Badmonster's bridge log - A beginner's journey

He who hesitates

2009-04-10T11:07:00.003-04:00

Well, I woke up thinking of bridge. It's been so long since that happened.

I've been thinking about Walsh. I like Walsh, but I'm not sure why exactly. Maybe it's because Luis Argerich indicated that he plays it. Maybe it's because it makes me feel like I know a code - it makes me feel smart.

Some of the people I know gasp in horror at the mention of the W word. And then there is the debate about Walsh Style vs Walsh.

Yesterday I had a hand that I wanted to bid. I liked it. I like to bid. Now all sorts of experts are telling me that sometimes pass is the right bid. Clearly, that is just a conspiracy. They just want me to shut up and stay out of their auctions. Clearly. Right? But I'm on to them. And I like to bid.

Here is the lesson I learned, if you have a hand that you really feel the need to chime in with, and you wonder if your partner's head might explode when you do, it's probably better to do it at the lowest level you can rather than waiting and coming in at the 5 level.

Yesterday's hand:

Axxx

QTX

KJTxx

You are south and east opens 2S. His p bids 4s. 5clubs = not right.

In the cold light of morning, I think passing looks more attractive. But I am not officially embracing the P bid.

Good advice

2009-02-08T12:32:00.001-05:00

I was whining (you know how I do) about how badly things were going. About how I wanted to play better. Bid better. Think more. Make fewer mistakes. My friend HagarH said: Play slower.

Damn. He's right.

Hint: Play barefoot

2009-01-24T21:58:00.004-05:00

My time away from the table leads me to believe that the memory is an interesting thing. You forget the good habits and remember the bad. The muscle of the mind learns to recognize patterns and keep running tallies, but without practice that reflex will atrophy.

Counting is crucial. One way to get it back is to count outloud as each card is played.

Take note: This practice may be better suited to computer bridge than live.

Not a bridge post really

2007-08-26T10:40:00.000-04:00

For someone who doesn't like bridge books, I'm sure reading a lot more of them. This is due in large part to commuting by bus. The truth is, I still do not read at home very much. But I read during my lunch hour and on the bus. I'm enjoying it. I'd like to think I'm learning something.

The problem is I'm not learning/retaining as much as I'd like. There's an awful lot of to take in. I'm under the impression that there are techniques you can employ to boost the efficacy of your study time. Anyone know of anything I can read on the subject?

"I Love This Game"

2007-07-17T19:33:00.000-04:00

I'm reading on the bus, again. I was reading Hardy - 2/1, and then last night I played with Dano. Dan's my favorite partner. I thought about this some today. I get to play with some incredible people. Many of them are so much better than I that I always feel as though it's a special treat when I get to play with them. And it's great fun, but there isn't always the ease that comes with playing with someone who's in step with you. Dan's a stronger player than I, in many ways, maybe chiefly in that he's more consistent. But he's also still learning many of the same things I am. It's hard to explain why that's so nice. It just is. Of course, there are many people learning things, so it's not just that. I play some of my best bridge with Dan. And we have a meeting of the minds, where we can a feel for what might be going on with our CHO. Also, I think our outlook and approach to the game is very similar. I like that we don't do much discussing at the table, and that we review after.

Anyway, before I digressed I was about to say that I have been reading Hardy, with Dan. And I think we've agreed that we are going to read through, then think about where we're going to make changes. Because at this point, we're thinking we'll use everything, and really, I think we'll just end up confused. There's too much candy in the store to try it all in one day. So, we'll read through then decide what to incorporate and reread there. We might read Lawrence before doing that to see what else is out there, before settling on anything.

Well, we played in the 299er last night. We had some bad boards. Dan pointed out (very gently and tactfully) that I made some mistakes that were not things I'd usually do - he forgets how unfocused I can be, and he thinks I might need a brain rest. He finds that sometimes when we try to read and practice and read, practice there’s a dip in performance at the table, and we can use a little time to rest our brains.

So, with Dan's blessing I took a break from Hardy, which is nice because I've been trying to find time to read Sabine Auken's I Love This Game.

I have such hero worship for Sabine. You know, it's easy to explain why you think something, but much harder to explain why you feel something. What is my fascination with great women players? I cannot define it in a way that makes sense. But maybe it's not so unusual, really.

On Sunday, I went to the museum with my family. My father, who is getting older, I suppose, was very fascinated by the fact that there were two paintings by Miro that were done in his seventies and eighties. Maybe we like to see proof that greatness is possible, regardless of our age or gender or whatever. Maybe I just want to be Sabine when I grow up. Of course, it's too late for that, and I'm far more likely to turn out to be Mrs. Guggenheim than Ms. Auken at the table. But I can dream.

I'm surprised at how accessible the book is. I can follow it, I can understand it, and I'm excited by the exciting parts. She's a wonderful writer, and storyteller. If you haven't read this book, you might take a look.

Automatic trump lead

2007-06-07T21:37:00.000-04:00

1x-p-1y-p-2z-p-4z.

They probably need ruffs to set up their side suits. We need to cut down on them.

The Master List of Things Everyone Knows, but no one told me!

2007-05-12T09:37:00.000-04:00

I keep stumbling across little normalities that I had no idea existed. So, I'm making a list. - So I don't forget them. You all feel free to chime right in.

1. In this auction 2c-2d-3nt... 4c can be stayman, and that's fairly standard. (Is it standard enough to be the default?)
2 If you make a take out x and then bid 1nt on your next turn you're not showing shortness in openers suit, you're showing a balanced 16-18ish nt hand.
3 Make that 18-19ish.
4 Don't signal with your high cards if it means setting up the suit for the opps. (Ok, maybe that's a bit obvious for this list, but I sometimes need reminders)

I Have A Theory

2007-05-03T19:05:00.000-04:00

I have a theory, which is great cause for celebration around my house. Most days I don't just not have a theory, I barely have opinions and have to borrow some from other people. But I have a theory. It's this: I think whatever the relative merits of discard systems or lack or merits, it's got to be more profitable to just learn to discard wisely and signal well, before adopting one.

Recently I was talking with a friend about UDCA and she was shocked that I don't use O/E or Lav. And I didn't go into all this because I like her, and I didn't want to bore her, but I was thinking it all. I was thinking about when someone, about a year ago, pointed out to me that my discard was giving away a trick. I was so busy trying to signal what was in my hand that I didn't bother to think about what I was looking at in the dummy, what declarer might be planning or anything but the fact that I had an honor and p could lead that suit to me and I could take a trick.

Now, clearly, O/E as a device is in no way to blame for my shortcomings as a defender. But I find that not having to worry if my card is odd or even frees me up to think about what I should be discarding. It's one less distraction. Once I can be distracted by bright shiny things and still throw the right card I can revisit the issue.

On The Short List Of Things To Do

2007-04-20T22:35:00.000-04:00

I made a list of what I need to do to become good at bridge

#1 Develop good habits (always count. Always make a plan. Don't be lazy. Think.)
#2 Learn what hands are really worth, ( and accurately adjust with each new piece of information as valuation is a fluid thing that changes every time anyone bids.)
#3 Learn to be a better partner. Get a better grasp on when to ask p develop your hand, and when you want to help partner set up hers.
#4 Concentrate. Maintain focus.

Speaking of That

2007-04-15T12:24:00.000-04:00

Two of my favorite partners really like weak nt. I've promised to learn it. (Partnership is a reciprocal thing, isn't it? I try what they like, they try what I like, in the end you play what works for everyone, but you try it. - I went to culinary school. It's the same thing. You try it before you say you don't like it.)

I posted on the BB Forums asking about the benefits and risks of Weak NT. My favorite response came from JDONN, who made the explanation clear enough that I felt like I knew what was going on. I don't know that I'm going to like weak nt. But I do know that I want a good defense to it.

This or That?

2007-04-15T00:58:00.000-04:00

Something that comes up fairly often is the question of whether to learn something new, or try to master the basics. For a year, I tried not to add a single new convention, a decision that came on the heels of realizing that I had no idea what many basic bids meant. Sadly this still comes up. Sometimes in a perfectly normal auction I'll draw a blank. Its scary.

Many of my friends who are much better players than I tell me, "Don't worry about that now, Deb. First get a better grasp on standard." And I acknowledge that they've got a very valid point.

On the other hand, much of what I encounter at the table is not standard. It's nice to know what's going on. It's nice to feel that you're clued in. And of course knowing how the super-sonic forcing pass of death work, doesn't mean you have to play it. Sometimes it's just nice to know what it is.

What was standard yesterday becomes less standard tomorrow. Just today someone said. "No one plays Bergen anymore." Which is an exaggeration, but there's something there.

Is the examination of various options just a distraction at this point, or does it give a beginning player a better handle on what's going on? Can it hurt to think about new ideas?

Where p knows you have a sequence

2007-03-18T21:16:00.000-04:00

Lead the top of your sequence to show entries in high suit and bottom to show entries in a lower suit.

In balancing seat

2007-03-18T20:20:00.000-04:00

As an unpassed hand, 2nt is not unusual but shows a balanced 18-21.

Right Through The Pack

2007-03-07T19:14:00.000-05:00

I borrowed Right Through The Pack from the local library, and I think I'll have to buy it. It's one of those books I want to reread as I improve. It is a bit above my head, but I have some strategies for handling that. The most important of which is that I'm not reading the book like a novel. Instead I read a chapter at a time. This let's me really digest what that chapter was about.

I started out saying someone should right a book from the pov of the 2 of spades. So, did I enjoy that chapter? Yes, one of my favorites. My very favorite was the Ten of Diamonds's story of how a smart player threw away an ace. He started with
qx

AK

He had some clubs in the dummy he couldn't cash. So, by throwing away the ace, he didn't so much make an entry as force the opps to lead the red suits for him.

Something that came up at the table that I should have known recently was this:
KT9x - I lead x in nt. When I lead again, I must lead the T not the 9.

Recurring themes

2007-02-27T08:55:00.000-05:00

Strange how something will come up and then suddenly it's everywhere. I think it's the collective unconcious, but my friend the physicist assures me it's just coincidence.

The other day in a class in the 2/1 club an expert pointed out that when partner opens 1c in fourth seat it's almost never right to pass.

Today, I'm running to the library to pick up Right Through the Pack. I was lamenting that bridge text doesn't excite me like I'd like it to, and and that I'd learn better if somoene was writing them in narrative from the point of view of the two of spades (or do I mean Two Of Spades?) and it turns out someone did. Sadly, the Nassau County Library system doesn't have Bridge in the Menagerie.

From the table

2007-02-25T09:14:00.000-05:00

Last night I learned many things. I woke up this morning thinking of three of them.

The first of these, I found complicated and hard to grasp, but I think I've got it. Hopefully, I understand well enough to write about clearly.

P led the 8 of spades against 1nt. Declarer played K from K 4 in dummy. I held J523. What to play?

(We play UDCA) Turns out we should give attitude here. We play the 5. The 5 says I don't have the queen. Had the dummy had the queen the 5 would have denied the Jack and the 2 would promise it. Ok, so hopefully I can break this down. P takes a lead. 8 could be fourth best. P could hold the Queen, but so could declarer. And P might be wondering where that honor is. He knows I don't have a higher honor, because I'd have covered. So, it's the honor below the one played in dummy that we want to tell p about. With the honor under the one played we give positive attitude, without negative. We don't however do this with the 10.

With a five card major we want to bid when p opens a minor. I held QTX QTxxx XX XXX. Han opened a club. I passed. We got creamed in clubs. And you know thinking back it's not the first time this has happened. In fact, it might be right to bid a heart even without the Q spades.

The third thing last night, reminded me of something that Justin said last year. Sometimes in a suit contract you need to count your winners. Ax AQJx AKxxx Ax. I opened 2nt we play in 4s.

So, here we are:

KQXXXX xx xx xxx

Ax AQJx AKxxx Ax

I count my losers. Two clubs a possible heart, and with a bad split a spade. I didn't have a plan. I had a thingy (a thing like a plan, only less specific without the details.) And I thought, Can I somehow trump a club, and then I didn't pull trump and bad things ensued. And bad scores ensued. And yes, this is a story about how if you plan the hand this doesn't happen. However, it's also a story about counting your winners. 5 spades (six on a good break) 2 hearts 2 diamonds and a club is 10. The moral is, if you have your tricks, take them. Sometimes you have to stop and count your losers and go right on ahead and count your winners too.

Like a dog with a bone

2007-02-10T14:08:00.000-05:00

So, here we are, a few days later, and still I'm thinking about Bergen raises, whether to play them, and if not how to replace them. I've talked to a lot of very good and even great players. I've run it over in my head. Here's some of the conclusions that I've reached.

I play bergen because when I was learing bridge the first time I was taught by someone who played Bergen. He said : This is the only way righteous people play and any one who doesn't is a heretic who should be bbqed. G_d fearing folk play Bergen, he said.

So, I played Bergen.

But I didn't want to play something because a million years ago someone I no longer speak to said I should. There should be a better reason.

Some of those reasons include:
Many people play this way, and when you sit down with a stranger it's nice to have common ground.
Most intermediates who play 2/1 play Bergen, and when I'm looking to sit down at a table, it's often an intermediate table.
I think I like the preemptive bid 1M-3M.

Why try something else?
While I like the 1M-3M bid, I'm less excited about the jump raises. I'm not sure if they are descriptive enough to give up bids that reveal a great deal about my hand. For instance invitational jumps which show a 6 card suit, or minisplinters which show a distributional supportive hand.

I'd like to expand my vocabulary. Look at a new idea. Test something against what I'm used to and see which I like better.

I came up with the above all by my self. (Right or wrong I like to come up with an opinion. It makes me feel like I know something.) People have said some interesting things on the subject which I am weighing as well.

Bergen is easy.
The preemptive 1M-3M may not have as much value as I've assigned it, and that auction may be better used for mixed raises.

Inv js are common too, and a lot of people I respect use them.

I don't have to choose. I can play Bergen with some people (random pick up partners and those with whom I don't have detailed agreements) and something else with others.

What I'd like to try is to use 2nt as limit plus, the jump shift as an invitational suit showing bid, and maybe try these mixed raises all the kids are dancing to. Now I just need victims to bid them with me.

What if I gave up on Bergen?

2007-02-08T12:04:00.000-05:00

Assume this: p-p-1s-p-3c. This scares me. 3c has to say no spade support, 6+clubs and invitational values. This is scary. You're at the 3 level with no known fit and p could have opened on a good 8 count and a club void. What happens here?

In you're a passed hand you can't use Bergen, and really would you want to? That's what drury is for. And two way drury you can even show a fourth trump if you have one.

This all started when at a class in 2/1 an instructor said that bergen should be on in all seats. I question this. First, as just stated we have a bid for an invitational hand with support. Second if we don't have invitational values is it crucial that we go to the three level? Just because with 9 trump we can play at the three level, does it mean we must? If p makes a game try then we can, ith a 7-10 point hand, look at our 4th trump and factor it in. I don't think I want to use Bergen in all seats.

So, I asked an expert. (When in doubt ask an expert.) He said Bergen raises are silly. He suggested I give them up. Well, I believe him. I mean if you ask someone a question because you trust their expertise, isn't it foolish to dismiss their response because it wasn't what you wanted?

So, what if I gave up Bergen? What do I gain? What to I lose? I gain a way to show an invitational hand with a long suit.
What scares me isn't that I lose the ability to show a fourth trump on the hands where I have 7-12 points, though I worry about giving up my preemptive 1M-3M. What scares me is being out of step with the other players at my level. Now, I recognize that the players at my level aren't going to make me better. But playing a lot will. And they're the people I get to play with most.

What would happen if I gave up on Bergen Raises? And do I ever want to bid 3c invitational when p opens in 3rd seat?

The Forums

2007-02-05T17:53:00.000-05:00

On the forums today, there’s a discussion about leads. Something I’ve thought a lot about lately is leading from 3 small. What I decided is this: I want to lead low. The reason is that I think it’s often easier to discern from the bidding where the honors live, but it can be of great use to know the more about how the hands break down.

Again, I don’t have a firm enough grasp on logic to defend this position. I know some experts say I’m entirely wrong. Richie Reisig says anything but low from three. It’s an interesting question and one I may just ask on the boards and see what answers come back.

Also on the forums Fred Gitelman posted some thoughts on learning bridge. He said:

In response to this question: Fred,

What would you recommend to the student of basic bidding theory? Any particular good books or articles? Anything else?

I am sorry, but the only good books I know of on this subject were written more than 50 years ago. Probably for some they would still be interesting to read, but the game has changed so much since then that I expect most non-experts reading such books (if they could even find a copy) would end up becoming confused.

I see most of today's books about bidding as analogous to those spam-like ads "work part time from your home and earn $100,000+ per year!" or "eat all the chocolate you want and never gain any weight!". Most modern books on bidding I have seen are nothing but hype and what they are hyping is some bidding system or collection of conventions that will "improve your results by 10% without you having to learn the basics!".

Here is what I would suggest:

Don't give a great deal of consious thought to this subject in your first few years of serious play. Learn a simple bidding system and only the few conventions that are so popular that they have essentially become part of "standard bidding" (unfortunately there are now quite a few conventions that fall into this category).

Keep your mind uncluttered with conventions that you don't really understand and play as many hands as possible, ideally with either a keen regular partner who is at roughly the same level as you or with a much better player who understands that it will help you more to spend your time discussing concepts like "a jump shift is forcing to game but a reverse is not" rather than the latest flavor of modified DONT.

Your brain is a remarkable machine. You will learn a lot of what is important by osmosis, especially if you manage to avoid distractions (like trying to come up with the best possible scheme of rescues when the 10-12 1NT opening that you shouldn't be using get doubled).

If you can afford to hire a professional player to be your partner or to give you online lessons (or whatever) you should do so, but do not hire anyone unless they are highly recommended by a person you trust and respect. If the pro or teacher starts by telling you that you must learn to play "4 of our minor is always 1430 Keycard Blackwood with specialized followups to the trump Queen ask" then find someone else - this person is trying to sell you snake oil.

After each session you play you should think about the hands and talk them over with your partner. If your partner is at the same level as you, try to make friends with an experienced player who is willing to discuss the hands you are not sure about (and who is the type of player whose idea of good advice does not involve teaching you that you would not have had a problem if you used his preferred variety of Extended 2-way Reverse Drury).

If you are fortunate enough to have access to an experienced player who is willing to help you, do not waste this opportunity by asking him questions that are designed to boost your ego (by trying to convince him/her to agree that your disaster on a particular hand was your partner's fault for example). LISTEN to your expert friend/teacher even if you disagree with him or her. Then THINK about it later. Do not get defensive when you are told that one of your bids was horrible. Instead try to understand what went wrong with your thinking process so that you can learn from your mistakes.

Once you get to the point that you consider yourself to be solid intermediate player (this should take 2 or 3 years of hard work) you should buy a subscription to The Bridge World magazine (and if you have friend who has a collection of back issues try to borrow them). Each month this magazine has a feature called The Master Solvers' Club. Read it and think about what you read. Re-read it and think about what you read.

You may find the other features of this magazine to be interesting as well, but it is fine if you read only The Master Solvers's Club in each issue.

This will help you to learn things like:

1) That bidding is not just an exercise in language, it is also an exercise in logic
2) How strong players apply logic to solve unfamiliar problems
3) The axioms that form the basis of this logic (which are "the basic principles of bidding theory" that I referred to in an earlier post)
4) You will also learn plenty about the language aspects of bidding, but most of these lessons will not involve learning the names and mechanics of new conventions.
5) That bidding situations in which the "right" answer is not at all clear are far from rare, regardless of how well you play.

This will also help you to improve your bidding judgment. Good bidding judgment is largely a function of experience. Reading what a bunch of good players have to say about a bunch of interesting bidding problems allows you to benefit from their vast experience without having to experience the same hands yourself.

Keep in mind that in many ways "learning the basics of bidding theory" is similar to things like "learning the basics of probability theory" or "learning the mechanics of compound squeezes" - these are all just parts of the game. On any given hand any given part of the game is unlikely to matter. You can survive (and you can certainly enjoy bridge) without learning such things.

All players are better at some parts of the game than others. For most parts of the game it is not necessary to be highly proficient in order to achieve reasonable results at the table.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

The post is here.

I can however retain water

2007-01-29T15:25:00.000-05:00

A friend recently tested me with this: how do you play AJXX opposite K89x, for three tricks every time? I thought and pondered and pulled at my hair. I got out cards. I couldn't figure it out. Finally, the next morning, I went over all the options with him until we eliminated every bad choice. It took the two of us about twenty minutes. By the way once you know the answer, it's so very clear, and embarrassing that it was so hard to cipher out.

Last week, at work, I opened up Root's How To Play A Bridge Hand. (It's a great book) I read it about a paragraph at a time in between working. I'm sure I will finish the book this year. The first chapter is all about suit combinations. The thing I realize about reading is that my comprehension is sometimes pretty good, but I usually don't feel like I'll remember it at the table. I'm going to look for a way to make quizzes online and use that as a mnemonic tool.

I guess the upshot is that I'd like to be able to look at these problems a quickly reach the correct conclusions. Since that's not going to happen what I need is better habits and preparation at the table. I guess that means memorizing suit combinations. Consider this an open invitation to suggest quiz questions.

Its all about the goats

2006-06-25T13:59:00.000-04:00

Two Wednesdays ago Curtsolo did a class on the Principle of Restricted Choice, (yeah, pretty sure we wanted to go with title case on that) which is where if someone plays an honor and the honors could be split or he could be throwing from two, IN THE ABSENSE OF OTHER INFORMATION, you play for the other guy to have the other honor.

Yeah, this is where Monty Hall and the goats come in. Let's say you're in your chicken suit and Monty is asking if you want to keep what's in your prize, or trade for what's behind one of the two doors. Ok, it's two to one that the good prize is behind one of the other doors. Then to make it more interesting Monty shows you what's behind door numbe 2. Goats. He's not going to open the door with the car right? Take what's behind door number three. Switch. Because the door he didn't open is still two to one to be the car.

Good Stuff from Bob

2006-06-15T22:06:00.000-04:00

Leading akjt against nt lead the A asking for an unblock. KQT9 lead the queen.

_______________________________________________

You lead A from AK dummy comes down with qjxx you should shift. Almost every time. The exception is when, There are a lot of tricks in dummy and if we don't take it our trick may escape.

Very interesting

2006-06-06T16:59:00.000-04:00

Today, at work, we've been kind of busy, so I kibbitzed the bbo juniors tourney and the lesson after with half an eye. Frankly, the level of discussion is much higher than a lot of the other classes I get to attend, so I really wish I could pay closer attention.

This came up though, and I found it extremely interesting: 1d 1h 2h x What's X? Wellm it shows a heart honor and a declining to raise. Very interesting. Something I want to think more about.

Protecting Partner

2006-05-29T15:43:00.000-04:00

I was talking with someone last night and they introduced a new concept. You play negative docubles. Let's say you hold:

x Axx Akqxxx Ax

As dealer the bididng goes 1 d, 1 s, p, p, to you. My inclination is to rebid my diamonds.

No! We x. Because if p holds a hand full of spades they cannot. So, we x and if p converts it's probably right.

Three Kings

2006-05-26T10:32:00.000-04:00

I was speaking with Bob about 2h supernegative. I'd been debating with another beginner about whether 2 Diamonds shows a hand that is bad but not bust. (My feeling is that it doesn't imply anything negative, only that you have a hand without a suit good enough to justify getting in the 2 clubs opener's way. ) Eventually the conversation turned to the cost of bidding a suit without compelling reason. For one thing.. you wouldn't want to bid 2n unless you were sure you'd play in hearts, or at least, not in nt. Right? But Bob mentioned that the two nt bid for hearts is one of the things he most dislikes about the 2h neg. He said... and this is the interesting part... if you have three kings you want to be the declarer in nt. And how do you make that happen if 2n is hearts.

But can we extrapolate? If we have three kings do we usually want to declare period?