Hi Bobby,

I was just wondering what (if anything) was going through other declater’s heads here. There might be a sliggt concern about trumps being 4-0 or 3-1 and a cross ruff might run out of steam but there are 4 rex winners a slow club and 4 spades so it takes effort to go off unless clubs are 5-2.

Regards,

Iain

Hi Iain,

Without meaning to do so, your post is just a product of your table confidence, a quality not all, in fact, likely many fewer than you suspect, possess.

The lesser experienced player first sees, only three potential losers (2 clubs and the trump ace), similar to the confident but somewhat unwise boxer feels as he enters the ring, “I am gonna give him a left jab, then a right cross, followed by a haymaker punch to the jaw and it’ll be over in the 1st round”, failing to think about what his wily opponent will also be doing at the same time.

Yes, and no doubt, it is declarer’s duty when thinking before playing to trick one (I hope), as to what dangers lurk to which I can eliminate.

Failure to employ that caveat has (as a Brit or a Climie would agree) put paid to many contracts there for the taking.

A famous former US President, Theodore Roosevelt, once said, “speak softly but carry a big stick” how about, “think broadly but always toward making one’s contract” before playing to trick one as declarer?

Easy for me to say before realizing, through the years, all the contracts I have had swept away by not doing.

I suspect the answer is implicit in the last words of the column’s second sentence.

As one famous expert said (Sheinwold?), if an alarm bell rang when a key decision point arrived, almost all would get it right. The problem is that every bid and every play over 24 – 28 hands per session, 2 – 4 sessions per day, over the course of a tournament could be just such a decision point. Unlike programmed algorithms, humans have limits and triage their attention/energy to points where the decision points are clear or, at least, more easily recognized.

This hand is deceptively simple yet, w/o seeing all four hands, it is probably easy to get wrong when nested in amongst (~5 bids per hand) x (12 card play decisions per hand) X (24 hands per session) X (2 sessions per day) X (3 days per tournament min) = ~9,000 other decisions.

Hi Jim2,

Yes, many of our regular posters have at least suspected, that you tended to be numerate.

However, now slightly over 100% of them have seen that fact confirmed and in NT.

However most pair tournaments consist of 26+ hands, not 24, at least 2 sessions per day and usually more than 3 days (I’m not touching your 5 bids per hand, even with a 10 foot pole).

You have probably been ultra conservative with your estimates and to follow through with the blockbuster question, How many of those 9,000++ decisions do the top world bridge players get right?

My guess is, and I certainly do not know, but I would guess no more than a ratio of 1 in 3 since, when merely basically following suit with a low card there has to be one of several which could be played (usually for deceptive purposes, others for some sort of legal signal) which, in fact, are not.

So that in conjunction with deciding on lines of play there probably are many hands which even good players do not play a single correct card (at least in the proper order) so while I agree with your basic thesis, I think you are much too kind to everyone to whom you inferred.
(of course, present company is always excepted).

Finally and in regard to your over the top handling of numbers, I will expect you to never lose another bridge World Championship, but will, of course, not consider the logistics, of you having an opportunity to play in one.

Hello Bobby
First, Best Wishes for 2019 to you and Judy, and to all those who drop in here to learn, to help educate and often entertain!!

Now, about dropping Transfers and begin playing Two-way Stayman over 1NT:
Could you kindly make summary comment on:
(1) the expected benefits, and
(2) would it be appropriate for those playing a typical 2/1 system and strong 1NT (i.e. not playing a strong club and weak 1NT).
Having answers in your words will help me in discussions with some current Partners.
Thanks

Hi Clarksburg,

I’ll try to give a non-biased view for preferring 2-way Stayman over 1NT (15-17 or its environs) to Jacoby Transfer (JTB). (However I suggest transfers over 2NT or, of course, NT which starts with 2 clubs.

Advantages to transfers over 1NT: 1. In the absence of interference it will likely get the play from the right side of the table with the opening lead coming up to the strong hand.

2. Certainly more tournament players are familiar with JTB allowing less forgets with non-established partnerships plus the advantage of not having to learn a new method.

Advantages to 2 way Stayman TWS:

1. It immediately tells both partners the expected strength of the responder to 1NT. 2C=0-9, 2D=10+

2. It takes a full round of bidding away from the opponents, since transfers require at least 2 rounds, but an immediate sign-off at 2 of a major could and often does, end the bidding.

3. It prevents a lead directing double by the LHO of the partner of the 1NT opener and also forces a higher level for him to have to bid at the 2 or 3 level.

4. I believe that the opening lead advantage by Jacoby players is significantly overrated. (only by my experience, not anything to offer scientifically).

5. Also when playing JTB and partner responding 2 clubs Stayman, if the 4th seat bidder intervenes, it is nice to know the type hand partner has (F or NF) for the NT opener.

When going to game anyway it is OK to bid 2 clubs when holding a game hand, if one is very weak in diamonds and prefers to not allow his LHO to double 2D for the lead (needs to be alerted).

Finally much more (not necessarily pluses or minuses) science which can be added such as 4 level transfers and 3 level major suit bids to show shortness (with either JTB or (TWS).

#2 above is likely the greatest advantage since the defense often has only one shot at the apple, giving advantage (one way or the other) to the side preventing the calibration of the defensive hands. Experience has indicated to me that perhaps while playing against very good players the simple 1NT P 2 Spade sequence has provided substantial gains since the 4th seat player cannot now pass and expect another chance, causing him to make more mistakes than against JTB.

In answer to your specific request 2 way Stayman IMO is even more valuable while playing a weak NT since its frequency occurs more often offering more opportunities to take advantage of less bidding room for those worthy opponents.

You hit the bull’s eye, with great clarity, on the target of my ask.
Many thanks!!

As awarded to members of the King’s German Legion.