OCP Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

You are welcome to register if not an OCP user.
Please bear in mind, however, that this Forum is mainly
intended to support people learning or using OCP.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
 1 
 on: June 28, 2020, 08:40:39 PM 
Started by brian_m - Last post by brian_m
https://www.bridgebase.com/tools/handviewer.html?bbo=y&lin=pn|brian_m,kasey,IBracem,brucek|st||md|3S24QAH36AD5C689JK%2CS356H4789JDJC457T%2CS89JHTD36TQKAC3QA%2C|rh||ah|Board 25|sv|e|mb|1C|mb|p|mb|2C!|an|!c positive%2C GF|mb|p|mb|2D|mb|p|mb|3C!|an|5 controls|mb|p|mb|6C|mb|p|mb|p|mb|p|pc|HK|pc|HA|pc|H4|pc|HT|pc|CK|pc|C4|pc|C3|pc|C2|pc|C6|pc|C5|pc|CQ|pc|H2|pc|CA|pc|H5|pc|C8|pc|C7|pc|DA|pc|D2|pc|D5|pc|DJ|pc|DK|pc|D4|pc|H3|pc|CT|pc|H7|pc|S8|pc|HQ|pc|H6|pc|S7|pc|SQ|pc|S3|pc|S9|pc|SA|pc|S5|pc|SJ|pc|ST|pc|CJ|pc|H8|pc|D3|pc|D7|pc|S4|pc|S6|pc|D6|pc|SK|pc|D9|pc|C9|pc|H9|pc|DT|pc|S2|pc|HJ|pc|DQ|pc|D8|

I'm not really endorsing Mark's precipitous jump to 6 !C, in fact I thought we might have missed 7 !C when I saw the two hands, but once I saw all four hands I'm having great difficulty in finding a line which makes 12 tricks on the K !H lead. If East did not have the 10 !S then I could possibly do it by leading away from AQ !S and getting another entry to dummy by finessing  !S 9, but unfortunately East's  !S are K10x not Kxx, which puts paid to that idea.

If you let West ruff a  !D then she will continue  !H.

Can anybody see a line which makes the slam?


 2 
 on: July 07, 2019, 06:56:07 PM 
Started by OliverC - Last post by OliverC
Playing in tempo can be extremely important. Sometimes the slightest hesitation can give the game away, and your subtle subterfuges will all come to naught. Often you have to try to anticipate what might happen so that you can be ready to play in tempo so as not to give the game away. Holding up your King with Kx when Dummy holds AQJxxx in a suit with no side entries is a well known ploy (when you think Declarer only has 2 of the suit).

Another situation came up today in a hand I played with oktay. You are North, the Dealer at Game All. You are holding

North
 !S A432
 !H Q7
 !D QJ3
 !C J954

After 2 passes, partner opens a weak 2 !H . This is passed round to East, who protects with 3 !C , and West's 3NT ends the auction. You select the !H Queen as your opening lead and Dummy goes down. This is what you can see:

East (Dummy)
 !S Q65
 !H 9
 !D K94
 !C KQ10872

                North
                !S A432
                !H Q7
                !D QJ3
                !C J954

Using o/e signals, Partner plays the !H 4 on trick 1, which Declarer wins in hand with the King. Declarer cashes the !C Ace (Partner contributes the 3) and then tanks for half a minute. What are you thinking about in the meantime?

The play at trick 1 suggests that Declarer has !H AKxx or AK10x. You know about the !C Ace, but the current pause suggests that Declarer started with the stiff !C Ace, as otherwise his second Club would have hit the table already. Declarer will also have either the !D Ace or the !S King, but probably not both of those cards, or Partner will have opened vulnerable with something like a 2-count. If Partner has the !S King then you cannot prevent an entry to Dummy in Diamonds, but if Partner has the Diamond Ace, the whole hand might revolve around trying to prevent Declarer from reaching Dummy with the !S Queen. It's entirely possible that the hand is going off whatever the position, because you know Declarer probably only has 1 entry to Dummy, and the Clubs are not going to run, and if Declarer has the !S King you cannot prevent them from reaching Dummy with the Queen, but you need to work the hand out as best you can.

After his tank, Declarer plays the !S King. If you hesitate, even for a moment, especially if you going to duck, then you've given the game away, because you only have something to think about if you have the Ace. If you end up taking the trick, a pause doesn't matter, but a pause before ducking is foolish. oktay thought for about 10 seconds and then ducked.

As it happened, Declarer was clearly not paying any attention, because he then played the !S 10 and then, after another pause, ran it and lost to partner's Jack. A 3rd Spade went to your Ace (all following) and you could cash your 4th Spade (Dummy & Declarer discarding Diamonds and Partner a Heart) before leading the !D Queen, allowing partner to take Declarer's King with their Ace and return a Diamond to your Jack. You exit with your 3rd Diamond and Declarer has to concede 1 Heart trick to South for -2.

This contract was probably doomed from the start, but you have to realise that You can work out that Partner has the !D Ace or the !S King, but Declarer cannot be sure. From their viewpoint South might or might not have the !S Ace and/or the !D Ace, so best to keep them guessing.

 3 
 on: June 30, 2019, 05:58:45 PM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by DickHy
Hi, Jim and John, many thanks for replying

... and also to Brian for the alternative treatment regime.  I will pass that on to my partner and we can chat about it.

One thing that occurred to us after I posted was that over 3N responder could make a slam try ... as one might in a 2/1 or SAYC system when thinking about a minor suit slam.

The positive 55 responder would initial reply to the 1C opening with the higher ranking 5c suit, so over the 3N sign-off by opener, responder could bid the lower suit.  In the normal fashion, opener could reject the suit(s) by signing-off in 4N, or could accept the lower suit by cue bidding an ace in the two suits responder does not have.  If opener preferred responder's first suit, he would bid that at the 4-level.  After acceptance/choice presumably bidding would have to be cues/RKCB.

This sort of scheme might work well for 65 hands when the 6c suit is lower ranked - as it was in the example in the post - because when responder bids his 5c suit over 3N it will be of higher rank than the first suit he bid.  Thus, the first suit must be a 6-carder.  Opener could proceed as above: cues to accept, 4N to sign-off, 5x to choose the 5c suit.

Of course the scheme won't work with 65 hands when the 6c suit is higher ranked, because opener will not know from the 4y  bid over 3N that responder is 55 and not 65.  Maybe then, responder should rebid his 6c suit over 3N.

All that seems much more tortuous than the alternative treatment.

My partner and I also use a hybrid system with a simplified version of Asking bids after 1C - positive, but we use alpha, theta and iota, gamma, eta and epsilons. 

Anyway, thanks for responding guys,

all the best

Dick


 4 
 on: June 29, 2019, 05:50:05 AM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by brian_m
Hi Dick,

Good to see you playing OCP and discussing tweaks with partner.

IMO, you perfectly bid the sequence according to OCP doctrine. In regards to partner showing  !D first, I think everyone would do the same. With 8+ HCP and 5-card  !H & 6-card  !D, the only time I would show the 5-card Major first is when the Minor is significantly weaker. I believe that is Oliver's doctrine, too.

Anyway, Brian created a nice gadget for showing two-suited Responder hands with 8+ HCP. 1 !C-2 !H [alert] showing 8+HCP and promising two-suits. Of course, to incorporate this in your system, you need to modify your 4441 8-11 HCP Responder responses. I believe Brian suggested making 1 !C-2 !S showing 4441 8-11 HCP and showing a singleton in one of the Major-suits. Similar to 1 !C-2NT [generic singleton in the Minors]. You would also have to adjust your subsequent Eta responses to allow the additional first step "oops! you Eta Asked in my singleton suit."

Brian can elaborate better (and correct me as needed). I think Oliver has no problem with OCP partnerships playing in this matter; but I seriously doubt if it will ever become part of OCP standard. Although it is a tweak I use, and I believe Brian continues to endorse it, adding it as standard OCP just adds another level of complexity to a standard system that is already quite complex [and we are talking the Simple System  :D].

John

Maybe the information in the alternative treatments forum is not up to date. I'll go take a look...

One quick check later...

The information in the alternative treatments forum is correct, provided you notice the amendment in red to my original posting, and read down to the bottom of the thread to see what we ended up with.

The two and three suited positives which Georgi and I devised, and Michael and I now play, are as follows

1 !C - 2 !H = 8+ HCP with any 5+/5+ two-suited hand except for both minors. In other words, the 2 !H bid must promise at least one 5+ card major.

1 !C - 2 !S = ANY 4441 shape with either 8-11 or (rarely, obviously!) 16+ HCP.

1 !C - 2NT = 8+ HCP with 5+/5+ in the minors. We found that we had to take this out of the 2 !H bid to get the responses to work properly.

1 !C - 3 of a suit = the standard suit below the singleton 4441 of OCP, but these bids are limited to 12-15 HCP. It's obviously very rare for responder to have 16+ 4441 shape opposite a 1 !C opener, but we found we could handle that very easily within the 2 !S response, so we moved those hands into that. After 1 !C-2 !S Opener just assumes that Responder has the 8-11 hand initially, as will be the case on the overwhelming majority of occasions. For those very rare occasions when responder does have 16+, they just continue on after opener (presumably!) signs off in game.

If anyone wants the Adobe PDF of this scheme, with all the continuation bids, send me an e-mail (or PM me your e-mail address on here) and I'll send it to you.



 5 
 on: June 29, 2019, 02:29:38 AM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by Jimmy
Dick,

Jimmy plays a hybrid system that he developed, I thought he had a similar idea to Brian's, too. Maybe he can elaborate.

John

Hi John,  Yes we play a hybrid system which is somewhat natural and allows either opener or responder to begin inquires/cues once trump is established.   In this sequence we would show the  !H suit first for two reasons,  first (and primarily),  it takes up less bidding space (while forcing to game) and allows opener to better define their hand at a low level,  second,  it shows the 8+ points with 5+  !H's, the longer  !D's can be shown with repeats or a jump. 

 6 
 on: June 28, 2019, 10:46:11 PM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by lute57
Dick,

Jimmy plays a hybrid system that he developed, I thought he had a similar idea to Brian's, too. Maybe he can elaborate.

John

 7 
 on: June 28, 2019, 10:43:54 PM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by lute57
Hi Dick,

Good to see you playing OCP and discussing tweaks with partner.

IMO, you perfectly bid the sequence according to OCP doctrine. In regards to partner showing  !D first, I think everyone would do the same. With 8+ HCP and 5-card  !H & 6-card  !D, the only time I would show the 5-card Major first is when the Minor is significantly weaker. I believe that is Oliver's doctrine, too.

Anyway, Brian created a nice gadget for showing two-suited Responder hands with 8+ HCP. 1 !C-2 !H [alert] showing 8+HCP and promising two-suits. Of course, to incorporate this in your system, you need to modify your 4441 8-11 HCP Responder responses. I believe Brian suggested making 1 !C-2 !S showing 4441 8-11 HCP and showing a singleton in one of the Major-suits. Similar to 1 !C-2NT [generic singleton in the Minors]. You would also have to adjust your subsequent Eta responses to allow the additional first step "oops! you Eta Asked in my singleton suit."

Brian can elaborate better (and correct me as needed). I think Oliver has no problem with OCP partnerships playing in this matter; but I seriously doubt if it will ever become part of OCP standard. Although it is a tweak I use, and I believe Brian continues to endorse it, adding it as standard OCP just adds another level of complexity to a standard system that is already quite complex [and we are talking the Simple System  :D].

John

 8 
 on: June 28, 2019, 10:03:06 PM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by Jimmy
Perhaps someone would help with this, please.

I held AKxxx Kxx - AKQxx and partner had xx AQxxx KQJxxx -

The bidding (not necessarily correct!) went 1C - 2D - 2S (alpha) - 2N - 3C (iota) - 3D - 3N sign-off

My partner wondered if 1H would have been a better positive response to 1C, but the diamond suit seemed too strong to ignore.  But whichever suit was first bid by responder, the second suit seemingly might be lost.  We started discussing a special scheme for a positive responder who is 55(+), then realised we had soon gone beyond our grasp.

Admittedly this is an unusual hand.  Is there a scheme in OCP after 1C to handle a 55/65 positive responder?

best wishes

Dick     

Hi Dick,  I am a novice OCP player,  but do play a modified precision system using some of the OCP sequences.  It is my general understanding that it is best to bid the 5 card major over the 6 card minor (with a few exceptions). 

But,  on the other side of the coin is this,  what if Opener had this hand:


 !S  AKxxx
 !H 
 !D  Axx
 !C AKQxx

Opener has one HCP more.   ;D

I am sure experienced OCP er's will comment.  JMO

Jim

 9 
 on: June 28, 2019, 07:45:24 PM 
Started by DickHy - Last post by DickHy
Perhaps someone would help with this, please.

I held AKxxx Kxx - AKQxx and partner had xx AQxxx KQJxxx -

The bidding (not necessarily correct!) went 1C - 2D - 2S (alpha) - 2N - 3C (iota) - 3D - 3N sign-off

My partner wondered if 1H would have been a better positive response to 1C, but the diamond suit seemed too strong to ignore.  But whichever suit was first bid by responder, the second suit seemingly might be lost.  We started discussing a special scheme for a positive responder who is 55(+), then realised we had soon gone beyond our grasp.

Admittedly this is an unusual hand.  Is there a scheme in OCP after 1C to handle a 55/65 positive responder?

best wishes

Dick     

 10 
 on: June 27, 2019, 11:49:18 AM 
Started by OliverC - Last post by brian_m
The hand was in a duplicate at Stratford-on-Avon BC, when I still lived in the UK. Not surprisingly, we got a visit from the TD on the following round because the next table just couldn't believe the contract. We'd been waiting for the TD call.  ::)

When I told him what had happened, the (playing) TD probably violated Law on providing UI (can a TD's announcement provide UI? Interesting theoretical question...) by telling the room there was a very unusual contract on board number whatever it was, the entry on the traveller was correct, and please don't call him to query it! 

I can't honestly say I blamed him...  ;D



Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10