Unis à la table : la magie du bridge en équipe
J’adore le début de l’automne, le temps ralentit et on peut profiter d’ap...
By Chris Willenken
I’ve been around the bridge world for long enough to be asked a lot of questions. One that gets repeated time and again is, “How can an average player work to become a really good player?” My answer may surprise you.
First and foremost, it's important for aspiring players to avoid the trap of memorizing conventions. Because top players generally play more conventions than average players, it's tempting to associate knowledge of more conventions with bridge skill. And it’s true that discreet use of extra conventions beyond Stayman, Blackwood, and the like does make an expert pair more effective. I estimate that added effectiveness at about 1%!
If you’re an expert competing against other experts, that 1% might matter. However, if you're not an expert player, you can improve a lot faster by ignoring extra conventions and focusing on other aspects of the game. And remember that if you or your partner frequently misunderstand each other’s conventions, it’ll inevitably cost you points in the long run.
Once you've avoided the convention trap, you’ll have time to focus on developing the most important bridge skill: counting the opponents’ hands. There are so many things to count in bridge. Top players count high card points, shape, and tricks. They use both the bidding and the play to help them get a complete picture of each deal. Obviously, when they figure out what everybody holds, they're going to get great results.
If you’re not used to counting, counting everything might seem hopelessly out of reach. However, if you assign yourself small short-term goals, you can make reliable long-term progress. If you aren’t counting anything currently, first work on counting the outstanding trumps. Once you can reliably count trumps, try also to count the opponents’ remaining high card points based on what they showed in the bidding. When you have succeeded at those tasks, you can work on counting other suits as well, and eventually you will be counting everyone’s entire distribution! But the key is to achieve true mastery of each task before you move to the next. If you continue to assign yourself realistic short-term counting goals, you'll improve slowly but surely over time. (And not having a bunch of conventions distracting you will definitely help.)
After counting, the next most important skill is reviewing your past results impartially. This process enables you to stick with winning strategies and abandon losing ones. For example, perhaps you like opening weak two bids in third position with five card suits. In that case, keep track of your scores when you do it. Are you showing a profit overall? Does the vulnerability factor in? How about suit quality? For many players, this analysis is challenging because they develop an emotional investment in their current strategies. If you want to win more, objectivity is the key.
In my experience, most players long remember their successes and quickly forget their failures. With the best players, the opposite is true, because they're constantly looking for opportunities to improve their own games. It’s liberating to know that even the best players in the world are constantly making and learning from their mistakes. When we acknowledge that bridge is a lifetime learning process, it's easier to own past errors as a first step towards avoiding future ones.
Chris Willenken is one of the world’s top bridge players. In 2022, he won the Vanderbilt Knockout Teams and earned a silver medal in the World Mixed Teams. He offers private playing lessons on BBO.
[…] my last article, I advised improving players to avoid spending time learning new conventions, and we talked about […]
All very interesting,still learning at 85, where can I read more?
Super interesting and most useful! pity that I am so bad at counting....after a while I get it right on my fingers.....make up for it with good memory and plenty of logic!
Very useful advise. I will start applying some of the principles mentioned that I don't currently consider.
All conventions look great on paper. Take T-walsh. Or its predecessor Montreal Relay (maybe Chris you are too young for the latter one). In practice these agreements have many drawbacks. One of these is the inability to bid 1C-1D-1H=unbalanced hand with 5 clubs and 4 hearts.
Yes, I fully agree with your views. Just applying simple rules like the LAW, or try to avoid bidding 5-over-5 are more worth than 1000 conventions.
I totally agree here. But I enjoyed reading the article. Definitely helpful.How much ever you play, you’re never perfect.Learning never ends, and with mistakes you learn more.Thanks
It is useful, but not as much as more players are using rule of 20 to open and/or opening in first seat with 8HCP as allowed by ACBL. Then what?
Very true and very helpful! I have another intriguing question: how about blindly returning partner's lead? A lot do that, I find it pretty wrong! And whatever else is true, the key to success here, I find, is having a regular parnter -- like in real life, no way without it.
Thankyou Chris. I've been playing bridge regularly for 3 years now. I am finding the more I learn, the more there is to learn. I have learned a lot of conventions, several versions of stayman, as I play with so many different partners in the club and online. I also observe that some very experienced pairs at our club often trip up over their multi two bidding.
I now play 2 over 1 because the robots on BBO do, and am encouraged by your comment that it prevails at the top level compared with SA. I have completed all the practice hands on BBO at least twice, and your comment on learning how to count and track the honour cards, hcp and suits against the expected distribution based on bidding, makes sense, as these contracts are otherwise impossible. I can only hope that I can eventually translate this skill from practice hands with unlimited time (and often two or more attempts), to real life games under time pressure. As you say, its mostly about making less errors than other people in the room.
Let me add one topic: in BBO-robot tournaments count your opponents.too
There is a saying of Albert Einstein:'Make everything as simple as possible,but not simpler.'
I suggest applying this to bridge game.Make your system as simple as possible,but not simpler.
Hi Ligaff,
Thanks for writing such a good and challenging post about the usefulness of conventions. Your example of a "maximal double" as a game try after 1S-(2H)-2S-(3H) is a good example to consider. First of all, that convention probably comes up once or twice a year for me, and I play many thousands of hands per year. So a player needs to remember the convention for the whole year just to improve their score a small number of times.
Second, and this is the key point that most people miss: if I am not playing the convention and I am forced to guess between 3S and 4S, there is probably only a small average loss. Let's say I have a hand right on the borderline, so I will guess wrongly half the time. I'd estimate that when I bid game wrongly, game is still probably a 40% contract on average. And when I miss game wrongly, game is still probably only 60% on average. So on the 50% of the cases where I guess wrongly, I cost myself 20% of the matchpoints (by taking the 40% side instead of the 60% side). That means that on average, I cost myself 10% of the matchpoints on that board: 20% half the time.
Is it worthwhile to hold this convention in my brain for the entire year knowing that it will probably gain me 10% on one or two hands? For me, yes, because there is no effort required to remember it. For most others, almost certainly no.
Hi Guy,
You are correct that it is difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of a general system (2/1, SAYC, Precision, etc.) based on hand-by-hand analysis. However, one can simply trust the judgment of world-class players! There is a reason that we do not see anything other than 2/1, strong club, and the occasional Polish club in the late rounds of the major team events. Those are the systems that have proven most effective over time.
The advice is worth all the gold, silver and diesel (as a friend puts it). It was as if written for me. I love to open weak 2 any position with 10-11 if they are not worth opening at one level. I think I've an edge but will keep track of the numbers now.
I generally agree with this good advise.
But I think a lot of players, including many top players, would agree that using more than a few basic conventions only makes 1% difference to their results.
Although I like the idea of evaluating my conventions using my results, the methodology is simplistic, because we pick up a lot of inferences from what is not bid. The methodology works well for the example given (opening a weak 2 in 3rd on a 5-card suit) but would be a terrible way to evaluate the use of a strong club convention. Because the main value of such conventions is that if pard opens, say, 1S, you know that she has a maximum of a 16-count (for example).
Brilliant!!!! I have taught bridge over the years and for some people who are keen to learn, it's been taught quite simply: to get them started and to keep them interested when they have struggled. These players are still able to bid and make slams.
Now I am playing weak 2's and bidding to the fit in overcalls etc plus all the other conventions that are used today. Yes they are helpful in bidding to the correct contract and the correct level but they sometimes cause confusion and misunderstanding too at times. There's a lot to be said for keeping things simple and it's fantastic to hear such an expert, as Chris is, saying this!
Brilliant article by Chris Willenken. I’ve been playing and learning Bridge for three years and I’ve been saying that counting is crucial. A few conventions are important but counting is vital otherwise you’re playing on guesswork.
As the great Andrew Robson says, “The three keys to becoming an accomplished Bridge player are counting, counting and counting.”
"top players generally play more conventions than average players"
It's also true - and sells the conclusion better - that top players have analyzed and rejected a great deal more proposed conventions than average players.
I concur wholeheartedly. Conventions are a strong part of the game. The point Chris was making was not to overuse or abuse conventions, simply for the sake of 'Playing Your Favorite Convention" at the bridge table. I ask my students to play no more that the 6 or 7 basic conventions, and work on learning to be excellent card players as declarer and defender. That is where you win tournaments in the long run.
A tradução para português é pouco clara por vezes...Better in english
Olá,
A tradução de nossos artigos é feita de forma automatizada pela Google. Como toda tradução via software, é imperfeita, mas ainda assim útil para quem não é fluente em inglês.
Thanks — great advice ?
I do not agree. Some conventions are VERY handy and partnerships who don't use them are at a distinct disadvantage. Example:: 1S - 2H -2S -3H. It is your turn. If you are not playing 3S competitive and double as all purpose game try, you are going to be totally in the dark. Most folks probably just be 4S instead of inviting. There are many other examples where an agreement (convention) makes things better. A convention tends to be "good" if it solves real world problems and does not give up much in return. The Grand Slam Force is so great because there just isn't much other use for the bid and in some spots, it is exactly what is needed.
But more importantly...Your article seems to imply that the judicious use of more conventions somehow detracts from other aspects of the game. We can, and should, study the rest of the game. But the fact that one's defense needs work does not somehow mean one should play a bare bones bidding system.
I will admit that some folks fall in love with conventions and use them as an excuse to make bad bids. And, of course, conventions and agreements that are not fully understood by both partners can create huge disasters. Using a convention without the corresponding hand can also create worse results. These problems are not solved by stripping conventions, They are solved by proper preparation. Expanding your range will, of course, not be without growing pains, but simply sticking to a limited set of agreements will cause your bidding to stagnate and you will always be swimming upstream. When I played competitive bridge, my partner and I were in the right contract far more often than not and in many cases, that was aided by agreements. Sure, sometimes the key component is really understanding how to bid and hand evaluation and conventions don't really matter, but it is very important to realize that properly handled agreements help with hand evaluation and such. If I can describe my hand more accurately via a convention, my partner is better placed to make a correct decision. There simply is no escaping the value of agreements both in general and in making better bidding decisions. Without a highly detailed set of conventions, one will never achieve expert level and will struggle to even have above average results in open fields.
Excellent advice
Great advice, I am a relatively new player and too many conventions are difficult to remember and take you on a slippy slope away from the basics. I have started doing exactly what Chris has advocated and my results are much better. Thank you for confirming my new strategy.
It is easier to try a new convention than to try and think.
Well explained, but nothing new for me, I am not a convention maniac, as some intermediate players are, Having good grip of basic things is much more important than adding extra conventions, and at times forgetting about them causing catastrophic results.
Certainly will help me thank you
"Like" straight forward advice. I'll take it and practice. Thank you!
I like what he says
very useful information.
Sorry I meant to give it 4 stars