she is dangerous!

Some nights ago I have told my opponents at a BBO table that my partner is one of the best female players in Romania (after she left our table, so it wasn't a flattery). They weren't so impressed.

Yesterday, she proved it! It was a 10 boards match between friends, all Romanian experts/advanced. When the last board hit the table, we're 8 IMPs behind, so both me and my partner felt the impulse to do something. I have opened 1NT (natural, 15-17) and left hand opponent doubled, showing a 5minor-4major two-suiter. With
♠ AKJT85
♥ K5
♦ 5
♣ AQ74
she announced an undeterred 7♠. You need some temper to think about this bid and even more to make it at the table. The result was also influenced by my eccentric choice of opening:

East/ALL	♠ 6 ♥ T964 ♦ 98762 ♣ T82	East South West North 1NT (!) DBL* 7♠ (!!!) all pass
♠ AKJT85 ♥ K5 ♦ 5 ♣ AQ74		♠ Q3 ♥ AQ8732 ♦ Q4 ♣ K95
	♠ 9742 ♥ J ♦ AKJT3 ♣ J63

What happened then? North led a club, trying to (mis)guess partner's minor and 7♠ was an easy make (by working on hearts). At the other table, a more normal and unsuccessful bidding landed in 6♥, down one (lead ♦ A and then you loose one more trump).

Call me a result merchant, but +20 IMPs is such a pleasing way to finish a match ;-) Thank you partner!

my own pet developments after 1M-2NT

With my regular partners, I play 1♥/♠ - 2NT sequence as four (or more) card fit and invitational or better values. I know for North Americans this shows game forcing values with fit 4+ (Jacoby 2NT), but in Europe "fit 4+, INV+" is more popular and I think it's better.

There are many ways to continue after such a start. For some years, I was quite happy with the simplest system: the rebid of the opened major, from both sides is minimal and can be passed; anything else is (semi)natural, in first instance a game trial bid, but can reveal later a slam tentative.

One of my partners insisted this is too rudimentary and proposed a very complicated scheme, but I'm a simple soul and resisted ;-) I'll probably detail that later, but for now i want to propose my original(?) and simple scheme, which is based on losing trick count (LTC). I found this to be very appropriate, since we know about a nine card fit, LTC should be adequate.

So, after 1M-2NT, the opener bids his loser count in steps:
- 3♣ = minimal hand (7 losers or worse).
- 3♦ = 6 losers
- 3♥ = 5 losers
- 3♠ = 4 losers or better (but with 3 losers you probably open 2C)
Higher announces are still to be refined, for now I propose: 4♣/♦ = 5-5 hand, non-minimum; 3NT = not defined yet (specific Ace ask it's an option).

After the 3♣ = minimal hand, the responder can
- use 3♦ as a general game essay
- try to sign off in 3M (opener may override and still bid game)
- blast the game
- bid anything else with slam interest (cue-bid)

After 3♠ (4 losers), you are for sure in slam zone and will continue with cue-bids. A grand is not excluded ;-)

After the other step responses, the responder can see at a glance if there is slam possibility by counting his potential cover cards and continue with cue-bids or stop in the game.

It would be only fair to add that I don't insist this is the best system over 2NT "fit 4, INV+". It's just an untested idea, which appeals to me because of the simplicity and apparent efficacy. Your mileage may vary.

References on losing trick count (LTC):
- wikipedia on hand evaluation methods
- bridgeguys glossary
- Ron Klinger's book on Amazon

how to give back 1100

Last night I played a short IMP tourney on BBO. On the first board, we were lucky enough to receive a +1100 gift from our opponents. A board or two later, my partner opened 1 heart in third position and I have
♠ 4 3
♥ 8 7 6 5 4
♦ A 2
♣ 10 8 7 4
We're vulnerable, red versus white and both opponents passed. Still, I have decided to bid 3 hearts (weak in our system). That is a little bit over-aggressive but I blame the -1100 which followed on partner opening, which was:
♠ Q J 5
♥ K 9 3 2
♦ Q J 6 3
♣ Q 9
Full bidding: p - (p) - 1♥ - (p); 3♥ - (DBL) - all pass.

I think this board is an useful exercise in blaming partner ;-) Seriously now, look at his hand, I would really consider passing it. Slow values, a hand which scream 'defend, defend!'.

Also, even if we accept opening with only 4 card in majors in this position, there should be a reason:
- lead directing (good suit). is this case, 1♥ is not better than 1♦
- preempting. in this case, 1♥ preempts nothing more than 1♦
Do not open a 4 card major (in a 5 card majors system) just because you can.

Now, I wait for my partner comments on how bad was my 3♥ call, with a semi-balanced hand, 9 losers etc ;-)

freemind for bidding system notes

FreeMind is a free mind mapping software. You may check the official page and the wikipedia entry for download and tutorials.

Why is this interesting for bridge players? Well, I have decided to try using it to keep bidding system notes. In my experience, it's better than a wiki engine for this purpose. You don't have (yet?) the collaborative editing, but the result looks far more nicer and usable than a set of wiki pages.

You may check a preliminary work here: my system notes (requires Java enabled browser). Click around to expand/collapse nodes, some of them are incomplete but hopefully you'll get a taste of FreeMind.