A trip through blogland…day 10 of my Internet journey

September 13th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

Since this is the weekend I decided to make today a personal blog day.  I am going to search the web for more bridge blogs and see what I can find.  Someone created a domain name called

http://www.doublesqueeze.com

Admit it, that is a cool name.  I also see that the authors have divided their post into categories.  (Aside: I really need to do a much better job of that.  My software/host is slow so it will take a while and I am a person of limited patience still I see the value of it and I am going to work on it.)  The bloggers are Meg and McKenzie Myers.  McKenzie is a bridge pro.  I find the Blog interesting and amusing.  The September 12th column followed Meg’s adventures with a new partner at the instant match point game.  They also have a list of their top bridge books.  I do like most of them but naming no names there is one that definitely wouldn’t make it to my list.

A blog “roll” wouldn’t be complete without a mention of Danny and Susie Korbel

http://korbelbridge.blogspot.com/

I love the picture.  This is a very active blog but two expert players who play a lot of tournaments.  In fact they have organized their blog by tournament.  The first hand in the most recent blog is a triple squeeze.  What is most interesting about it, other than relatively poor defense, is that the whole squeeze works on the players tempo.  The auction started 3♠ pass 4♠.  West paused for a lot time over 4♠ which marked him with some cards.  If he bids and plays in tempo declarer is going to have to decide whether he stiffed his offside club king (which he should do) or whether he was squeezed in three suits (much less likely).  The other thing I notice is that Susie does the same thing I do saying East when she means West, making the play description a bit tricky.  Overall this is a very good blog.

Over to Stacy Jacobs blog site

www.stacyjacobs.com

and I am jealous.  Why?  She asked a bridge question and got eleven replies.  That never happens to me.  Here is her question published on September 9th.  What do you open on this hand

♠ A

♥ AQJxx

◊ AKxxx

♣Ax

It is an interesting problem.  Without looking at the response I think that I would open 1♥ but I have agreement with all partners that with an Ace (not applicable here) or a King-Jack or better you keep the bidding open so it doesn’t get passed out very often.  Most people seem to like 2♣ and there is a reference to Gazzilli.  I decide to find out what that is.  

There is an explanation of Gazzilli on her blogsite.

When you open one of a major and partner responds 1 of a major or 1NT (1♥-1♠; 1♥-1NT; 1♠-1NT), opener’s 2♣ rebid is either natural and weak (11-12hcp, 5+ major and 4+♣ ) OR any strong hand, 16+.  I need to think about whether I like this.htt.

Stacy is an active blogger and her favorite color is yellow.

Next up is Jeffrey Miller and “a coup for you”.

I notice he has an investment blog too.  I bookmark that I love investing even though the market is terrible right now.  From his bio, he obviously knows more about it than me.

 http://www.oldprofbridge.com/

He has a few problems posted and I notice that each blog is very short and contains only the problem.  Maybe that is the best way to get replies.    Here is the most recent blog problem.  Vulnerable at imps you have

♠76 ♥ 109 ◊ KJ1076 ♣ K1095

Your partner opens 1NT.  Do you bid?  I guess the main question here is do you have enough to invite to 3NT.  The spot cards are very attractive so yeah I suppose I do and I would bid 2NT in this situation.  While I am not sorry I visited there are few posts and this is not an active blog site at this time. 

He leads me to an excellent and active blog by Dave Smith

http://pokerandbridge.blogspot.com called Just Sayin’ and this site is a twofer.  You get bridge and poker about equally.  All the posts I look at feature a hand with some interesting comments or analysis. And best of all he reads bridge.blogging… high five Dave.

There are many more blogs out there.  I didn’t have time today to visit more but I will soon.

The best 10 website so far (10 sites after 9 days)

September 13th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

I decide to write a list of the top 10 bridge sites I have visited so far in my web search.  Actually I ranked about 14 sites A and it was very hard to get it down to 10.   I decided to use a variety of different site types to narrow it down.  The best blog, the best links, the best forum etc.  My criteria was the site that would be most valuable to expert players so if it was more focused on bridge students it didn’t make my list.  I looked for content, organization and ease of use.  Any site I mentioned (unless I suggested it was under construction) has merit.  So here is my top 10 by type

Day 9 – Halfway to better bridge on the Internet

September 12th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

What I have learned so far is that there are a lot of resources on the Internet that can help to improve my bridge game and that of all players. While my focus has been on the expert level there is much for players of any level. Most of the material is free. One problem is that it is spread across so many places and needs some organization. I am going to think more about how to deal with that and get the best out the resources available.

Today I decide to focus on conventions. A long time ago I had an idea for a database of all bridge conventions which could grow expand and change with time. Various people have tried to do this but I am not sure how successful they have been. The logical place to start would be somewhere like wikipedia, a place where many people could make contributions to a whole. I am going to start by looking at bridge conventions on Wikipedia.

The bridge convention list on wikipedia is very eccentric and seems to be to be designed more to classify conventions than to list them. For example under weak opening bids we have: kamikaze 1NT, Ekren and Mudiberg. Oddly enough I play all of them if you consider 10-12 notrump to be kamikaze. Ekren is defined as an opening 2◊ or 2♥ to show both majors at least 4-4 and as the author suggests it is superior, increasing the pressure to bid on left hand opponent since 2♥ can be passed out. Interesting some players use 2♣ to show this hand. I assume they play strong club.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_(bridge)

The link for the explanation of Ekren takes me to Swan games which has a suggested defence. Nothing much is written about the Kamikaze notrump but it does take me to bridgebum

www.bridgebum.com

which has a small amount of helpful information. For example they do have the escape system I play with Isabelle which we call Guoba (after John Guoba a Toronto lawyer and bridge player) and they call touching escapes. This system is designed to allow you to give you the maximum chance of finding your best fit but does have some drawbacks. Isabelle and I have improved it. Maybe I should publish our ideas?

Australian Stayman is listed under fit-seeking conventions but there is no explanation of it at all. Intrigued I google it and come up pretty dry. So I wander over to the Australian Bridge Federation site.

http://www.abf.com.au/index.html

It has a few interesting things like a feature “what should I bid” but no discussion of Australian Stayman. I also check and find out that Austrlian Bridge Standard uses normal Stayman. I can’t find it. I cheat and look it up in the Encyclopedia of Bridge Conventions and the Bridge Encyclopedia . Its not there. Success! I find it in an unlikely place, the website for Jack Bridge, one of the leading world computer games.

http://www.jackbridge.com/

With Australian Stayman the responses to 2♣ are

• 2◊ minimum with 4-4 in the majors
• 2 of a major minimum with four of that major only
• 2♠ minimum with 4 spades 2NT minimum no 4 card major
• 3♣ maximum no 4 card major 3◊ maximum with 4-4 in the majors
• 3 of a major maximum with four of that major only

Having found it I wonder if it was worth the search. Conclusion: There is a lot about conventions on the web and a few good sources. However wikipedia is not one of them. My dream of one good place to go, where everyone could contribute and build a real convention database does not exist.

Well there must be some good news today so I head over to great bridge links

www.greatbridgelinks.com

and find a link to the Australian Bridge.

www.australianbridge.com

 its an Aussie day so I am visitng the Aussie magazine. I am going to try the online bidding forum. I decide to do last month’s forum so I can look at the answers when I am done. I use my old trick of cover up the answers with my word document while I look only at the question. It seems Larry Cohen is guest moderator this month (August).

Here is hand one. I hold ♠ QJ108 ♥ 3 ◊ A43 ♣ AKJ86 The auction starts off like this:

West North East South

Pass Pass   1♣   DBL

RBL   1♥      1♠   2♥

Pass Pass    ?

I usually play that redouble shows no fit and is penalty oriented and I am sure that the problem was not designed with that agreement in mind. Partner’s double of hearts would have been for penalty so a pass here denies a penalty double of hearts.

What else does partner’s pass show? Partner Since I already bid 1♠ over 1♥ I think I have denied interest in doubling hearts from my hand. can’t have four spades. I suppose he could still have three clubs. Perhaps he is 3-3-4-3 or 3-3-5-2. I have enough extra values that I want to be in game. I suppose the choice is between 3◊ and 3♥.

I am not sure what a double by me here would be. I don’t think it is penalty. Partner can bid 3NT over either bid but I like 3◊ a little better because it shows my shape, more or less.

When I look at the answers I see that the respondents are confused about the meaning of double with some thinking it is penalty and some takeout. Hmmm. Double gets a score of 70. I don’t like making those bids in real life unless I am sure partner and I are on the same wavelength. 3♥ also gets the top score. The concern (perhaps valid) with 3◊ is that you might be 4-1-4-4. I suppose that depends on whether you open 1♣ or 1◊ with that distribution. 3◊ gets 80 points. The auction is worth some discussion with partner.

Forcing pass revisited and more

September 11th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

The ACBL Bulletin is starting to move up on my list of must read magazines.  I have always enjoyed the column by Pam and Matt Granovetter.  This month’s article was particularly interesting because it talked about the issue of showing strength to create a forcing pass.  The discussion here is about 3 level interference.  In the example your partner opens 1♠ and RHO overcalls 3♣.  The idea here is that 4♣ is not a slam try but sets up a forcing pass situation.  It is effectively a raise to 4♠ made with values. 

Colin and I had this discussion playing forcing club.  It partner was prone to jump to game knowing that slam was unlikely after a limited opening than opener couldn’t generally penalty double any bids made by the opposition since responder could have anything from a preempt to a game force.   But of course it is true with standard too.   The problem in either case is how does opener know if responder just wants to play in game or is making a real slam try.    Even if the opponents don’t bid again there are issues if the cuebid takes you close to game.  I guess opener simply does not go past game by himself but lets responder make a move unless opener has significant undisclosed values. 

If the opponents come back into the auction than there are more issues, with less space.  In the example in this month’s Bulletin Pamela’s partner jumped to slam (off two aces) after the opponents came in again.   I guess opener should not assume extra values and bid accordingly.  Nothing seems very satisfactory but the forcing club bidders should have it easier.

Does anyone have any thoughts on how to handle this type of situation – playing forcing club and playing standard (or 2/1)?

 Last night Ray and I had the great pleasure of playing a few hands against Erin Anderson and Matthew Mason of the Canadian Youth team.  We played 12 hands before Ray who had played tennis all afternoon conked out.  It was an interesting session in that the older folks overbid and the youth were a lot more sensible.  

 Here is a hand where the “mature” woman got a bit frisky.  But a lot of you would too.  I held ♠ K98654 ♥J84 ◊  J4 ♣. J7 

Matthew opened 1◊ red on white, Ray passed and Erin bid 1♥ .  I don’t like to bid on bad hands where I am unlikely to play the hand but I decided to bid 2♠ .  It used up so much space.  Matt bid 3◊  and it went all pass.  We had quite a pretty defence to beat the hand two tricks for a good score.  Erin and Matthew played very well against us and we all had a good time.

Day 8 – Internet search for better bridge

September 10th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

It is time to visit Ron Klinger’s website.  Ron Klinger is a prolific author and one of the world’s great bridge teachers.  It seems appropriate that the subtitle of his website is improve your game. 

http://www.ronklingerbridge.com

I go to his blog first.  Ron is an awesome blogger.  There is at least one entry for every day.  I am impressed.

Right now he is blogging about the Pacific Asia Congress.  Ron is from Australia  and we are planning to  meet him when were in Australia in October.

I look at the latest post dated September 7th. (Is Australia ahead of us or behind us in time – I can’t remember how the international dateline fits in.)  Here is the first problem.  You are West fourth to speak.  South opens 1NT (15-17) and it is your turn.  Both are vulnerable and you hold:

I am going to assume that I play my normal system multilandy.  I can’t double for penalty and I am not sure I want to anyway.  So I guess I pass.  Later on in the article I see the result.  This was played at four tables in the semifinal.  At two tables my hand doubled and they played in 1NT doubled.  At the one table my hand passed.   Doubling works, oh well.  It is seems to me that it is rare that doubling works against a strong notrump.   In the other match  At the fourth table North-South were playing weak notrump and opened 1♣ avoiding all the problems.  One for our side!

Unfortunately almost all the material on the website is only available for paid members.  So I can’t see most of it.  But there is a lot of material here.  Still the blog alone is worth the visit.  I wonder if anyone would pay for my writing. Nah. 

This next website won’t make me a better bridge player but it is interesting.

http://www.zimbio.com/Bridge+card+game

Zimbio seems to be a collection of online magazines and it includes a bridge zine which seems to be a collection of bridge articles from all over.  This leads me to an article in the Truro (Nova Scotia) Daily News.   It is the story of 18 year old Aled Iaboni a Canadian junior heading to Beijing.  He does say that his marks went up when he learned to play bridge.  When I learned to play bridge I almost failed out of university – a different time I suppose. 

On to Danny Kleinman’s website, Dan Kleinman is a Master Point Press author, Bridge World staff nember, a profilic write and one of the most interesting people I have every met.  Danny’s website tells me that he is the author of 40 bridge books, and books on backgammon and various other subjects.

 www.dannykleinman.com.  I know that this website is going to be fascinating before I even arrive.  For once, the first place I want to read is Danny’s biography.  Ray would say that “it needs editing” but it is fun, just like Danny.

If you like conventions you have come to the right place.  Danny has invented a convention for all occasions and they have wonderful names.  I read all about “Ba Ba Blacksheep”.  This is a convention used in 2/1 auctions that start 1D-2C.  It actually seems pretty straightforward.  Opener must bid 2D over two clubs on any hand that does not have extra values. Two of a major is a reverse and 2NT shows more than an opening notrump bid (18-19).  I suppose this would have to be modified for weak notrumper.  3D is strong and natural and 3NT is a strong club raise.  3 of a major is a splinter in support of clubs.  There is a little more but he doesn’t talk about how the auction continues after a forced 2D.  I guess responder just keeps bidding naturally.

I check out the deal of the week and find a very pretty defensive hand along with a story.  The pair he was watching were had a 79% game.  Maybe Danny should consider professional kibitzing.

There is an interesting article on the secret of declarer play.  This is the secret I want to learn.  The idea is that you have to think like the defenders and let them make mistakes.  There is another point about which suit to establish in notrump, but that is not the point that grabs me.   I am now remembering Eddie’s rule about what card to lead when you want a cover (high) and when you don’t (low).  If I can internalize this idea of Danny’s I know it will help me.

Is 88 imps in 12 boards a lot in university bridge?

September 9th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  No Comments 

I thought it would be interesting to check out the action from Poland at the World University Games.  The 4th World University Bridge Championships were held in Lodz Poland September 3-8 with teams from 21 teams from 15 countries participating.  Awesome!  Going into the last round the the Netherlands A team was well ahead and could not be caught.  Poland A and Norway A were battling it out for second spot. 

USA A was leading the North American teams in fifth spot with USA B and Canada well down the track.  In the final round Poland A had what should be on paper a fairly easy match against Netherlands B while Norway A was playing Austria which looked to be the tougher match.

Each match of the round robin was only 12 boards but in the final match, between Poland A and Netherlands B, the final score was 45-15 for Poland A.  That is 60 imps on 12 boards.  But if you are impressed by that, the highest scoring match of the last set 88 imps switched hands in 12 boards in the Czech Republic versus Chinese Taipei match and several other matches had 80 imps changing hands.  These were not swingy boards either.

The first board in the Poland – Netherlands match was fairly flat but the second board brought the first big swing when the Dutch team got to 6♠.  Here North had to decide which of his two aces to lead but in fact it didn’t matter since they both cashed. 

Do you like the opening bid chosen by Kalita of Poland in first chair.  He held:

♠ 2

♥ 106

◊ KJ9865

♣ 10532

and with all not vulnerable he created some action when he opened 3◊.  West, Hop, bid 4♥ and the Polish North upped the ante with 5◊.  Now I take you to the East hand.  Helmich found a bid that would never have occurred to me.

♠ Q87

♥ 9875

◊ 2

♣ AQJ97

and he chose to bid 6♥!  (in chess notation they give bids like that an exclamation mark).  I think this is a complete shot and likely to be a losing one.  His partner held:

♠ K74

♥ AKQJ32

◊ 73

♣ K6

In the closed room without the 3◊ bid the auction smoothly proceeded to 4♥. 

I found sixth board of the match quite interesting.  Are you one of those players who likes to switch around the meaning of 1♠ and 1NT?  This convention cost Netherlands B 10 imps.  Partner opens 1♥ and your hand is

You (West)

♠ KQ976

♥ 9

◊ K653

♣ A82

One thing seems likely if you are going to play the hand in notrump it is probably better from partner’s side. 

Partner (East) holds:

♠ 102

♥ AKQ64

◊ QJ104

♣ Q6

Played from the West hand a club lead is a killer with the ♣K over the ♣Q.  Played from the East hand you are going to have to have a lot of bad luck not to make the hand.

Poland A went on to win this match handily and take second place with Norway A in third.  I hope they show some of the various junior team matches on BBO from Beijing.  At this level I expect the matches to be interesting and exciting even on deals that might be flat in the Open Teams.

The North American teams did not have a great tournament.  USA A had the best result, a fifth place finish.

A sad story

September 8th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

I remember watching a movie about Loretta Lynn.  At one point she turns to the audience in tears and says I know I can tell you this because you are my friends.  Well that is how I feel about you as well.  In the last few days I have had some sad news.  Isabelle cannot play in the World Championships in 2009 and so we have both dropped off our women’s team for the upcoming CWTC.  Isabelle and I do intend to play in 2010 in Russia however and we will sort that out in future.  I would like to thank the members of my former CWTC team who sent me encouraging emails.

I am not sure what I am going to do this year.  I might try to get a team for the CNTC and play with my son Colin or maybe find someone else to play with on a CWTC team or skip the whole thing entirely.  I have this strange idea about going to Brazil as a kind of reporter/blogger.

Anyway, the whole thing is very depressing and I decided to take a few days off from my bridge Internet search.  I really liked playing with Isabelle and before with Pamela and I will miss the whole thing.   Thank goodness for Ray who plied me with cake and love yesterday. 

Tomorrow I will be okay and will get back to serious blogging and work.  Tomorrow I will think about my bridge future.  Not today though.

Bidding a hand from the PABF Championships

September 8th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  1 Comment 

I  was watching a bit of the PABF semifinal and I noticed that neither table reached an excellent slam.  I was wondering how I would bid it.  Do you ever do that –  bid both sides of the hand with your system, trying hard to be honest, and see what you would do?  Here is the hand along with my self bidding.

The hand has been rotated for convenience and North is the opening bidder with no opposition bidding.  I would open 1NT (12-14).   With 4-3-3-3 the question is do you use Stayman as South.  You do have an 18 count with prime cards and slam is certainly possible.  Partner mayhave some shape so I do like bidding 2D game forcing Stayman.  Partner bids 3H showing 4H and you bid 2NT to ask for more information.  Partner bids 3S and you now know he is 4-4-3-2 or 4-4-2-3.  This is great for you so you try a cuebid of 5C and partner bids 4H denying a diamond control but showing more than a minimum.   How likely is slam now?  Partner might have QXX of diamonds since he denied a diamond control or XXX.  How about this hand

KQXX KQXX QJX XX

Slam would be on a finesse.  Can I come up with 13 points consistent with the auction where slam is not very good?  Qxxx KQXX QJX KX.  That will do it.  The key to the hand must be decent spades.  I think 5S should ask that question.  Since partner has already denied a diamond control and we have shown controls in the other suits.  This might be our auction

In my dreams.  In one room North didn’t even try for slam after he knew his partner had 18-19 points and four spades with him.  What do you think?

We are moving!

September 7th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  3 Comments 

As you may be able to tell we have moved Bridge Blogging to a new web host.  Our new software is easier to use and has a lot of new features so all bloggers should enjoy it.

We will be contacting all current bloggers today and Monday and get them started.  Previous Blogs have been moved across so readers should be able to see them but it may take a day or so before all Bloggers are moved across so some bloggers will be slower in publishing new blogs.

Day 7 of 15 days to better bridge

September 6th, 2008  ~  linda  ~  2 Comments 

I decide to go back to Jeff Goldblum’s site and warm up with a bridge movie

http://www.gg.caltech.edu/~jeff/

I find that the first two deals are all about bidding judgment.  I do fine but I think that this is an area where we can all learn.  I do have to get my copy of Neil Kimelman’s Improve Your Bidding Judgment and put it by my bed to dip into from time to time.

 http://www.masterpointpress.com/bidding/judgment.html

I ponder a while with CHO is before realizing it is partner (center hand opponent), silly me.

I am intrigued by the idea of an overcall structure that allows you to make preemptive style overcalls or sound ones at the two level.  I am going to read that next.  I hate being kept out of the auction and some partners hate it if I make weakish 2-level overcalls.  Maybe there is a way to get into more auctions.

Actually problem 3 turns out to be a defensive problem and I am happy that I get it right.  Have a go:

Both vulnerable: 2C/3C is preemptive here

You lead the CA and partner follows with the CQ and declarer the CK.

What do you do at trick 2? 

Actually on the hand the two logical plays will beat it.  My choice partly depends on whether I think partner will dump the CQ on my ace to telling me his holding (which really has no value since he knows that I will know as soon as declarer plays his card) or it is suit preference.  I think it should be suit preference and so with a good partner (like Colin) I play ace of hearts and another.  Otherwise I play a diamond.  If declarer has a singleton club it does seem unlikely he also has a singleton diamond and partner almost certainly has 2 spades so playing diamonds gives me a chance to give partner a diamond ruff or at least cut declarer off dummy.  Either play works on this hand.

I think this has been a good exercise but I move on to Colin Wards’s http://www.firesides.net/cchumour.htm

Bridge at the corners which turns out to be a humorous bridge book.  It seems like a good idea for a Saturday morning.  There are some humours moments in the chapters I read but in the end this is not to my taste.  I head for Colin’s home page and see a lot of interesting convention ideas.  There are some interesting convention ideas and you can try your luck at the session from hell.

My next stop is the bridgeguys.

http://homepage.mac.com/bridgeguys/index.html

I start off just for interest looking at a brief history of bridge which doesn’t seem at all enlightening.  But contains some links to whist pages which might be useful some time.

The bridge glossary is fascinating.  For example I find out that there is a caddy hall of fame and in the attached picture I notice a former Canadian junior Ian Boyd. There is a page where they have separated out some of the conventions and systems and for some reason behaviour guidelines.

Do you know what the golden rule is?

I also notice that the muiderberg two bids are featured.  I play this with all my current partners and I am interested in all the articles in this section.  One article is presented in the original Dutch but since it is bridge Dutch I am amused to find that I can read it e.g

Antowoorden na 2H

pas = om te spelen

2s = nonforcing

2SA-mancheforcing

It helps that I know some bridge French and a bit of German!

I take a brief detour to Ray’s bridge game.

http://www.raysbridgegame.com/

Release 7.6 (25 Nov 2007) is available.  You define bidding rules and then test them on generated hands.  (you can use the default set too).  This is very interesting and I decide to try it out at length.  I may report back to you on how this all works out at another time.  Fortunately there is a lot of help and examples on the site.

From here I head to http://www.bridgesights.com/hondobridge/ a page belonging to Howard Schutzman a bridge teacher and expert player.

There are a lot of lesson hands, mentoring session notes (down as bridge movies).  Since I play weak notrump I am curious to see what methods he is teaching so I head over to weak notrump lesson series part 1, opening 1NT.  I don’t expect to agree with everything he says and right off I notice that he doesn’t want you to open 1NT with a five card major, even a weak one.  He also suggests playing four way transfers with weak notrump and doesn’t even mention 2-way Stayman.  Well, perhaps he method is a reasonable way to get people moved from strong to weak notrump (at least to start with).

There are some interesting play “puzzles”, one per month.  The problem is presented and you email your answer.  There are no answers on the site.  I find the August 08 puzzle intriguing.

You end of in 4S with no opposition bidding. You get the lead of the CJ. What is your plan?

I am still thinking about it but it does seem right to win the opening lead and play a diamond.