[eagles123]

So my regular real life partner is a pretty good card player but his bidding is limited, and we don't play too many conventions. To give a rundown of what we play at the moment

2/1 game forcing
15-17 no trump
short club
reverse benji (i know i know - i've tried arguing it)
stayman
weak 2's in the majors
michaels/unusual no trump
jacoby 2nt
splinters/cue bids
transfers over a no trump (3 way)
1430 keycard
inverted minors
carding = standard everything

anyway my partner now wants to expand our range which i'm delighted with, but my question is what is the biggest priority - knowing my partner we should definitely add one thing at a time rather than all at once!

Thanks

Eagles

[wank]

2 way cb?
lebensohl in general, but most importantly (imo) over reverses?

[Cyberyeti]

wank, on 2016-May-10, 15:55, said:

2 way cb?
lebensohl in general, but most importantly (imo) over reverses?

Agree Lebensohl is important, although I think it's most important in 2♥-X-P- or 1♥-X-2♥- type auctions.

Some form of checkback is also important.

More important is to understand your style, how aggressively you open/overcall, what does a preempt look like in each seat/vul etc

[hrothgar]

Negative doubles

[eagles123]

hrothgar, on 2016-May-10, 18:08, said:

Negative doubles

already played - should have put in original list

[nige1]

Card-play conventions e.g. Smith peters or Prism.
Competitive conventions e.g. UCB, FJs, NFJs, 2N = good raise, UNT, Michaels, Jump-cue asking for stop, Raptor over a short 1♣ opener.

[hrothgar]

My understanding is that you might want to focus on horizontal versus vertical placement of cards when on defense or perhaps a nuanced system of coughs and sniffles.
These seem to yield some really impressive results.

On a more serious note, I suspect that extending your defensive carding agreements will probably give you the best return on investment.

[Hyperon]

Lebensohl would be for me the most important because auctions can get very nasty and vague without it.

Playing 2/1, I would not feel comfortable when I don't have a serious/non-serious bid available.

[Vampyr]

Why do you want to add to your collection of conventions for the sake of it? Determine which hand-types you find yourselves unable to handle well, and look for a way to handle them better.

In the meantime, you could work on defensive carding.

[TylerE]

Lebensohl. Useful in so many types of auctions.

[rmnka447]

It's important to review and be sure you have a thorough understanding of the possible bidding sequences for the things you already play. It's one of the real advantages of a long term partnership. This depth and detail of understanding gives you a huge leg up on most opponents. Even when you get into unfamiliar territory, knowing how your partner thinks and bids can help you figure out what's going on. I'm sure this "being on the same page" is at the heart of what world class pairs like Meckwell mean when they say they have hundreds of pages of bidding agreements.

It's more important to be able to use the tools you have well than to have lots of tools that you are less certain how to use. Also, every new tool has an overhead in memory associated with it. That burden can have a cost especially when under pressure. So, be judicious in what you add.

I think your partner's one thing at a time approach is a good one. One way to do that is to review where you have the most problems with the way you currently play, then find the tool that helps solve that problem. That's good in several ways. First, you won't be adding tools just to add tools. Second, you'll have a real reason and understanding of why you are adding the tool. Finally, you'll be able to evaluate if the tool has helped and how much it has helped. If it proves a dud, you have good reason to jettison it.

I also agree with recommending Lebensohl. The place I'd start is with the Lebensohl 2 NT response to the double of a weak 2 bid. It does a lot to clarify what the advancer responding to the double has.

[phoenix214]

Id go with the following:
Rusinow leads, Obvious shift, from conventions sf 1NT(if you play forcing), if not that most likely either some lebenshol or gazilli.

[Tramticket]

Before adding conventions, make sure you really know your system fundamentals. Which bids are forcing? game forcing? non-forcing? When are you showing attitude / count / suit preference in your carding? Are you confident that you know your partner's answers to the same questions.

When you get to add conventions I would pick:
Lebensohl
Check-back (whichever version)
Multi 2D instead of Benji

Natural carding is great - no need to change.

[Zelandakh]

If you are playing MPs then I think you usually gain most from improving the competitive bidding agreements. An obvious area where you are lacking is a 1NT defence and that is the first place I would start. UCBs would be another obvious suggestion along with Lebensohl/Rubensohl, fit jumps and support doubles. On the non-competitive side, the biggest omission is checkback, which should definitely be high on your wish list. You could introduce your partner to a simple form of NMF immediately and perhaps build it up with more detail over time.

After these, I think you would be best off taking stock and analysing hands to see where you are dropping the most MP/IMPs while your partner builds up some familiarity with the changes. It might well be that you are better off adding depth to your existing arsenal (1NT structure, NMF, etc) than adding new stuff. Most of all, get a feeling for where your partner feels unsure. If you are able to build up their confidence in those areas it tends to raise their entire game.

[Jinksy]

Three weak 2s?

Failing that, Lebensohl seems to be the only one from the original list that makes some unbiddable hands biddable.

[Tramticket]

Zelandakh, on 2016-May-11, 03:20, said:

If you are playing MPs then I think you usually gain most from improving the competitive bidding agreements. An obvious area where you are lacking is a 1NT defence and that is the first place I would start. UCBs would be another obvious suggestion along with Lebensohl/Rubensohl, fit jumps and support doubles.

Good points - playing in the UK, a defence to a weak NT must be a very high priority (I didn't spot that omission). UCBs are also a must.

[P_Marlowe]

Lebensohl, but more in the direction of Good / Bad.

You encounter interference, and you need a way to handle this interference.
Neg. Double handle low level interference quite well, but Lebensohl will help
you to improve the handling of higher level interference.

Also some kind of NMF / Checkback, 3rd suit forcing, but is this uncontested.
You can keep it simple, simple will do fine.

Basically I would go by frequency.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[kenberg]

I have some of the same issues with a current partner. Lebensohl in various situations is certainly very useful. He and I are not currently playing it over reverses and I hope that we can soon. 1C-1S-2H. Sometimes responder holds a club fit and six points, sometimes a club fit and twelve points. What to do?

I do not think you often want to bid 2NT to play after 1C-1S-2H, so it is natural to find an artificial use for it. Now after 1C-1S-2D you have to decide whether 2H or 2N should be used as an artificial bid, I suggest going with whichever he prefers. And there are other things to be talked out. But I don't see any way to resolve simple follow-up problems without some sort of Leb type of agreement.

New minor forcing has been around forever. (Once called PLOB for "petty little odious bid") He might well be open to its use in its most basic form: 1x-1M-1NT-2y where y is the other minor if x is a minor and y is clubs if it begins 1H-1S-1NT.

As I am sure you agree, it is essential to set exact boundaries. With the pard mentioned above it recently went, in an uncontested auction, P-1D-1S-2D-3C-P. I had the diamond hand, I figured pard had clubs to go with his spades. No, he meant it as new minor. I am ok with playing 1C-1S-2C-2D as a new minor artificial bid but even that I was not aware we were doing. The 3C nmf is crazy, I think. And whether nmf should still be on opposite a passed hand is not clear. Also, I don't care much for nmf over 1m-1M-2NT. After 1D-1S-2NT I might well want to explore for a club slam. Lacking some more advanced gadgetry I like playing all bids as natural and forcing over the 2NT rebid. Incidentally, also after 1D-1S-1NT you might occasionally (but far less often) want to explore for a club slam. Presumably the nmf bid of 2C, then followed by 3C, allows for this. And, if over 2C partner, holding good values and three spades, bids 3S with the expectation you have five, then 3NT shows that the 2C was a slam try in clubs.

I mention these things because perhaps your partner's reluctance is based on bad experience with conventions. Having things written down will minimize disasters, and going to a trusted source (as opposed to me, for example) and playing the convention as recommended by that source saves a lot of time and contention. Mike Lawrence has a CD on conventions, I often try (but rarely succeed) to convince a partner that we could play a convention just as Mike says, how bad could this be. Or you could use a different source, no one source covers everything. Alas, most players know "the right way" to play a convention, they often do not feel the need for discussion because "everyone knows how it is correctly played" and so ...

So good luck.

[PhilG007]

I remember one year at a congress I played against a married couple whose
convention card stretched to 4 pages(!) It was so complicated that when a conventional
bid was made,the other player had to leave the table while their partner explained the
significance of the bid. They often got in quite a pickle trying to remember all their
fancy gadgets and usually ended up with inferior results. I think that should be a
salutary lesson in taking on too much 'baggage'

[Cyberyeti]

PhilG007, on 2016-May-11, 13:21, said:

I remember one year at a congress I played against a married couple whose
convention card stretched to 4 pages(!) It was so complicated that when a conventional
bid was made,the other player had to leave the table while their partner explained the
significance of the bid. They often got in quite a pickle trying to remember all their
fancy gadgets and usually ended up with inferior results. I think that should be a
salutary lesson in taking on too much 'baggage'

3 questions before adopting a convention:

Is it effective when used.

Is it more useful than the natural bid it replaces. (frequency of occurrence comes into this)

Am I going to remember it.