Vang on Bridge

very funny, pclayton

2007-10-03T13:16:00.000+03:00

Pclayton, posting on BBO Forums and commenting the bidding sequence:

2♠ - 3♣
3♠ - 3♥
4♠ - P

(3♥ was probably a typo, intended as 4♥)

The insufficient 3♥ call is a very imaginative way to efficiently get your suits in. Over 3♠, you can try another 3♥ which gives you room for cue bidding, and show your extra suit length. 4♥ would be weaker. Sort of a fast arrival thing.

I vote this as the comment of the year ;-)

a few boards from Mamaia 2007

2007-09-10T13:55:00.000+03:00

I have posted a few interesting boards from Mamaia 2007 festival on BBO forums:

- a competitive bidding position
- two 6-5 hands
- a probabilities declarer problem (matchpoints)

sayc "secrets"

2007-07-15T13:55:00.000+03:00

SAYC, or 'Standard American Yellow Card' is a bridge bidding system used in North America. Due to increasing popularity of online bridge, it has become the de-facto standard for bidding. Unfortunatelly, many people seems to play their own variant.

I'll try to cover here some of the common misunderstandings. My reference is a recent book by Ned Downey and Ellen (Caitlin) Pomer, Standard bidding with SAYC, highly recommended if you are serious about bridge. Even if you are an expert you should buy this book, for reference.

Weak two openings, simple Stayman and transfers to majors after 1/2 NT are standard. There is no need to put in your BBO profile "sayc, weak 2, transfers", "sayc" would be enough. If you refuse to play weak twos or transfers, maybe it's time to step into 21 century ;-)

It is perfectly okay to open 1NT with a 5 card major (5332 distribution). The french school players hate this, the americans love it. Same goes for 2NT opening, of course when you have the required point range (15-17 for 1NT opening, 20-21 for 2NT).

A direct 2NT answer after 1 minor opening is Game Forcing (for example 1D - 2NT), 13-15 balanced hand (usually without four card major). This is highly unusual for european players, who play it as invitational, 11-12 HCP. I don't know which variant is better, I only say what SAYC is.

With 18-19 balanced hand you don't open 1NT or 2NT. Opening 1NT with 15-18 and 2NT with 19-22 is agricultural bridge. The way to show this is with a jump rebid in NT after opening 1 suit, for example: 1C - 1S - 2NT.

Enough "secrets" for one day, have fun with your game!

she is dangerous!

2007-04-25T16:44:00.000+03:00

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

2007-04-13T00:06:00.000+03:00

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

2007-04-12T11:33:00.000+03:00

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

2007-04-05T14:56:00.000+03:00

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.

Save your money

2006-12-06T13:37:00.000+02:00

I saw an advertisement on BBO by a company called New England Bridge which sells downloadable bridge documents (presumably PDFs). While nothing is wrong with this itself, I feel annoyed and decided to save your money by listing some reasons you should NOT buy from them.

First, they are full of sales buzzwords, like buy two, get one free, 10% off everything with Gold membership and so on, enough to make me puke.

Then the price. 1 to 9 pages documents - from $8-$20. Guys, are you for real? A good, printed bridge book ( ~ 200 pages) is 10-15$.

It's unclear who is the author of those documents. I may eventually give it a try provided they are written by Mike Lawrence, Eddie Kantar, Larry Cohen or other famous bridge champion, but not if they are by JoeDoe.

The excuse on why you need give a credit card number to receive a free document is completely hilarious and they have no less than ONE item in free documents page.

So, do yourself a favor and spend your money on quality bridge books from: amazon.com, baronbarclay.com, bridgeshop.com, postfree.cc or your local dealer.

Two psyche positions

2006-12-06T09:05:00.000+02:00

There are two well-known psyche positions in modern bridge bidding:

after a take-out double, for example: 1♣ - DBL - 1♠!
after a preempt, for example: 3♣ - pass - 3♠!

Both spade calls in previous examples may be made with the sole purpose of making hard for opponents to play this suit. In order to cope with this situations, the following agreements are common:

after a take-out double by partner, if the player in 3rd position announces a new suit, double is for penalty and even more, bidding that suit it's natural:
- (1♣) - DBL - (1♠) - DBL = penalty proposal, with four plus spades. A common confusion here is to think it's a responsive double. A double is responsive only when RHO (right hand opponent) raises the opening.
- (1♣) - DBL - (1♠) - 2♠ = natural, non-forcing, with 5 spades (7-10 HCP)
after a preempt, double in 4th position is takeout to preemptor suit:
(3♣) - pass - (3♠) - DBL = take-out to clubs (i.e. promises 3-4 spades)

Oookay, so why I'm boring you with this common stuff? Because I have found two interesting extensions in some recent BBO forum threads:

from [1]:
(1♦) - DBL - (1♠) - P
(1N/2♣/2♦) - 2♠
In other words, partner doubles, then bid the responder suit. This is natural, a hand stronger than the direct overcall with 1♠ (GOSH in Robson terminology, good one suited hand). With other strong hands, partner may double again or cue-bid the first opener suit.
from [2]:
(3♣) - pass - (3♠) - double here is take-out to clubs and 4♠ is? Natural again, a good hand with spades.

It seems to be simple and obvious, but I remember a hand from a Bermuda Bowl (1991?) where the Polish champions Balicki - Zmudzinsky did not interfere in the bidding when the opponents bid 3minor - 3♠ - 4♠. In 4th position, one of them had a strong hand with AKQxxxx in spades (the opponents had spades 1-1 ;). Eight down non-vulnerable not doubled wasn't an adequate score...

Martens books

2006-10-25T21:01:00.000+03:00

UPDATE: the books are available at online shop MartensUniversity.com.

From one of the 48th European Team Championships bulletins I have found out that Krzysztof Martens, one of the best Polish bridge stars, has published five books (in english, thank God!). It was difficult to order the books, but after a series of emails with Mr. Martens (kmartens AT poczta.onet.pl), I finally got them.

Extra Length transfer bids - 107 pages
Contains a short overview of the classic 2/1 styles then a very detalied and interesting Martens innovation plus some training exercises. Martens ideea is basically to switch the meaning of 3rd round opener calls, in order to ease slam bidding, something like:

1♠ - 2♣
2♦ - 2NT; (GF, want to play notrump from this side)
- 3♣ = transfer to diamonds (5-5 shape)
- 3♦ = club fragment (5-1-4-3 shape)
- 3♥ = transfer to spades (6-4 shape)
- 3♠ = heart fragment (5-3-4-1 shape)
- 3NT = 5-2-4-2 shape

After this, reponder can easily start slam investigations by agreeing a suit.
A clear technical advancement, but only for dedicated partnerships, who are willing to invest hours of work on slam bidding after 2/1 sequences.

The Martens system - 232 pages
As the title says, yet another bidding system. Fortunately, even if you are not interested in changing your system now, you may pick some ideeas and/or bidding sequences since the base of the Martens system is quite similar to natural systems (closer to Polish Club in fact, but that's normal i guess ;-). See for example the blog post regarding stayman then transfer.

Hand evaluation - Bidding decisions - 146 pages
In my oppinion, the second best in this collection. After a theoretical discussion and some short quizzes, one hundred interesting problems, tough decisions in competitive bidding and/or slam investigations, all commented by Mr. Martens. I don't always agree with his analysys, but it's always interesting to see the thought process of a great champion.
Let's see one:

1♠ - DBL - 2♥* - DBL ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2♥*=transfer, 7-9 HCP, 3 card fit
pas - pas - 2♠ - 3♥
pas - pas - ?

♠ Q98
♥ Q932
♦ 87
♣ KJ86

You'll have to read the comments for Martens solution.

The World of transfers - 241 pages
A detalied analysis on many transfer positions, including the probably well known transfers after opponents/partner overcalls and other original or less known positions. For example, after opponent 3♣ preempt, Martens suggests loosing the natural overcall 3♦:
- DBL = normal take-out double
- 3♦ = hearts
- 3♥ = spades
- 3♠ = transfer to NT
- 3NT = to play
- 4♣ = two suiter, diamonds plus one major
- 4♦ = natural, constructive
Recomended only for bidding geeks.

Dynamic declarer play - Virtual European Championships part 1 - 230 pages
Probably the best book in this colection, 340 great declarer play problems, scored in IMPs. I only read the first ten problems or so and I estimate their dificulty somewhere at level 3 or above in Bridge Master, in other words real advanced/expert on BBO. Highly recomended for any aspiring bridge player.

Unfortunately, there is no website at this moment for those books. If you are interested, write an email to Mr. Martens (and probably mention my review ;-).

stayman then transfer

2006-10-25T16:03:00.000+03:00

I get this new (for me) convention from one of the Martens books: transfers after 1NT opening and normal response to Stayman. The author calls it Stayman plus transfer, which is quite misleading, we already play Stayman+transfer as responses to 1NT opening.

It works like this:

after 1NT - 2♣ - 2♦ :

2♥ = weak, with both majors (Garbage Stayman)
2♠ = transfer to clubs. may be a weak hand with 6clubs-4M (reponder will pass) or a strong GF hand with 5 clubs and a major in 4 (if is strong, the reponder continues in a natural way, or in polish style by bidding a singleton)
2NT = natural, invitational
3♣ = transfer to diamonds, as above (weak or strong)
3♦ = transfer to hearts. Smolen style, 5 hearts + 4 spades
3♥ = transfer to spades, Smolen (5 spades, 4 hearts)
3♠ = ?

after 1NT - 2♣ - 2♥ :

2♠ = transfer to clubs (long clubs plus four spades)
2NT = natural, invitational
3♣ = transfer to diamonds (long diamonds plus four spades)
3♦ = transfer to hearts, slam invitational
3♥ = natural game invite
3♠ = heart fit, splinter

after 1NT - 2♣ - 2♠ :
- 2NT = ! transfer to clubs (long clubs + four hearts)
- 3♣ = transfer to diamonds (long diamonds + four hearts)
- 3♦ = ?
- 3♥ = transfer to spades, slam invitational
- 3♠ = natural game invite

Which are the advantages?

very easy to remember. especially for Smolen hands (you'll know for sure which is the major in 5 and don't have to think about it) and for hands when reponder wants to issue a slam invitation in major
ability to describe weak 6m+4M hands. very usefull for pairs, you search first for a major fit
not much to loose (see below).

What you loose?
After 1NT - 2♣ - 2♠, 2NT is transfer to clubs (in all other sequences, 2NT is natural invitational, but here is not enough space). This means that you'll have to find a way to describe an invitational hand with 4 hearts. Martens overloads the heart transfer: 1NT - 2♦ = heart transfer OR only four hearts in an invitational hand. After this:

1NT - 2♦
2♥ = make the transfer with 2-3 cards in hearts
2♠ = maximal hand with four hearts
2NT = minimal hand with four hearts

After 1NT - 2♦ - 2♥, the reponder bids:

2♠ = i have only 4 hearts and invitational. the bidding may stop in 2NT
2NT = i have 5 hearts, invitational
3any = natural, as after normal transfer, promises five hearts

Nice one, isn't it?

other bridge blogs

2006-10-19T15:56:00.000+03:00

Other bridge blogs (in no particular order):

Who is Krzysztof Martens

2006-10-19T09:00:00.000+03:00

Krzysztof Martens is one of the best players from one of the best bridge playing nation, Poland. He is listed by World Bridge Federation as World Grand Master, the highest rank. An impressive career both as player and as coach, from which we shall note:

one silver medal in Bermuda Bowl Yokohama 1991
three bronze medal in Bermuda Bowl (1981, 1989, 2002)
three gold medal in European Team Championships (1981, 1989, 1993) and two bronze (1991, 2001)
one gold medal in Bridge Olympiad 1984 Seattle
gold medal in World Transnational Teams 1982 Hammanet
1997-1999 coach of the Dutch National Womens Team which won World Championships in 2000
2000-2002 coach of the German National Women Team which won the bronze in the Bridge Olympiad in Maastricht and gold in World Championships in Paris

Mr. Martens recently authored five interesting bridge books. I'm fortunate enough to have them and I'm going to review them soon.

another slam from Stara Zagora

2006-10-18T13:30:00.000+03:00

In one of the 8 board team matches, I was happy enough to play and make three heart slams! Play this one better than me, 6♥ on club lead:

♠ x
♥ xxx
♦ AKxxx
♣ Axxx

♠ AKQJ
♥ AKJxx
♦ xxx
♣ x

At the table, i finessed directly in trumps, planning to revert on discarding diamonds from dummy on spades if I don't find the ♥Q well placed.

This seems a rather inelegant plan and it's probably better to play directly: trump AK then spades discarding diamonds, then ♦ AK, ♣ ruff, ♦ ruff, ♣ ruff letting opponents take their trump trick when they wish.

Still, the queen of trumps was well placed so I wasn't punished on this board ;-)

a slam from Stara Zagora

2006-10-18T12:59:00.000+03:00

So, we're back from Stara Zagora Bridge festival. Not much bridge we played there, but except this, everything was cool and we plan to go again next year.

I have two interesting slams from there. In one of the pairs sessions, me and my partner had:

♠ K10xx
♥ Kxx
♦ AQx
♣ QTx

♠ x
♥ AQJTxxx
♦ Kxx
♣ Ax

and we bid (from South, opps pass): 1♥ - 1♠ - 3♥ - 4♦ (cue) - 4NT (keycard) - 5♥ - 6♥. Probably not the best slam in pairs, but we usually like to bid slams. Now, left hand opponent leads a club. Thinking, thinking... What do you play from dummy?

I have spend some minutes on trying to see if I have any clue, however small. Ultimately, I thought we'll probably have the same bidding without the ♣10 and decided to ignore that card, playing Q from dummy. Winner ;-)

Our teammates (this was the pairs contest) made the same slam, doubled, on spade lead! How did this happened? Small spade lead, 10 from dummy, Q from the opponent who then tried to cash the ♠A too. And they call me lucky...

before Stara Zagora

2006-10-12T12:12:00.000+03:00

Nothing special to post today. i'm leaving Bucharest to go in Bulgaria for Stara Zagora Bridge Festival. We'll see when i'm back if i'll be in the mood to post a review.