Sunday, September 17, 2006 5:01 AM

Our purpose

 

PITBULLS:

 

          Many of my articles discuss systemic bidding. I would like to make a disclaimer. Unless you plan to play at the CNTC , National and Bermuda Bowl level it is not necessary to adopt a complex bidding system. Bidding judgment & hand evaluation are far more important Bridge skills than memorizing complex bidding systems. The cost/benefit factor is just not there . The danger of forgetting against what you gain from the rare hands that the system benefits you,  makes losses more common. Professional Bridge players have the time to learn complex systems. Working people simply do not.

 

          In the Calgary regional KO , Tom & I played against a pair who played Precision. They had no systemic errors & bid their system well. About the 7^th board this impressed me enough to say “you guys are a well oiled machine” . Anyway , the point I am trying to make is Bridge judgment & hand evaluation is way more important that systems. We beat this team 59-3 as they were B players although armed with a great system still lacked Bridge judgment & hand evaluation skills.

 

          I write all these articles on systems not necessarily to play but to discuss on my Web site. I just like discussing Bridge theory. This does not mean I even want to play what I write about. I like discussing & arguing about it on my web site though which is a huge difference.

 

          With “modern bidding” where people just bid because they paid their card fees , I do like a natural system so we can compete better. In the 70’s , forcing club systems were in style because they were given a free run. Forcing club systems have declined in popularity due to this invasion of privacy to the extent that nobody on the Italian team plays an artificial club. This is one reason why we advocate a strong & natural 2♦ opener. Since it is natural , we do not have to open ridiculously strong diamond hands at the one level. Purging diamond hands from the 2♣ structure means one less artificiality to worry about . 5 card diamond suits in the NT structure , two suited diamond hands & of course the always troublesome 4-4-4-1 Roman 2♦ hands.

 

          I like natural bidding & patterning out so you can identify stiffs that way. Artificially wastes rounds of bidding just to get the artificiality out of the way. In my retirement , we have tried to improve on standard bidding as we are all aware there are many logical holes in the system that needs to be plugged. Relays are not that artificial as long as they are used to fix deficiencies in a natural system. Standard Edmonton is an antiquated system designed in the 70’s and 80’s that has not kept up with the times. Our focus has been on trying to improve that system with the ultimate goal of performing better at the Bridge table.

 

          These improvements in bidding , have a common philosophy. Natural bidding is stronger than artificiality with relays. Keeping the bidding lower ( useful space theory) is stronger than “fast arrival” to your contract. We borrowed from the forcing club people & have a multi purpose 3♣ strong jump shift. We emphasize defensive hands vrs offensive hands using off shape doubles to describe defense . We need “equal level conversion” to assist us after off shape T/O doubles. We dislike up the line bidding so we show our balanced distribution with NT bids at all times. We dislike 4^th suit forcing so have gravitated towards XYZ & new suit 2NT to replace or minimize the bid. We are trying to tone down splinters in favour of showing suits in order to get into the auction quicker with our suits. Our 2♣ openers include two suiters so that we do not have to risk opening rocks at the one level. We use relays by responder rather than showing controls after a 2♣ opener. We use relays throughout our system to escape. Our approach with “jump bids” , are that they are suit orientated rather than just showing HCP’s a la Goren. Our philosophy with our Q bids , strong major systemic bids , 2NT bid by responder & inverted minors are that they are all “limit raise or better”. We leave escape hatches from game forces in all the above bids & 2/1 bidding.

 

          We have borrowed from the past to improve our bidding system. In the 1930’s , quick tricks were very important for Bridge decisions. Opening bids promised defense measured in quick tricks. We use “quick tricks” as a criteria in deciding whether to make a T/O double as opposed to an overcall. We use quick tricks to decide whether we should balance or not. We use quick tricks to decide whether we will compete again with a D.S.I.P. double. Controls are emphasized in many of our bidding decisions especially opening bids. We recover the strong jump shift by responder from the past. A jump rebid by responder describes the strong jump shifts of yesteryear showing a good suit along with slam going HCP’s. We have also borrowed fit showing jump fits by responder which is another bid from the past. We have borrowed from the modern pros in that we “play the vulnerability” however we limit this chaos to the “terrorist vulnerability”

 

          I think D.S.I.P. theory is a great way to counteract modern bidding. They bid so much with the aim of trying to steal from you or just trying to wreck your auction at the expense of their discipline , you need some ammunition. The D.S.I.P. double allows you to convert for penalty from either side of the table . D.S.I.P. theory allows you to stay out of partner’s way & not rescue bad bidding opponents. Forcing pass theory has been elevated in importance due to modern bidders. They have no fear and do not respect vulnerability. They just bid so much , I call their style terrorism. Many of my articles are a war on terrorism especially starting from the opening bid & pre-empts. We stress discipline as opposed to single handed poker tactics & we value our partner. Our system & philosophy reflects that discipline.