[Cthulhu D]

I started a thread about why don't people playing T-Walsh use a 14-16 NT range, and a number of people noted that playing a different NT range from the room is undesirable. I'm curious to know - in people's opinion, how much of a difference does this make at:

A) Matchpoints (in a reasonably sized field)
B) Cross Imps (in a reasonably sized field)
C) Teams

Would it matter if a significant subset of the field (~20%) was playing a different NT range anyway? I ask because most tournaments here have a large majority playing a strong NT, with a minority playing a weak NT.

[NickRW]

Well, frankly, I am basically in agreement. I prefer to play (if I can) a (goodish) 14 to a bad 17 NT. (You can call it a conservative 14-16 or a 15-17 with aggressive upgrades or whatever) with T-Walsh.

With regard to different ranges compared to the field, yes, if you're a good card player, going with the field has some merit at MPs (and perhaps a microbial amount of merit at Ximps). However, if you're playing T-Walsh, you're already not going with the field whatever your NT range is, so the point is largely of academic interest. And, anyway, the whole reason you do things differently to the field is because you reckon it is a long term winner. Back your judgement! (or learn from your mistakes as the case may be).

Nick

[helene_t]

At club pairs I don't really care. Maybe if my objective is to get as many masterpoints as possible over the year, not caring if I sometimes have a 35% evening, I should go anti-field but I am not really sure what my objective really is other than have good bridge.

At league teams we want to collect as many VIPs as possible. So if we are huge favorites we should go with the field and if we are huge underdogs we should go against, but usually it doesn't matter.

At KO teams it would be more important.

[Cthulhu D]

 helene_t, on 2014-November-12, 07:29, said:

At club pairs I don't really care. Maybe if my objective is to get as many masterpoints as possible over the year, not caring if I sometimes have a 35% evening, I should go anti-field but I am not really sure what my objective really is other than have good bridge.

At league teams we want to collect as many VIPs as possible. So if we are huge favorites we should go with the field and if we are huge underdogs we should go against, but usually it doesn't matter.

At KO teams it would be more important.

Yeah, I'm mostly interested in what you'd play at a multi day tournament or some other even where 'winning' is an important objective. For club pairs I agree, I'm playing to practice not to win so who really cares.

What's the league teams format in the UK?

 NickRW, on 2014-November-12, 07:26, said:

However, if you're playing T-Walsh, you're already not going with the field whatever your NT range is, so the point is largely of academic interest. And, anyway, the whole reason you do things differently to the field is because you reckon it is a long term winner. Back your judgement! (or learn from your mistakes as the case may be).

Nick

Yeah, I obviously think my methods are a winner and play a number of anti field things. Hence in part the question.

[NickRW]

 Cthulhu D, on 2014-November-12, 07:34, said:

What's the league teams format in the UK?

Can't speak for everywhere. My county runs leagues with 7 or 8 teams. 20Vps over 28 boards (captains can agree to reduce to 24 boards - which can be a blessing as my area is right over to one side of the county and you can have over an hour's drive to get home from some places with the prospect of having to be up for work before 7 the next day).

[dicklont]

I play a 12-14 NT in a 15-17 NT world, because we like the weak NT.
Sometimes it gains, sometimes is costs, all those times you have more action and emotion at the table which is ok.
In the end we hope (and think) that playing a weak NT is slightly better because you get to open 1NT more often.

[dicklont]

 NickRW, on 2014-November-12, 07:44, said:

Can't speak for everywhere. My county runs leagues with 7 or 8 teams. 20Vps over 28 boards (captains can agree to reduce to 24 boards - which can be a blessing as my area is right over to one side of the county and you can have over an hour's drive to get home from some places with the prospect of having to be up for work before 7 the next day).

I would suggest playing 2 matches of 24 hands on a saturday or sunday, with all the teams in the same room. You'll lose a lot less time driving to matches and reduce your CO2 output.

[NickRW]

 dicklont, on 2014-November-12, 08:10, said:

I would suggest playing 2 matches of 24 hands on a saturday or sunday, with all the teams in the same room. You'll lose a lot less time driving to matches and reduce your CO2 output.

You try getting captains to agree to ANY weekend match. They all want to play week days (and many would try for week day in the hours of daylight if they could because they're retired and don't have to care about work [but mysteriously do care about golf at the weekend or seeing the grandchildren or whatever])

[whereagles]

Anti-field actions introduce randomness in your results, with all the plusses and minuses it carries. You and pard need some maturity to deal with the inevitable zero coming from it.

Playing with the field yields more predictable results, and tends to benefit better card players.

[Trinidad]

 NickRW, on 2014-November-12, 08:21, said:

You try getting captains to agree to ANY weekend match. They all want to play week days (and many would try for week day in the hours of daylight if they could because they're retired and don't have to care about work [but mysteriously do care about golf at the weekend or seeing the grandchildren or whatever])

This is a typical chicken - egg problem.

Bridge players are retired. => They want to play on week days.
Bridge is played on weekdays. => Only retired people show up.

In the Netherlands, a small but densely populated country, the bridge league is organized in divisions or classes with promotion or relegation as follows (for pairs and teams):

A "Master Division" playing at a central location during weekends (Saturday + Sunday, players from far away stay overnight)
A First Division playing at a central location during weekends (Saturday + Sunday, players from far away stay overnight)
8 Second Divisions playing in 8 regions at a central location in those regions during weekends
___
24 Districts running competitions, typically with one "Main Class" and several "1st/2nd, etc. Classes". Here, each district is free in setting up the competition in a central location or with home and away matches at the different bridge clubs.

So, playing bridge at a high ("Division" level) will "cost" you about 6 weekends per year. Many people with careers and kids can afford that for their main hobby. Playing 24 individual matches that have to be arranged on a weeknight would be killing for these players.

Rik

[Vampyr]

I think that playing with the field is probably most valuable in qualifying phases of an event.

[Siegmund]

Remember too that playing the same range as the field is not the only way to get to the same contract from the same side as the rest of the field frequently.

For instance, weak notrump without transfers means your auction will be 1NT-2H and the strong notrumpers' auctions will be 1m-1H-1NT-2H.
Similarly you could, if you wanted, open 1C on the hands the rest of the room opens a strong notrump, and play transfer responses to 1C (if your local regulations allow it.)

But really, I do not think it is much of a factor. You are playing your system because you believe it is better that what those other idiots are playing. If your system gets you to a different spot than the field, you are expecting to profit from that.

[Vampyr]

 Siegmund, on 2014-November-12, 10:06, said:

play transfer responses to 1C (if your local regulations allow it.)

A bit off-topic, I know, but I am curious whether there are regulations anywhere that do not allow this.

[NickRW]

 Vampyr, on 2014-November-12, 10:14, said:

A bit off-topic, I know, but I am curious whether there are regulations anywhere that do not allow this.

Apparently ACBL thinks they're a very naughty thing!

[TylerE]

 Vampyr, on 2014-November-12, 10:14, said:

A bit off-topic, I know, but I am curious whether there are regulations anywhere that do not allow this.

ACBL. The only exceptions are that 1♦ can be something interesting, and you CAN play transfers IF AND ONLY IF either 1♣ is strong and forcing, or the transfer itself establishes a GF.

[GreenMan]

 Vampyr, on 2014-November-12, 10:14, said:

A bit off-topic, I know, but I am curious whether there are regulations anywhere that do not allow this.

The ACBL GCC does not.

[helene_t]

I don't think we can play transfers in our local team events, they still use EBU level 3.

[Vampyr]

 helene_t, on 2014-November-12, 10:38, said:

I don't think we can play transfers in our local team events, they still use EBU level 3.

I am surprised by this.

[mycroft]

One strong impact is the relative strength of the field, especially in the play. If you are the best player in the room, there is a strong incentive to play effectively the field system, and get your A+ on the play (*) ... and don't get put in any "well, now that I've seen dummy, I'm getting a zero" contracts. If you are a pretty average player in the field, and you prefer to win than do your best, then playing an anti field system is perfect. On a good day, you will play well (but not as well as the best in the room), the "well, now I've seen dummy" contracts will all be in your favour, and you'll get good results on defence from your stellar play and the extra knowledge you have from your system (and the extra difficulty they have dealing with your system), and you will win. On an average day, the swings and roundabouts balance each other out and you have an average game, with 4 or 5 pajama hands. On a bad day, you get 35% for third-worst in a six-section National Event (our other three sessions were above expectations, don't worry!)

I did run into that last time I ran into Siegmund, as a matter of fact; 24 pairs, only the top 3 (really, only the top 2 in our case) matter. But we were in the top 15% of the should have been much stronger than that field. That, combined with a bad day for the system, and we were nowhere and annoyed.

(*) Those of you who have gone through my history or just been around for a while know that this also leads to these people pushing for "getting rid of all these crazy systems that just poison the game". What they actually mean is "I'm a better player than you and think the auction should just be a way to find the contract that we can show who the best players are." The concept of "I'm a better bidder than you (with my crazy system), and I just want to win by getting to better contracts from the right side, passing less information to the defence than you do; and think that that should be how the game plays, because it tilts in my favour" eludes them completely.

[PrecisionL]

11-14 hcp weak NT in pairs at all vulnerabilities is my preference.
In IMPs I use a 12-15 hcp NT that fits well with a strong club.