[Fluffy]

Zelandakh, on Oct 1 2010, 09:12 PM, said:

TylerE, on Oct 1 2010, 03:52 PM, said:

The only proper place for stolen bid doubles is on my oppoennt's CC.

As Spyder suggests, Stolen Bid Doubles have their place. You probably already play at least one...1D - (1S) - X = hearts. Another popular one would be 1NT - (2C) - X = Stayman. The trouble comes when you try to play them generally.

I don't play either of those I play some revolutionary convention named take out double.

[jdonn]

Zelandakh, on Oct 1 2010, 04:12 PM, said:

TylerE, on Oct 1 2010, 03:52 PM, said:

The only proper place for stolen bid doubles is on my oppoennt's CC.

As Spyder suggests, Stolen Bid Doubles have their place. You probably already play at least one...1D - (1S) - X = hearts.

That's not a stolen bid double, that would be 1D - (1S) - X = spades. Nice try

[babalu1997]

jdonn, on Oct 1 2010, 06:38 PM, said:

Zelandakh, on Oct 1 2010, 04:12 PM, said:

TylerE, on Oct 1 2010, 03:52 PM, said:

The only proper place for stolen bid doubles is on my oppoennt's CC.

As Spyder suggests, Stolen Bid Doubles have their place. You probably already play at least one...1D - (1S) - X = hearts.

That's not a stolen bid double, that would be 1D - (1S) - X = spades. Nice try

there is a player at bbo who plays SAYC but "Bids nothing tricky"

i was kibbing this known expert pair, while she partnered with an unsuspecting expert-- who happened to be very advanced.

1 spades- 2 sapdes by her --- she actually had 5

partner thought it was michaels and some disaster ensued

when he left, she said

i told you, i bid nothing tricky

she is resourceful tho, one time she asked me to play at her table as opp

i said: only if you get a star player to be my partner

well, she did!!!

i haven't played with a star since

[manudude03]

Well they do exist in some places I guess...

1NT-P-2♦-X hey I wanted to bid that!

remove the pass, not good

[nige1]

babalu1997, on Sep 30 2010, 02:32 PM, said:

so, the partner does not show and you have to play with randoms, or maybe youa re lonely at the partnership desk. list the profile things which would prevent you from playing with a potential random partner.

TylerE, on Sep 30 2010, 02:51 PM, said:

Others I'd add:

I have more difficulty getting partners than Babalou or TylerE so I am less picky. If a partner leaves in the middle of a hand or ejects me from the table, I classify him as an "enemy" and won't play with him again but that's got nothing to do with his profile. Comments

• "Never lead trumps." John Maclaren only granted a few partner's a license to lead trumps "The Idiot's Lead".
• "Rule of 15." Convincingly refuted in a BBO post but still an article of faith to some.
  I admit these first two are a bit off-putting because they impugn my judgement. But I can tolerate all the rest
• "IN=16-18." or 15-17 is OK although 10-12 is more fun.
• "No transfer." works well for 9-11, 10-12 and even (strong) 11-14 notrump ranges.
• "Stolen bid doubles." seem fairly simple and natural.
• "Gerber anytime." reduces chances of reaching dodgy five-leve contracts.
• "1♦ =4+." is OK as long as you only open with four when 4441.
• "Strong 2s." Strong major twos fit in quite well with Multi, and relieve responder to 1M of the obligation of bidding 1N with dross.
• "Players from countries where the average club player learns precision as the first system." I like Precision -- ideal for learners.
• "Standard stuff like Stayman transfers neg x" is helpful to those who don't speak 2/1 as their Mother-tongue.
• "SAYC + Some modifier." Most system-names are like "Acol" -- they describe "An Attitude of Mind" rather than a set of conventions. But SAYC is a well-defined exception to this rule.
• "Misspelled conventions." Seriously?
• "I love this game". Some of us do
• "Play for fun". Ditto

[Little Kid]

When picking a random I usually ignore their skill level and look at their profile instead as it seems to be a better indicator. Some things I would avoid are:

- 16-18/ strong 2s indicates weaker and maybe rusty players (in my experience on BBO anyway).
- People who feel the need to list basic things like stayman, transfer, weak 3, natural...
- Stolen bids
- No transfer/stayman
- Gerber
- 01234 blackwood or something similar
- Open 12+/13+
- Opening one major with 4+ and other major with 5+ of the bid suit.

Other than that list and perhaps a few others I'll be willing to play with most people as long as I can play most of the conventions on their profile.

[NickRW]

IMO, rather than saying what you don't want to play with, you'd be better off, if you truly want/can tolerate playing with randoms, is to play whatever they play (the better to keep partner comfortable) - and if they appear no good after a couple of hands, go somewhere else.

Personally I can't stand playing with folks, no matter how good they may be, for a few of hands and then trying to agree a card with someone else in a couple of typed sentences.

Nick

[cloa513]

Surely the thing to avoid is people who don't list anything other than maybe a system. Obviously very lazy.

[helene_t]

cloa513, on Oct 2 2010, 03:18 PM, said:

Surely the thing to avoid is people who don't list anything other than maybe a system. Obviously very lazy.

Or one could say "obviously very flexible".

I don't state anything since I don't have any strong preference.

[nige1]

cloa513, on Oct 2 2010, 09:18 AM, said:

Surely the thing to avoid is people who don't list anything other than maybe a system. Obviously very lazy.

Oh dear. I want to learn so on my profile I ask
"Please may we play your system/profile"

[Bbradley62]

TylerE, on Sep 30 2010, 03:51 PM, said:

SAYC + Some modifier. There's no such thing as "SAYC Basic or SAYC Full". Also people who list only SAYC + about 20 conventions that are the exact opposite of SAYC (weak jumps, inv minors, things like that). The absolute only thing SAYC has going for it is that it is set in stone...

It appears to me that many BBOers use "SAYC" when they mean "Standard American", which means not 2/1 and can have any of a variety of conventions added or omitted. It's silly to object to this inexact nomenclature. When someone asks for a Kleenex, and you have a different brand of tissue, you know what they mean. (Although, if I ask for a Pepsi, I do not want a Coke...)

[kenberg]

FWIW, my profile currently reads as follows:

In the email line:
"SAYC,Capp, nmf, or see below"

Here is the below:

2/1; RDr(2C only); 1430; wk2DHS, NSF; NMF;FSF; Texas, Smolen/ 1&2NT, 4st tfr; Str JS; neg->3S; sup x


The stuff listed is not there really because I just love it but rather because I want to avoid confusion. Or at least cut down a bit on the confusion.


I am fully aware that most of these things need discussion. At least, if pard agrees to my profile, we know what 2NT-3C-3D means. If he says he would rather play Puppet (or, better, Muppet as we see on another thread) then fine, Muppet it is. Similarly, on the SAYC line, a lot of people think Capp is part of SAYC. Not really. But I put it down so if he agrees with my SAYC profile we are playing it. If he says natural or DONT or Woolsey then we are playing natural or DONT or Woolsey.



The thing to avoid is something I saw kibbing recently:

1C 1S
2C 2D
2H 3S
Pass

13 top tricks. Not a good result.

Playing strong jump shifts it begins 1C-2S and they find it. Not playing strong jump shifts there has to be a way to bid the hand that would like to bid 2S strong. The 2D bid followed by the 3S bid is, afaik, the way to do it. Hopefully nmf conveys that. If not, well, them's the breaks.

I find that putting up my profile as above, and agreeing to whatever (within reason) modification partner explicitly asks for, is adequate to substantially reduce confusion. One cannot expect error free communication in a pick-up game. But you should try to not play in 3S making 7.

[mgoetze]

1N=16-18 is surely bad. But not nearly as bad as 1N=15-18, which I also see occasionally.

Many things have already been mentioned. I also avoid stuff like "SEF" or "roudi" as I simply don't know those systems and don't care to learn them. Oh and I definitely avoid "world class" as well as all "experts" from certain countries.

Personally, I am not very impressed by profiles listing a bunch of conventions. I mean, the first thing I need to know is whether we are playing Standard American, Polish Club, 2/1, Precision, ACOL, Blue Club or whatever. Most of those have a more or less standard set of conventions, and I don't mind the occasional misunderstanding there. The next things I generally want to know are our 1NT range, our defense against their 1NT, and what flavour of Blackwood we are playing.

"wj odw 4455" looks like a perfectly good profile to me; unfortunately I get denied at those tables more often than otherwise.

[blackshoe]

mgoetze, on Oct 3 2010, 01:29 PM, said:

1N=16-18 is surely bad. But not nearly as bad as 1N=15-18, which I also see occasionally.

"All Notrump ranges are wrong." -- Ron Klinger, in The Power System

[jdeegan]

I am 1000% in favor of BBO's self rating policy. OKB's Lehman rating created a mess. However, if you have the time, you can easily research a player's BBO result history.

Generally, over a lot of hands, say 1000 or more, the better players will be plus IMPs per board (say +0.5 or better which is what I shoot for but don't always attain) and matchpoint averages well over 50%. Oswald Jacoby used to say HIS average was 60% versus the random duplicate tournament field.

Obviously, this does not apply to JEC and friends whose opponents are selected from among the world's best players. There are numerous similar situations.

[the hog]

blackshoe, on Oct 4 2010, 01:19 AM, said:

mgoetze, on Oct 3 2010, 01:29 PM, said:

1N=16-18 is surely bad. But not nearly as bad as 1N=15-18, which I also see occasionally.

"All Notrump ranges are wrong." -- Ron Klinger, in The Power System

How about 17-20?

[helene_t]

mgoetze, on Oct 3 2010, 06:29 PM, said:

"wj odw 4455" looks like a perfectly good profile to me; unfortunately I get denied at those tables more often than otherwise.

Change your flag

[JoAnneM]

There is only one type of player that I don't want to play with, and that is the inflexible one who cannot adjust, or who insists on "my way or the highway". I ask a player what they want to play but if someone sits down and tells me what we are going play the alarm bells start ringing.

[mgoetze]

JoAnneM, on Oct 6 2010, 03:02 PM, said:

There is only one type of player that I don't want to play with, and that is the inflexible one who cannot adjust, or who insists on "my way or the highway". I ask a player what they want to play but if someone sits down and tells me what we are going play the alarm bells start ringing.

Let's say I am very flexible and willing to play Polish Club, Precision, Blue Club, Carrot Club, Moscito, Magic Diamond, Suspensor or any system similar to one of these with the gadgets of your choice. Which would you choose?

[billw55]

mgoetze, on Oct 3 2010, 12:29 PM, said:

Personally, I am not very impressed by profiles listing a bunch of conventions. I mean, the first thing I need to know is whether we are playing Standard American, Polish Club, 2/1, Precision, ACOL, Blue Club or whatever. Most of those have a more or less standard set of conventions, and I don't mind the occasional misunderstanding there. The next things I generally want to know are our 1NT range, our defense against their 1NT, and what flavour of Blackwood we are playing.

For me it's basic system followed by defensive carding. It seems like hardly anyone bothers to mention carding in their profile.