7      Pass    2NT!8   
Pass    3C!9      Pass    3NT!10   
Pass    4H!11      Pass    4S!12     
Pass    4NT!13    Pass    5H!14     
Pass    Pass    Pass   

1. 15+ any
2. art. semi positive, no 5+ major
3. relay
4. balanced or 4441
5. relay
6. 4+ !S, 2-3 !H
7. relay
8. 4333 or 5332
9. relay
10. 4=3=3=3
11. RKC !h
12. 1/4 key cards in !H
13. !hQ?
14. no trump queen

Opening lead: C5    Result: Made 6
Score: 680       

North found out that south had some valuse (not sure which), 4333 and no heart queen plus one keycard (black ace). In theory, I guess they coudl be off AK of clubs if south had AK of spades. But who knows? You evaluate it.

MisIry?

2NT - 3C
3D - 3S
4C - ?

3S = denial in spades
4C = missing a queen (your quess which)
? = AK of clubs are a cover, missing queen allows finesse or drop (I have both jacks). Do I venture slam? I say no. I would try 5C and correct to 5H when partner bids 5D. I am in possession of info to decide if I want to risk it, however.

(after 3S, AKx of clubs could be 3 covers if partne has xxx of clubs and spade void).
=======================================
# Contr Ld Decl Tr Score Pts
=======================================
1 6H E D9 DUCA54 11 -100 -13.74
2 3D E H7 joep2 12 170 -10.95
3 3N W C5 euterpe4810 630 -3.42
4 4H E C4 theateam 11 650 -2.68
5 5H E D9 seattler 11 650 -2.68
6 4H E S6 Paul15 11 650 -2.68
7 4H E C7 Tchantche12 680 -1.95
8 4H E S7 inventi_i12 680 -1.95
9 5H W C5 hrothgar 12 680 -1.95
10 4H E S4 nahit 12 680 -1.95
11 4H E C7 janmor 12 680 -1.95
12 4H E C9 gaboa 12 680 -1.95
13 4H E D9 tunney 12 680 -1.95
14 4H E H7 pipulus 12 680 -1.95
15 4H E S4 Nicole41812 680 -1.95
16 6H E D9 iberdo 12 1430 10.26
17 6H E D9 bmark 12 1430 10.26
18 6H E C2 Lilah 12 1430 10.26
19 6H E H7 bobie 12 1430 10.26
20 6HX E S6 lecram38 12 1660 12.63
=======================================

[hrothgar]

Hi Ben...

Quick comment: Regardless of whether we are looking at "success" or "failures", most of your examples are taken from individual tournaments... Personally, I am THRILLED when my partners in said events can follow suit. I know that BBO helps with many mechanical issues, even so 'm surprised that many of these players haven't found a way to revoke.

I have a decent track record in Indys. Believe me, its not because I favour sophisticated auctions. Unless these hands feature me playing with a semi-regular partner, my primary goal with constructive hands is avoiding disaster, NOT finding "perfect" slams. HEnce the absence of cue bids, etc...

[inquiry]

hrothgar, on Aug 8 2005, 05:39 PM, said:

Hi Ben...

Quick comment:  Regardless of whether we are looking at "success" or "failures",

Hi Richard,

I thought you understood that I was using your hands not to measure your success of failure but to show how the system works by using not prepared hands, but hand YOU played. If it was comparing how well you could do, I could go back in time and pull up one with you and Ron? You and free? You and any partner you wish? However, I was trying to address your comment about frequency of the hands and quality of the method (examine how the the system worked) rather how you specically did. As Adam pointed out, BBO hands are not the best standard for comparing results. In fact, some think OKBridge has "higher" quality competition. The hands I posted before these actually were from OKBridge.

For instance, here is a tourney hand from May 3, 2005 with you and Free,

Quote

========================================
C:\BRBR\hrothgar.05.IMP-87.3.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 08-Aug-05
========================================
IMP-87      free        Dlr: South
Board 3     S AKQ642    Vul: E-W
               H AJ832    
azogarcia  D AT        o_uzal     
S 7          C           S J853     
H T654                  H Q9       
D 86543     hrothgar    D QJ97     
C Q97       S T9        C J65      
               H K7       
              D K2       
              C AKT8432  

North    East     South    West    
azogarciafree     o_uzal   hrothgar 
                      Pass     2C!     
Pass     2D!      Pass     3C!     
Pass     3D!      Pass     3H!     
Pass     3S!      Pass     4S!     
Pass     7NT      Pass     Pass    
Pass    

1. 9 slam points
2. relay
3. 7222 or 6322
4. relay, GF
5. 2=2=2=7 shape
6. relay
7. 9 slam points

Opening lead: DQ    Result: Down 4
Score: -400         Points: -14.83

Here, a non-pickup partner, a detailed system with realys, slam points, goodness knows what else reaches 7NT down four. I am sure the problem is easily identified (3-2 spades would give you a more reasonable chance, if the heart hook worked and hearts split nicely) and your auction should be something less vigirous.

MisIry might try,

2N - 3C
4H - 4NT
5C - 6S
Pass

4H = 3 loser no need for club (so club AK not pretty)
4N = Top side suit king (diamond king)
5C = diamond king working, missiing heart Queen
6S = not enough spades to risk 7S, but you have Ax of diamonds, club void, and missing KQ of hearts... I could draw your hand plus or minus a card in the majors.

It is this "picture" that can be drawn of openers hand fairly quickly that allows precision in bidding perfect fit hands.

Here are the results of the hand.
=======================================
# Contr Ld Decl Tr Score Pts
=======================================
1 7N E DQ free 9 -400 -14.83
2 6H E DQ voldenuit11 -100 -11.50
3 3N W D4 lesh 10 630 -2.50
4 4S E DQ Loly_miha12 680 -1.67
5 6S E HQ ven59 12 1430 10.17
6 6S E C5 pasker 12 1430 10.17
7 6N W S7 KoFuL 12 1440 10.17
=======================================

But for the record, I thought by using your hands we could address your concern (frequency) and benefit (not benefit from rather you found or not found the best contract, but simply from the stand point if using the simple rules outlined in this thread MisIry could have done well on the hands). In fact, I started intentionally with two of your best successes. I assure you my failures will be legiondary if I posted them but there would be questions of did I pick the hands I guess. Using yours, the leading critic, I thought I could get around issues of cherry picking ones to demonstrate the method, and show frequency of the hands.

Of course I will stop if you like, as your others examples are not so successful as the ones shown so far (nor as bad as the one above, and in addition, two hands are troublesome for the MisIry method as well).

For the record, during the 1091 hands, your side opened 3C twice, averaging minus 1.18 imps, 3D seven times, averaging minus 0.01, and 3H six times averaging an impressive plus 6.71. For the record, you bid 4H on four of these averaging nearly plus 10 imps on the four (11, 14,83, 7.53, 5.11), and them in 3S and 5D on the other two (plus 6.79, minus 5.0). For the 15 preempts you had, you averaged plus 2.52.

[hrothgar]

inquiry, on Aug 9 2005, 02:17 AM, said:

I thought you understood that I was using your hands not to measure your success of failure but to show how the system works by using not prepared hands, but hand YOU played. If it was comparing how well you could do, I could go back in time and pull up one with you and Ron? You and free? You and any partner you wish?

I was merely noting once again that you seem to be spending an inordinate amount of time on what I consider a rather pointless enterprise...

Every time you raise this topic, I make the same basic response

Give me a Dealer script that I can use to precisely understand your requirements for an opening bid. Every time, you dredge out some random collection of hands from BridgeBrowser. Todays its hands that I played. Last time, it was hands from recent tournaments.

I don't believe that systems should be evaluated by "cherry picking" hands, and comparing at-the-table results with a random series of partners with idealized bidding sequences generated when you're looking at both hands. This isn't analysis, this is data-mining

Case in point: In what way, shape, or form does the 7NT auction that Free and I had have any relevence to the discussion at hand? As far as I understand, we're looking at opening structures, NOT responding to opening bids... If you're suggesting that AK seventh with two side kings is suitable for a preempt, then I really don't understand the methods...

I've always maintained that your system will do very nicely with the strong 5-5 hands. Where we differ is how well the system handles the weak single suited hand types playing against competent opponents with a reasonable defense.

For whats its worth, the main reason that I want the Dealer script is to understand what impact different defensive methods have on opening frequencies. Case in point, I suspect that its safe to ignore the "strong" hand type when designing a defense. If I have sufficent strength to act in direct seat, than the conditional probability that you hold a weak hand type should go through the roof. Ergo, its very safe for me to adopt methods that are optimized against the weak hand types. As I recall, my original defense was based arround

Direct double = balanced hands and values
Cue bids = 3 suited takeout
Pass followed by double = Penalty

combined with a two tiered structure to show 1 and 2 suited hands.

I can't help but believe that you're gonna be at a disadvantage here...

[Free]

inquiry, on Aug 9 2005, 12:17 AM, said:

hrothgar, on Aug 8 2005, 05:39 PM, said:

Hi Ben...

Quick comment:  Regardless of whether we are looking at "success" or "failures",

Hi Richard,

I thought you understood that I was using your hands not to measure your success of failure but to show how the system works by using not prepared hands, but hand YOU played. If it was comparing how well you could do, I could go back in time and pull up one with you and Ron? You and free? You and any partner you wish? However, I was trying to address your comment about frequency of the hands and quality of the method (examine how the the system worked) rather how you specically did. As Adam pointed out, BBO hands are not the best standard for comparing results. In fact, some think OKBridge has "higher" quality competition. The hands I posted before these actually were from OKBridge.

For instance, here is a tourney hand from May 3, 2005 with you and Free,

Quote

========================================
C:\BRBR\hrothgar.05.IMP-87.3.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 08-Aug-05
========================================
IMP-87      free        Dlr: South
Board 3    S AKQ642    Vul: E-W
              H AJ832   
azogarcia  D AT        o_uzal     
S 7          C          S J853     
H T654                  H Q9       
D 86543    hrothgar    D QJ97     
C Q97      S T9        C J65     
              H K7       
              D K2       
              C AKT8432 

North    East    South    West   
azogarciafree    o_uzal  hrothgar 
                      Pass    2C!     
Pass    2D!      Pass    3C!     
Pass    3D!      Pass    3H!     
Pass    3S!      Pass    4S!     
Pass    7NT      Pass    Pass   
Pass   

1. 9 slam points
2. relay
3. 7222 or 6322
4. relay, GF
5. 2=2=2=7 shape
6. relay
7. 9 slam points

Opening lead: DQ    Result: Down 4
Score: -400        Points: -14.83

Here, a non-pickup partner, a detailed system with realys, slam points, goodness knows what else reaches 7NT down four. I am sure the problem is easily identified (3-2 spades would give you a more reasonable chance, if the heart hook worked and hearts split nicely) and your auction should be something less vigirous.

MisIry might try,

2N - 3C
4H - 4NT
5C - 6S
Pass

4H = 3 loser no need for club (so club AK not pretty)
4N = Top side suit king (diamond king)
5C = diamond king working, missiing heart Queen
6S = not enough spades to risk 7S, but you have Ax of diamonds, club void, and missing KQ of hearts... I could draw your hand plus or minus a card in the majors.

It is this "picture" that can be drawn of openers hand fairly quickly that allows precision in bidding perfect fit hands.

Here are the results of the hand.
=======================================
# Contr Ld Decl Tr Score Pts
=======================================
1 7N E DQ free 9 -400 -14.83
2 6H E DQ voldenuit11 -100 -11.50
3 3N W D4 lesh 10 630 -2.50
4 4S E DQ Loly_miha12 680 -1.67
5 6S E HQ ven59 12 1430 10.17
6 6S E C5 pasker 12 1430 10.17
7 6N W S7 KoFuL 12 1440 10.17
=======================================

But for the record, I thought by using your hands we could address your concern (frequency) and benefit (not benefit from rather you found or not found the best contract, but simply from the stand point if using the simple rules outlined in this thread MisIry could have done well on the hands). In fact, I started intentionally with two of your best successes. I assure you my failures will be legiondary if I posted them but there would be questions of did I pick the hands I guess. Using yours, the leading critic, I thought I could get around issues of cherry picking ones to demonstrate the method, and show frequency of the hands.

Of course I will stop if you like, as your others examples are not so successful as the ones shown so far (nor as bad as the one above, and in addition, two hands are troublesome for the MisIry method as well).

For the record, during the 1091 hands, your side opened 3C twice, averaging minus 1.18 imps, 3D seven times, averaging minus 0.01, and 3H six times averaging an impressive plus 6.71. For the record, you bid 4H on four of these averaging nearly plus 10 imps on the four (11, 14,83, 7.53, 5.11), and them in 3S and 5D on the other two (plus 6.79, minus 5.0). For the 15 preempts you had, you averaged plus 2.52.

Did I really bid 7NT on this hand?? We could be missing an ace

Anyway, I've played transfer preempts for a very long time (but seldom at high level), and I don't have the impression it's 1/3 strong versions. It's less, a lot less. Maybe 20%, 25% at most. And indeed, with the strong versions you'll probably score opposite weak opponents (and sometimes against strong ones as well), but with the weak version you'll lose against strong opposition. So the win-lose rate is about 1-3 against good opponents.

Anyway, you can't compare misiry and moscito, since it's a completely different approach: misiry openings are specific, while a strong 1♣ opening is a general bid.

[inquiry]

Let me start by apologizing for the 7NT hand, I pulled that one by mistake.. had it from the wrong side. That is a normal 1C opening bid... (well for you 2C).

Next to Free, I estimated, the strong version is one in three to one in four. That is from real world data (you have to be careful, because Ghoulsh tourneys have an icncreadible number of hte strong hands... so best states is from main room). In 1091 hands, there were 26 (sorry, 18 was from earlier dataset) preempts (3C to 3H) and 9 MisIry hand. That is 1/3 as frequent. But Richard opened preempts 15 times but had only five strong MisIry hands (1 out of three). His oppenetns opened preempt 11 times, and had 4 MisIry hands (4 losers, 5-5 or better). Those sound just about right.

To richard... "Every time, you dredge out some random collection of hands from BridgeBrowser.

Let's stop there for a minute. Let me discuss the hands I pulled out. Here I choose to take hands you played, not random ones, but yours. Another time, I looked at every hand played on BBO Main on April 1, 2005 over a 2 hour period (20 unqiue hands qualified...see my blog for those hands). I have even taken All ACBL toruneyments for a week (picking the week BEFORE THE hands were played... hands public record anyone could easily check and published them here (after announcing the week the hands would be used). Thus, I most definetely did not hand pick them, because I have downloaded literally hundreds and hundreds of these hands which I could show some remarkable (almost unbelievable) finding of perfect fits.

Despite efforts to pick hands that CLEARLY were not "cherry picked" (taking all hands, not selected ones), you accuse me of

[*'I don't believe that systems should be evaluated by "cherry picking" hands, and comparing at-the-table results with a random series of partners with idealized bidding sequences generated when you're looking at both hands. This isn't analysis, this is data-mining"'

Comparing with "random partners" was never the point. Get over it. I used your hands to avoid the cherry picking accusation. Comparing your RESULT obtained on the hand is also immaterial, it was did the method work. Showing all results is of course somewhat useful... but admittedly limited value, it is THE RESULT that is key (not the relative result).

But quite frankly I find this accusation of cherry picking hands under these conditions both insulting and counter productive. Cherry picking would be finding perfect hands for the system and showing them. Taking all your hands, all hands from "future tourneys", all hands on a specific date/time at the very least kills the cherry picking concept. Give me a break.

Your next point deals with competition when opener has the weak hand (or maybe the strong hand too). I will point out again, as I did in the first post in this thread, "Here are the simple rules that make this very playable (in this post, only partner completing the transfer will be discussed, and no interference... similar rules cover the other auctions, and can be discussed if anyone is interested).

That means this thread was to highlight the rules for Denial versus positive cue bidding, looking for useful "missing queens" and finding "useful distributional kings and distributional queens". Just saying do it with STRONG HANDS without explaining how to investigate slam and grand slam when among other things, opener cue-bids and ace asking is not available. This is my addition to the theory initiated by Misho.

Despite this attempt to show the the bidding logic as I said in this case with no intereference, you drag up the frequency issue again (I think this has been proven to most people satisfaction it is not SO RARE as compared to preempts. Both with real looks thrugh huge databases, and with statistical approaches) that it is not THAT RARE when compared to the preempts in these suits (not we do not use transfer preempt at all levels, and in fact, a friend of mine thinks 3S should be normal Spade preempt, 3H a weak heart preempt (or heart preempt by itself), and 3D strong heart preempt or two suiter, or perhpas just strong 3 suiter. But anyway, the frequency is somewhere between 1/4 to 1/2 as frequent.

Your next point is belief that I am going to be disadvantage (I assume greatly) when i have the weak hand. From the very beginning, I have agreed that I will be slightly disadvantaged when I have the weak hand. Not always, for instance, partner may have strong hand, so no disadvantage (and maybe advantaged when he raises and we right side contract), some times, they will pretty much ignore the preempt and bid whatever they were going to do. But on some hands we will be disadvantage. No doubt some other times we will be advantaged when they bid when they really shouldn't thinking opener is light. But I have always agreed we would be slightly disadvanged in the long run on the weak hands. However, not a lot since, as I have also pointed out, pro's who play transfer preempts EVEN without a stong version and a widely accepted bidding system (ultimate club) that uses such bids. Again, of course, you are so certain the the disadvantges (with weak hands) outweigh any stong hand advantages that to play them makes no sense. So we disagree.

Next you deal with competitive intervention when opener has THE WEAK HAND (I assume). And wonder why the hell I haven't pulled up dozens and dozens of hands to deal with your preferred defense to the preempt. There is a simple reason for this. There SiMPLY ISN"T enough hands in the database with transfer preempts to find how the transfer preempt does compared ot the normal preempt. So I would have to pull up hands and "guess" what the defensive bid would be.... especially since the occassional transfer preempt you find, the defenders have no such agreement.

If I can't even pick hands using Future hands (all ACBL hands in one week), all hands on one specific day (the first day of the current BRBR database), all hands YOU PLAYED, without being accused by you of cherry picking perfect hands for the method, there is no *@*$#)# way I could pick hands and propose interference that would meet your satisfaction and subsequent followup. But you know what, I no longer care. I don't care if you hate it, I don't care if you think it is horrible. I am going to continue showing the "simple" rules for bidding the strong hands (and of course, the weak hands), so anyone who wants to try it can (if they like) try it, including using what ever defenses to it they like.

Next... when partner doesn't simply complete the transfer (jump raise, 3NT, and new suit bids). Oh.. and i think i will show some cherry picked hands to show what can be done if I DID SHOW such hands.

[inquiry]

you want cherry picking, here you go...

[QUOTE]========================================
C:\BRBR\Slamming99.05.IMP-950.4.txt
Produced by BRidgeBRowser on 8/8/2005
========================================
IMP-950 jackhammer Dlr: West
Board 4 S 65 Vul: Both
H 854
herdian D JT86 momoxs
S T43 C J872 S AKQJ97
H QT962 H
D 9 Slamming99 D AKQ542
C A643 S 82 C Q
H AKJ73
D 73
C KT95

East South West North
3D (pass) (what would you bid richard)
4H Pass 5S Pass
7S All Pass

3D = heart or two suiter without hearts and with diamonds
4H = I can stand spades or clubs too....
5S = 1 loser, need a club cover
7S = Ace of clubs = grand. Gosh easy[/quote][/QUOTE]

Contr   Total
4S   6
6D   1
6S   30
6SXX 1
7S   5
Grand Total 43

[QUOTE]IMP-60 anaffar Dlr: East
Board 2 S K Vul: N-S
H AQ43
Rocky 40 D 653 osvaldo 50
S Q976542 C QJ742 S AJT83
H J7 H 9
D 72 07of9 D J4
C K9 S C T8653
H KT8652
D AKQT98
C A

South West North East
2NT Pass 4C Pass
5D Pass 7H All pass[/QUOTE]

5D = red two suiter, two losers
7H = looking at AQ of hearts, what else?

[QUOTE]IMP-457 zdenaz Dlr: North
Board 1 S AKJ643 Vul: None
H AKT862
RedBarry D latarasca
S T985 C 2 S 2
H 73 H J95
D 842 jipo D AQ765
C QT95 S Q7 C J643
H Q4
D KJT93
C AK87

West North East South
--- 2NT Pass 3C
Pass 4S Pass 5NT
Pass 6S Pass 7S [/QUOTE]

3S = three losers, need a club cover
5NT = bid your better major (six card suit or one with JACK, ingnore AKQ)
6S = six spades or five with the jack (two 5-5 without jack, bid cheapest)
7S

No one bid 7S....

[QUOTE]IMP-199 gaja Dlr: South
Board 1 S K83 Vul: None
H Q943
jarojan D JT4 saridon
S T62 C AQ8 S 7
H 6 H T8
D K98762 krynda D AQ53
C J97 S AQJ954 C KT6543
H AKJ752
D
C 2

East South West North
--- 2NT Pass 3C
Pass 3S Pass 7H (what should they bid over 2NT or 3C?
[/QUOTE]

3S = major two suiter, 3 loser, need club.
7H = QH = 1, SK = 1, CA = 1, grand is easy

[QUOTE]IMP-290 gibi49 Dlr: North
Board 1 S AQT3 Vul: None
H JT943
vidocq56 D 53 dado2
S 9 C T3 S J76
H AQ62 H K875
D 7642 carlofossi D 9
C QJ74 S K8542 C 98652
H
D AKQJT8
C AK

East South West North
Pass
Pass 3D Pass 4H
Pass 5D PAss 7S
[/QUOTE]

4H = push to game,
5D = not changed, 2 losers, D+S, no need for club
7S = AQ spade, covers your losers.

[QUOTE]IMP-363 tempestad Dlr: South
Board 3 S AQ5 Vul: E-W
H K98
nini45 D Q65 ahfatani
S J64 C QT98 S 97
H Q754 H T632
D AKJ94 Kapheez D T8732
C 3 S KT832 C 64
H AJ
D
C AKJ752

West North East South
--- ---- ---- 3C
Pass 3D Pass 3S
Pass 4D Pass 5NT
Pass 7C/7S[/QUOTE]

3S = club/spade two suiter, 4 loser
4D = denial cuebid (rule 3)
5NT = missing both queens, heart cover working, first round D control (GS possible)
Grand slam = up to you, which one.

[QUOTE]IMP-354 navacchio Dlr: West
Board 1 S A9753 Vul: None
H K975
lev-peter D 2 arndt
S 42 C AJ6 S 6
H QT862 H AJ43
D J8 Tatu77 D T754
C KQ54 S KQJT8 C T973
H
D AKQ963
C 82

East South West North
--- ---- Pass Pass
Pass 3D Pass 3H
Pass 4D Pass 4NT
Passs 5D Pass 5H
Pass 5S Pass 6C
Pass 7D Pass 7S
[/QUOTE]

4D = 3 loser, diamonds/spades
4N = king of hearts
5D = no use for heart king
5H = missing queens
5S = no
6C = distribution club king (planning on throwing clubs on Diamonds)
7D = yes, club king distributional works
7S = great... your club losers can be ruffed in my hand...


So much for cherry picking... next, how to bid with auction goes without a raise (including competition)