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...
In the interests of balanced discussion, here's Barbara's response to Larry's recent article, Conventions. How many are too many? Barbara argues you should master the big 10 (not the big 4) if you really want to be competitive.
Hope you enjoy this friendly debate. As usual, let us know your point of view in the comments below.
Regarding my good friend, Larry Cohen’s recent article on avoiding most conventions; I told him at a recent ABTA Convention that simply put, he is bad for business! Considering I have written TWO books on Conventions: 25 Conventions and 25 More Conventions You Should Know! 🙂
I have nothing but huge respect for Larry as a teacher, author and player and mostly as a person. But his audience is a very gentle crowd. Many of my students aspire to become very competitive players and we encourage them to move into duplicate after just a few beginner lessons. Larry indicates that they need only 4 Conventions to play this wonderful game, and I will agree that they don’t need 50 of them, but 4 is way too few!
Larry says that his “Big 4” (Blackwood, Jacoby Transfers, Negative Doubles and Stayman) need to be understood inside and out. And, again, I would certainly agree that any convention needs to be well understood. But somehow, he has missed the other IMPORTANT 6 (Takeout Doubles, Weak Two-Bids, 2♣ Strong Artificial Opening, Jacoby 2NT as a Major Suit Raise, Roman KeyCard Blackwood, and Fourth Suit Forcing).
These additional 6 make up my “Big 10”. I am not suggesting that anyone should learn them all at once, but to be competitive, each one of these needs to be included. And, by the way, being competitive is FUN!
So take my list of the “Big 10”, add them slowly to your repertoire, so that each is “understood inside and out” as Larry suggests. And have FUN!
So, Larry, I will have to write another book called “Ten Conventions You Cannot Live Without.” This is 2 ½ times better than The Big Four!
Barbara is widely regarded as one of the world's best bridge teachers and is a household name in the world of bridge. Barbara is the author or co-author of 36 books, mostly with Master Point Press. She runs a School of Bridge in Toronto, Canada and travels the world teaching bridge. She and her friend, Patti Lee, have built four schools in Cambodia and have been sustaining these for twelve years. They also build toilets for Government schools and for families of impoverished village families, many of whom are landmine victims. They are currently digging wells and building water towers for Health Centers in remote villages in Cambodia. In addition, they have installed hundreds of water filters in rural Laos.
Find out more about Barbara on her website: www.barbaraseagram.com
After reading all the intelligent replies one feels almost like an informed judge to make comment. The point missing here is both authors have relevant points. What one must not lose sight of is the fact that more bridge would be universally played if it is fun and enjoyable. I play average duplicate bridge three times a week now in my retirement and socially once a week. The format is vastly different with the social game. What is more relevant is what Larry refers to as method of thinking. Those with retentive memory and similar method partners seem to get best results. After all this is a partnership game. Never forget it is the not so good players that earn you points. The game also has a way of humbling the masters every now and then. Discards are so varied, but roving seems to be ignored by most of you above. Yes if you are super competitive learn them all 25. If you are competitive and want to enjoy stick with Larry. His explanations are so understandable and easy. Enjoy this game above all and do not become tooooo gooooddd to play with lesser players only under sufferance. I have no smilie to add on my lap top. Cheers all. Mike.
Drury and New Minor Forcing come up way more often than Fourth Suit Forcing or even 2/1, IMNSHO. Can’t live without them!
Rosenkrantz double is one of the most useful. Used after my partner overalls as the responder. My double means I have at least 1 of the top 3 in his suit, no promise of points, this allows him to know if it's safe to lead as we don't usually get the bid as he is an overall.
Only play what you are comfortable with. There is nothing wrong with an auction which goes 1H-2H-3H-4H as opposed to 1H-3X-3H where X is whatever version of Bergen you may have agreed to play. And woe betide you if you’d decided to flip-flop the meanings of 3C and 3D and someone forgets! Like my partner of some 35 years and I keep cajoling people: ‘Don’t play conventions you can’t remember or don’t understand’. Bidding is merely a way of conversing. Sometimes a butter knife works just as well as a screwdriver.
For my part, the one treatment I try to persuade a competent partner to augment our card with is Inverted Minors are still ‘On’ after a simple overcall but not after a takeout double. Of course, you still have to clearly define what constitutes the floor. Such a phenomenal game.
Also missed but vital: two-way checkback, some sort of forcing minor suit raise below three of the minor, Lebensohl.
I believe conventions will eventually eat up the game. Folks will just bid and redeal, all is known, no need to play.
What nonsense. This wonderful game, and its predecessors, were played and enjoyed long before Stayman, Blackwood and even takeout doubles. No doubt that in competitive circles both system and conventions are necessary but not at my local country club where only Blackwood is known. all that is needed is a deck of 52 and both good credit.and good friends.
There is a difference between SYSTEM and conventions. System is the basic approach you use in your partnership bidding. For example, when you open 1H you promise at least 5 cards, right? NO, only if you play Standard American or derivation thereform like 2/1. If you use a different SYSTEM like Acol, 1H only initially promises 4 cards. In the Acol SYSTEM you prioritise bidding your LONGEST suit first with a stress on the majors if you have two equal length suits. Acol avoids completely bidding two- or three-card minor suits at the outset. How can opening a 2-card club suit be regarded as natural? What this shows is that different SYSTEMS have different approaches. CONVENTIONS can be grafted on to ANY system. Stayman is a covention, Jacoby Transfers is a convention, etc. Take out doubles are more part of the SYSTEM than they are a convention. 2C forcing opening is definitely part of the system and cannot be regarded as a conventione. It's interesting to note that Standard American and Acol have a very small but nonetheless significant difference in the continuation after a 2C opening.
Conventions are like golf clubs. If you just want a social game, carry four clubs in a small bag. If you want to win a serious tournament carry 14 clubs in golf cart and know how and when to use them all.
Thanks for an interesting debate.
While I agree with Larry that the first three "conventions" mentioned by Barbara are, in fact, not conventions, I disagree with him about limiting the number of conventions you play. If you play 30 conventions and struggle with remembering when they apply and how they work, more power to you! It could be said that limiting the number of conventions you play is a matter of laziness, not cleverness. I'm just sayin'. In the long run, it's just a matter of personal choice.
I am a fan of DONT. It is easy to learn, and in my opinion, superior to other conventions like Capp, Landy or Brozel. I have often used it, with some judgement, with 4-4 distribution, and would guesstimate the success rate at 80-90%, which is pretty darn good for any convention.
Larry : I am glad you covered the very corners I felt were missing from my bridge playing games. And I do like Jacoby 2nt which is the only one that doesn't actually belong with the others mentioned, which are basic bids to me.
I vry much depend on you and I also agreed with Barbara's response to you.
Together you make bridge an intoxicating game.
I am also a "Larry-o-phite". He has helped my game with his rational and logical system. However, I do agree with you that I would be lost without my take-out doubles and my Jacoby 2NT.
I still need to add RKC but am admittedly too lazy.
Thank you for your reply to him.
We all know that bridge is a great game with thousands of distribution possibllities, so 100% accuracy, whichever convention you use, is unlikely, why make it any more complicated than is, I'm with Larry. Over the years numerous players and teams have been banned from International Tournaments for cheating. Screens preventing eye contact with a partner are standard so if all these conventions worked that would not be necessary. Not even the screens have prevented cheating, there are videos of cheats at work on You Tube, Happy Bridging.
Cohen is right, you do not need all those conventions and complicated bidding systems
I have been a life master now for over 50 years and been in many tournaments, playing against the best like Roth, Stone and Barbara Rappaport even Blackwood himself. I even played with him for several club games at his Bridge Center back in 1964. He was a great player and always a gentleman at the table.
I absolutely agree with Larry. Certainly the first 3, takeout doubles, strong 2C bids and weak 2 bids are pretty universal. They are not alertable and you would be hard pressed to find anyone who does not play them. They are a standard part of SAYC. Why not call 5-card majors a "convention"? I say no. 🙂
I agree that Larry is bad for Bridge.
But before I explain, I wish to point out that Bridge does not default to a 'first-choice' game for almost everyone interested in casual games with friends. Bridge requires a partner who plays the same way you do and won't argue. Bridge requires silence so that the declarer can concentrate.. Other games are far more conducive to a friendly and supportive afternoon/evening with friends.
So why play bridge? It's not the masterpoints. I hate to break the bubble of all the pros out there - but nobody cares about masterpoints. They're fun and do the job to deliver unbiased recognition, but at the end of the day they are worse than skeeball tickets. At least you can trade the skeeball tickets in for a plastic worm that sticks to the wall. (Ok, some people care about masterpoints, but the masses in my neighborhood who have left formal clubs for social networks of Chicago really don't care about masterpoints.)
I would argue that people play bridge for the Dopamine hit. That huge feel-good hormone surge after doing something super clever in front of all your pals. Bridge delivers Dopamine hits. Gin Rummy - not so much. But when you dumb-down bridge and stop encouraging expansion of the tool-box, you are also mitigating how often any player is going to get one of those Dopamine hits. And then....you are left with Gin Rummy, which as we know is far more conducive to a friendly supportive afternoon or evening.
And I really can't think of anyone who works so long and hard at dumbing-down the game as Larry does.
I know Barb , and have several of her books and pamphlets/booklets. She is great!! As others have mentioned w]at defines a convention -almost everyone plays 5 card majors -is that a convention or just a normal way to bid. Certainly the 10 Barb has highlighted are vey important to know and play.
Is there any record of BS achievemnts as a player anybody should know about?
Since an opening bid at the one level does not promise that you can take 7 tricks in your hand there is a conventional element to all bids. If you play 5 card majors then opening yur better minor is clearly a convention (you are not promising "more than your share" of the suit).
Barb I have bought every book of yours that I can. I have also recommend all your books by saying borrow them from the library then buy your own copy. Audrey Grant is ok but. you are the best
I have been a "competitive" player for over 30 years (local, sectional and regional), with over 1700 mp's, and question WHY 4sf and RKC blackwood are considered "required" conventions-- since they duplicate ALREADY forcing bids. Yes, both of them are 'NICE TO HAVE" in your arsenal, but neither of them rises to the level of "required".
For MOST players, Larry's approach to conventions is reasonable-------while Barbara's is geared to the NATIONAL tournament player---- and not so much to the Sectional/Regional game.
I have both books, because I do have a slight competitive streak. When I was just brand new to bridge, I was buying a beginner bridge book and saw Barbara's books and bought them. I haven't really studied them too much yet, but after reading this will check out the big 10! My family doesn't play competitively much, but more for fun with family and friends. Thanks both of you!! 😊
Barbara, As you say in your book of 25 Conventions, it's not just that you should use them all. It's just that you should know what they mean when others use them.
I'm rather against too many conventions at Teams. I think that's a more natural game. But with the constant wish for competitiveness at Pairs. The extra conventions are a help, no doubt. Cheers - John
Why do those guys in world championship VU graphs have more than 4 conventions?
Way to go Barbara, you are the best.
Two of my favorite authors and teachers!! Really enjoy their dialogue!
Remember playing my first game of bridge in the college bar. No conventions we were all just winging it. Then someone said, oh by the way 2 clubs means I have a very strong hand, you can't pass!
Great reply Larry.
Hi Barbara,
The only thing you have wrong ... I am GOOD for business! 🙂 Nothing like controversy. As they say, there is no such thing as "bad press."
Actually, most of our "disagreement" comes more from what we consider a "convention." Let me take your added 6 and show that they are sort of in my Top 4...
Takeout Doubles: Absolutely essential. But I consider it part of bidding ...not a convention. Technically, though, I suppose you are right in that "takeout doubles" were probably the first "convention."
Weak Two-Bids: Another one where I consider it part of standard bidding when we teach opening bids -- not a convention. Nobody teaches strong 2's.
2♣ Strong Artificial Opening -- Yet another "non-convention" -- but part of beginner bidding education. Along these lines, where would we draw a line between "convention" and basic bidding? For example, is 5-card majors a convention? Should 1H and 1S openings have been in your Top 25?
Jacoby 2NT as a Major Suit Raise: Probably my "#5" -- but not something we "can't live without."
Roman KeyCard Blackwood -- Well -- Blackwood is on my Top 4. I don't think Keycard is essential.
Fourth Suit Forcing -- Also needed as part of standard bidding -- can't really bid without it. So, quite important in "my book."
One hundred times more important than conventions: Don't make dumb mistakes (in bidding or play). 🙂
I love Conventions! ...and I am still waiting for Larry's explanation of Reverse Caterpillar 🙂