[inquiry]

csdenmark, on Dec 7 2006, 02:03 PM, said:

inquiry, on Dec 7 2006, 08:51 PM, said:

zasanya, on Dec 7 2006, 11:17 AM, said:

csdenmark, on Dec 7 2006, 05:10 AM, said:

So in fact not all interested have the knowledge of the existence of BBO Forum.

Another problem some may wonder is why more than 4000 registered members in this Forum and only about 100-200 posting here. I doubt the intensions of BBO Forum had that kind of limitations in mind.

100-200? More like 20-25?

1536 forum members have posted at least once.

Thank you Ben for this information. We therefore now know that 3000 persons have registered but posted nothing. As the only reason for registering is to be able to post I think BBO Forum has a problem - a nice problem of course - but a problem which need to be dealt with.

But Ben my figures was an assumption of regular users, at least 1 per month or so.

I think to download the beta version of the software you have to be a member, but I am not sure... but for lurkers, being a registered member makes it easy to read post since your last visit... so even if you never post, but do visit, there are reasons to register. One is to use teh private messaging. I have been messaged by at least two "members" who have never posted.

[csdenmark]

awm, on Dec 7 2006, 09:21 PM, said:

Two conventions that I think are being a bit undersold here:

Fourth suit force. Several people have mentioned this, but often put it fairly low on the list. This is a convention that comes up a lot, especially in a system where 2/1 bids are not forcing to game. For example: 1♠-2♣-2♦, what's responder's next call? It's actually more likely that responder has a game force than not. Yet in SAYC, 2♠ is a non-forcing preference, 2NT is invitational, 3♣ and 3♦ are not forcing. While 3♠ is forcing it certainly agrees spades. So how do we look for slam? How do we avoid 3NT if no one has a heart stopper? I think these are pretty basic questions, and the answer to both is 2♥ 4th suit forcing. Of course, 4th suit force is a fairly basic convention and a part of SAYC, so perhaps it's more of a "beginner" level thing to learn. But it's extremely important. If I had to list conventions I absolutely couldn't imagine playing without, 4th suit force would be on the list. Weak two bids, blackwood/rkc, and new minor force would not be on the list.

Lebensohl. This is a single convention that comes up in many different places (commonly over interference to 1NT, over partner's takeout double of a weak two, and over our own reverses). It solves a pretty serious problem in standard bidding (how do you know when partner has a good hand versus a hand that's just bidding competitively). While experts disagree about a lot of things (you can find people who hate inverted minors, or forcing notrump, or game forcing 2/1s, or any particular defense to 1NT), lebensohl seems fairly universal on expert CCs. Of course you can argue that it's marginal better to play different methods in the three situations (some kind of rubensohl/transfer lebensohl over 1NT interference, ingberman or some kind of relay over reverses) but virtually everyone agrees that lebensohl is a substantial improvement over "no conventional treatment" in the auctions where it comes up. Of course, lebensohl is a convention I could do without, but after getting the bare necessities down (negative doubles, stayman, fourth suit force) I think it should be pretty high on the list.

I really wonder the popularity of Lebensohl lately. I remember something more than 1 year ago a thread was up(seems no longer searchable) asking for info about Lebensohl. As normal for BBO Forum when it comes to topics where knowledge is needed, most silence. But of course I am pleased to see interest for this strong tool.

Most of my opps. claims expert level and they normally play without much else than Stayman, 2-way transfer and sometimes art. 2♣ art. forcing. For poles Wilkosz looks like a must. If one of them try to introduce something else the other one mostly dont know. Latest I remember both opps. have never heard of 'Herbert negative'. As I often play strong club(Precision/Blue) a 4-way tool like fx. CRASH ought to be welknown stuff. Unfortunately it is not. Not only it is not welknown but it is so unknown that even offered help they agree on natural instead.

4th suit looks to me to be the most advanced tool on expert level in pick-up partnerships.

I will now consider instead to accept beginner/intermediates for opps. in the future.

[inquiry]

csdenmark, on Dec 7 2006, 04:06 PM, said:

I really wonder the popularity of Lebensohl lately. I remember something more than 1 year ago a thread was up(seems no longer searchable) asking for info about Lebensohl. As normal for BBO Forum when it comes to topics where knowledge is needed, most silence. But of course I am pleased to see interest for this strong tool.

Maybe you meant this one Claus Lebensohl Vs Good-Bad 2NT That one was from 2003, easily searchable,

Or maybe you meant my Lebenshiol poll from even earlier in 2003? Again easily searchable

Or maybe this one On the many faces of lebehshol also from 2003, and well, you know.. searchable

Or Keylimes article that is was similar to this one What is your favorite conventions?, also 2003, also searchable...

How about 2004? Plenty there too, also all searchable... you might have been thinking about Luis's (why has luis abandoned us?? sigh)... hi sarticle was entitledYALT: Yet another Leb thread, Evil guys bid over our 1NT

Maybe you don't realize you can pull down the search opton and choose "from the beginning" that searches everything....

[csdenmark]

Thank you Ben. I clicked search on top and asked for 'Lebensohl' and search to be performanced in all Forums. I received this return:

Hand of the week
Interesting Bridge Hands bid_em_up 13 101 Dec 8 2006, 01:40 AM
Last Post by: whereagles
Conventions to Learn
Which are most important? Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion awm 63 1126 Dec 7 2006, 11:25 PM
Last Post by: inquiry
Help for lebensohl please
Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion rona_ 21 372 Dec 6 2006, 12:03 AM
Last Post by: kenberg
here we go again...
another rebid problem Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion jillybean2 18 163 Dec 5 2006, 06:33 AM
Last Post by: neilkaz
Strange sequence
SAYC and 2/1 Discussion pclayton 24 420 Dec 4 2006, 11:06 AM
Last Post by: FrancesHinden
Negative Doubles After Interference Over 15-17 NT
General Bridge Discussion pbleighton 9 197 Nov 25 2006, 07:28 PM
Last Post by: 1eyedjack
Meaning of 2NT
Beginner and Intermediate Bridge Discussion DWM 3 71 Nov 15 2006, 09:47 PM
Last Post by: dank
Poll: KQ A KTxxx AKTxx ; 2♠-P-P-?
pick your poison Advanced and Expert-Class Bridge Rob F 12 237 Nov 13 2006, 05:51 PM
Last Post by: Apollo81
supporting partners major with 2

-----------------------------
I see now I have options backsearch to the right. Sorry

[matmat]

personally, i think the most important thing is to have partnership agreements about basic responses to opening bids and raises. Nothing named, just basic hand evaluation stuff. Maybe Negative/Takeout doubles and jacoby transfers.

[jillybean]

A blast from the past. An improving player is asking which conventions to learn. how much has changed?

Once the core system is mastered Stayman, transfers, including texas, Keycard

Jacoby 2nt plain or modified
Drury 1 way is fine
Takeout, Negative and Support doubles
XYZ or if that's too daunting, 2 way NMF. + 4SF
Reverse
Forcing minor raise
Something as a response to a weak2
Cue raise, cue bids



Lebensohl


This made me smile, 1nt with 5 and 6 card majors

fred, on 2006-December-05, 18:51, said:

I regularly open some number of notrump with virtually all "in range" hands that contain a 5-card (and occasionally 6-card) majors.

I do not use any form of Puppet Stayman after any of my notrump openings.

Sometimes this works well. Sometimes it works poorly. It is hard (impossible?) to say if Puppet Stayman is a net winner, but my experience suggests that there is not a lot in it one way or the other.

One this is for sure: if I was banished to a desert island and could take only 10 conventions with me, Puppet Stayman would not come close to making the list.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

I do have puppet on the card but only because if I didn't, all 3 level bids/1nt would be empty.

[pescetom]

jillybean, on 2026-January-30, 15:17, said:

A blast from the past. An improving player is asking which conventions to learn. how much has changed?

Once the core system is mastered Stayman, transfers, including texas, Keycard

Jacoby 2nt plain or modified
Drury 1 way is fine
Takeout, Negative and Support doubles
XYZ or if that's too daunting, 2 way NMF. + 4SF
Reverse
Forcing minor raise
Something as a response to a weak2
Cue raise, cue bids



Lebensohl


This made me smile

I do have puppet on the card but only because if I didn't, all 3 level bids/1nt would be empty.

Makes me smile too
I'll bite, but not with my top ten... that requires too much thought about which methods are conventions (did you really count them, including basic things like 1m openings and bidding after interference? ).

Puppet Stayman is near the top of my list (and unlike you I lose sleep about the optimal meanings of all 3 level over 1N and would never waste one as a second major-seeking Stayman), but then Puppet Stayman to me means what it says, or almost: reply 2♦ if you have no 5 card major.
Jacoby transfer pulls its weight, none of the other transfers are top ten.
A modern 2/1 should take care of forcing minor raises, but there are other approaches.
Takeout and negative doubles certainly.
Support doubles; we are flirting, but far from engaged (the devil is in the detail), not top ten in any case.
Cues of opponent's suit to show inv+ support and requalify natural raises as interdictive are essential.
XYZ, MultiLandy, Rubehsohl, are core armour.
Mixed 1st/2nd level control-bids are the essence of constructive slam seeking auctions, not sure RKCB would make the cut of ten.
Reverses showing strength are arguably not a convention? But a mixed blessing in any case and I would work to reduce them with a better partner.
Jacoby 2NT and Drury are not things I would wish to play, let alone top ten.
Over partner's weak 2 I like a modified (to expose a lateral 4 card major) Ogust, but nowhere near top ten.
I am fond of a splinter (at lowest level logical) by Opener in Responder's suit, splinters by Responder are nowhere near top ten.

[jillybean]

 pescetom, on 2026-January-30, 16:26, said:

Puppet Stayman is near the top of my top ten, but then Puppet Stayman to me means what it says, or almost: reply 2♦ unless you have a 5 card major

Director, please

[pescetom]

 jillybean, on 2026-January-30, 16:30, said:

Director, please

It has happened

"Director, he won't tell me if Opener has a 4 card major or not!"

[mycroft]

Well, they'd really enjoy our "shows 12-14 balanced" forced puppet then.

(I know "modern" Keri allows a break of the relay with a 5-card major. We so rarely bid that way that working out how to show our hand when opener does isn't worth the advantage).

On the "what to learn" front? Strongly recommend, until you have a committed partnership looking to fill holes, "whatever the people in your club regularly ask whether you play". Whether you learn them only to say "no, I can't play that" or "I'd rather [other common option in the club]", it's worth knowing what they're asking about and what problems it solves (and how to solve the same problem your preferred way). And as Simon says, it's good to be able to play partner's game; it's a point in your favour next time when they have a choice next week, and they play better when *they're* comfortable.

[AL78]

blackshoe, on 2006-December-05, 18:01, said:

BTW, my pet peeve with reverses is the statement "I/we don't play reverses". Bull. A reverse is mechanical. If you as opener on your second turn, bid simply in a new suit above what the English call your "barrier" - two of your first suit - you have reversed. In Standard American, Acol, and similar systems, the logic of the system requires that a reverse show extra values. However, if you play a system where responder's initial 2/1 response is forcing to game, the logic of your system does not require that you have extra values to reverse, since you're already in a game forcing auction. So what many of those who "don't play reverses" really mean is that they don't treat them as forcing. Unfortunately, some of those folks aren't playing a 2/1 system, they're playing Standard American. So now their partner puts them back in their first suit at the three level, and they aren't going to make it. Hey, fine with me! Just don't tell me "we don't play reverses".

Ha ha, that reminds me of a recent hand where one opponent, playing Acol, opened 1♥ and bid 2♠ over 2♦ on their second turn with a 12 count. They ended up in a cold 6♦= for a top when the field stopped in 3NT.

[mw64ahw]

I wish I could get it in to some players heads that 2N after their 1N opening and interference is not to play. Lebensohl please. Plus let's have a way to get out of 1N-(X).

[jillybean]

mycroft, on 2026-January-31, 09:42, said:

Well, they'd really enjoy our "shows 12-14 balanced" forced puppet then.

(I know "modern" Keri allows a break of the relay with a 5-card major. We so rarely bid that way that working out how to show our hand when opener does isn't worth the advantage).

On the "what to learn" front? Strongly recommend, until you have a committed partnership looking to fill holes, "whatever the people in your club regularly ask whether you play". Whether you learn them only to say "no, I can't play that" or "I'd rather [other common option in the club]", it's worth knowing what they're asking about and what problems it solves (and how to solve the same problem your preferred way). And as Simon says, it's good to be able to play partner's game; it's a point in your favour next time when they have a choice next week, and they play better when *they're* comfortable.

The problem is, "we are not getting to the right contract and often going down in what we do get into", all these experienced players play these mysterious sounding conventions so that's what I must need to fix my game. Yes, bidding judgement and card play is more important but it takes a long time to master , conventions are "easy" to add. Easy to add the first bid, harder to understand and master the follow ups, I'm guilty

Keeping with the basics,ie I have an invitational hand with 5 of a major, partner has opened 1m and rebid 1nt. The standard approach is to jump in your major 3M. NMF or for those who are willing to stray to the wild side, xyz should be standard in club level games, in North America, I can't speak for those Italians and Britts.

[DavidKok]

I have a standard partnership checklist. I've removed some of the questions that I would ask but are presumably not relevant for partnerships that already agreed on a basic system, such as 'which balanced hands open 1♦?'. What remains might be useful list of discussion points - most of them conventions.

Spoiler

1H/1S - what is the raise structure?
2C - Always strong? Any weak options? Which strong options?
2D - Weak? Multi? Other? Which, if any, strong options?
2H/2S - Weak? Muiderberg? Can be 5card suit?

Style:
2/1 GF? 2C BAL or NAT or FIT?
Walsh?
Bypass spades with BAL on 1m-1H?

Competitive agreements:
Support Doubles?
What does NT in the sandwich show?
Michaels/Unusual?
Defence against their 1NT?
They interfere with 1NT?
How strong are 1-level overcalls?
Cue in competition is inv(+) raise?
Fitbids?
Negative/takeout doubles through 7H?

Conventions:
RKC? 1430/0314?
4SGF? What about the 1-level with Walsh?
Checkback/XYZ/XYNT/NMF?
Splinters?
Control bidding?
Inverted minors?

Some of these are maybe a bit much for an improving player, such as fitbids, special agreements about NT in the sandwich, or the raises in 1M-2♣. Do note that there are very few conventions in here! No Drury, pretty much no gadgets over our 1NT, limited followup agreements after 2-level openings. Any such agreement can improve the system, of course, but they would be a lower priority for me than the above.

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2026-January-31, 12:07, said:

I have a standard partnership checklist. I've removed some of the questions that I would ask but are presumably not relevant for partnerships that already agreed on a basic system, such as 'which balanced hands open 1♦?'. What remains might be useful list of discussion points - most of them conventions.

Spoiler

1H/1S - what is the raise structure?
2C - Always strong? Any weak options? Which strong options?
2D - Weak? Multi? Other? Which, if any, strong options?
2H/2S - Weak? Muiderberg? Can be 5card suit?

Style:
2/1 GF? 2C BAL or NAT or FIT?
Walsh?
Bypass spades with BAL on 1m-1H?

Competitive agreements:
Support Doubles?
What does NT in the sandwich show?
Michaels/Unusual?
Defence against their 1NT?
They interfere with 1NT?
How strong are 1-level overcalls?
Cue in competition is inv(+) raise?
Fitbids?
Negative/takeout doubles through 7H?

Conventions:
RKC? 1430/0314?
4SGF? What about the 1-level with Walsh?
Checkback/XYZ/XYNT/NMF?
Splinters?
Control bidding?
Inverted minors?

Some of these are maybe a bit much for an improving player, such as fitbids, special agreements about NT in the sandwich, or the raises in 1M-2♣. Do note that there are very few conventions in here! No Drury, pretty much no gadgets over our 1NT, limited followup agreements after 2-level openings. Any such agreement can improve the system, of course, but they would be a lower priority for me than the above.

Very similar to my own list, but it is shorter because (luckily or not) some of those things are so uniform here I have no need to ask:
- 2H/2S one can assume are natural weak
- nobody will bypass spades (I agree it is a good idea)
- how strong are 1 level overcalls == 7(8)
- nobody plays fitbits
- nobody plays inverted minors.
I "ask" more about 2C: birthright? what is a 2NT response (no it isn't)? what is a jump by opener (yes it is)?
Michaels here is a minefield as many play majors 5-5 and/or 1C-2D with 1C-2C natural: ask/agree.
I ask about what 1NT and 2NT are, happy to play any clear answer (they won't get anything else right anyway).

[DavidKok]

pescetom, on 2026-January-31, 13:53, said:

- how strong are 1 level overcalls == 7(8)

I normally introduce this particular hand and scenario (spots approximate but the ♠9 matters):

---

I've gotten all sorts of responses, ranging from 'obvious 2♠' to '1♠ is normal but I am aggressive' to 'I need an extra king to overcall 1♠'. I find this tells me much more than agreeing on any gadget.

As for your list, responses to a strong 2♣ really don't matter to me as they are so rare. If I only have a bit of time, focus on something else.

[mike777]

 DavidKok, on 2026-January-31, 14:08, said:

I normally introduce this particular hand and scenario (spots approximate but the ♠9 matters):

---

I've gotten all sorts of responses, ranging from 'obvious 2♠' to '1♠ is normal but I am aggressive' to 'I need an extra king to overcall 1♠'. I find this tells me much more than agreeing on any gadget.

As for your list, responses to a strong 2♣ really don't matter to me as they are so rare. If I only have a bit of time, focus on something else.

So how do you choose to respond and why?

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2026-January-31, 14:08, said:

I normally introduce this particular hand and scenario (spots approximate but the ♠9 matters):

---

I've gotten all sorts of responses, ranging from 'obvious 2♠' to '1♠ is normal but I am aggressive' to 'I need an extra king to overcall 1♠'. I find this tells me much more than agreeing on any gadget.

I would respond "happy to bid 2♠ if you are, otherwise Pass, unless you can make it AQT9x".
But I don't need to ask.
As I said, overcalls are uniform (and conservative) in Italy, and not just at club level: I am already an outlier to consider 2♠ and nobody would dream of 1♠.

[DavidKok]

mike777, on 2026-January-31, 15:27, said:

So how do you choose to respond and why?

I think 2♠ is best, but over here 1♠ is standard. The copout answer is that I will respond in any way that partner prefers, but I think it's close between 1♠ and 2♠ (with pass being much worse).