[tgphelps]

I am about to return to bridge playing after being gone for 20 years. I am going to teach wife the game, and "make her" play with me. Before I start teaching her, I want to know:

What bidding system do most (non-novice) players use these days?

When I left the game, it was mostly Standard American, but from watching a bunch of Youtube videos, I a lot about 2/1 Game Forcing. So perhspa 2/1 is "the new Standard American". Please advise me on which method I should teach her, and use with her in the local club. I don't want to teach Standard American, and then find out that "everyone" uses 2/1.

I will be watching for your advice.

[blackshoe]

I would say that 2/1 has supplanted SA in organized Duplicate Bridge. Personally, though, I prefer Precision, though that means difficulty in finding partners.

[akwoo]

tgphelps, on 2023-August-30, 14:11, said:

I am about to return to bridge playing after being gone for 20 years. I am going to teach wife the game, and "make her" play with me. Before I start teaching her, I want to know:

What bidding system do most (non-novice) players use these days?

When I left the game, it was mostly Standard American, but from watching a bunch of Youtube videos, I a lot about 2/1 Game Forcing. So perhspa 2/1 is "the new Standard American". Please advise me on which method I should teach her, and use with her in the local club. I don't want to teach Standard American, and then find out that "everyone" uses 2/1.

I will be watching for your advice.

The answer depends on where you are. Please specify, (Even within a country, there are local and regional variations, including that more isolated regions tend to change more slowly than more well-connected ones.)

[tgphelps]

blackshoe, on 2023-August-30, 14:18, said:

I would say that 2/1 has supplanted SA in organized Duplicate Bridge. Personally, though, I prefer Precision, though that means difficulty in finding partners.

Oh! Thanks for the quick reply. (I'm glad to hear that Precision is still alive. I read a couple of books on it decades ago, but have never played it.)

[tgphelps]

akwoo, on 2023-August-30, 14:20, said:

The answer depends on where you are. Please specify, (Even within a country, there are local and regional variations, including that more isolated regions tend to change more slowly than more well-connected ones.)

Ah yes. I forget that bridge is an international game, and countries vary greatly in their methods! I should have said: I am in the USA, specifically in Kentucky.

[blackshoe]

If you're interested I'd recommend Standard Modern Precision by Dan Neill or Santa Fe Precision by Dennis Dawson.

[tgphelps]

Thanks. I will eventually read one of those.

Can you also recommend a good book from which to learn 2/1? I have never actually played it a live game.

[DavidKok]

I recommend learning 2/1 from Larry Cohen's website. In particular his series on 2/1 and both of his series on standard bidding, here and here, are helpful.

[pescetom]

tgphelps, on 2023-August-30, 14:11, said:

I am about to return to bridge playing after being gone for 20 years. I am going to teach wife the game, and "make her" play with me. Before I start teaching her, I want to know:

What bidding system do most (non-novice) players use these days?

I think the clear answer is 2/1 and it does not depend upon where you live (unless there are other planets playing bridge).

There is also a fairly clear consensus that while having spouse play bridge too is a great idea, playing together may not be

[pescetom]

DavidKok, on 2023-August-30, 15:08, said:

I recommend learning 2/1 from Larry Cohen's website. In particular his series on 2/1 and both of his series on standard bidding, here and here, are helpful.

I agree, with a few inevitable exceptions (like his endorsement of a 2♦ GF that might only be 4 cards). But on the whole an exceptional resource. It's odd (or a sign of the times) that he never felt the urge to condense his material into a single printed bible, Goren style. There is nothing as good in book format that I know of (although "Il sistema quinta nobile a base naturale" by Franco di Stefano is worthy of note and goes for the throat of the system rather than teaching by example and implication like Larry).

[mikeh]

One word of caution. Sitting down with a new partner (should that ever happen) and having him or her say ‘let’s play 2/1’ doesn’t tell you much about what methods partner plays. There is no such ‘system’ of 2/1…it describes a basic idea that underlies pretty well all methods that have wide range natural openings, with a 2-level non-jump suit response to a 1-level opening, in another suit, by an unpassed hand as forcing to game.

Left for agreement are such commonalities as:

Responses to 1N. Back in your day I suspect that jacoby and maybe texas transfers were ‘normal’ but these days….many play 4 suit transfers, many play extended transfers, many play forms of smolen and there are many usages for 3-level suit responses. Plus negative doubles and more esoteric stuff should the opps bid over 1N (which they will more often than you remember)

Responses to 1M….is 3M weak, mixed or limit? What’s 3C or 3D? What are the responses to a jacoby 2N? Is 2N in fact a forcing raise

After 1x 1Y 1N, do you play new minor forcing or two way new minor?

What are your 2 suit openings (other than 2C) and what are your responses?

Do you play lebensohl in any sequences and, if so, what kind of lebensohl

What are your responses to keycard/blackwood?

What do responders’s jump responses in a new suit show? Weak? Strong? If strong, what are the criteria?

What does a 2N response to 1C/D show?

Etc, etc.

I’m a big fan of Larry Cohen and you’ll do fine if you study his suggestions….just don’t expect that everyone plays it the same way.

Plus, while many of the best pairs in the world play highly souped up variants based, loosely, on Precision, don’t learn it until you’re comfortable with 2/1 or you’ll severely limit the number of prospective partners…not to mention that I think it’s fairly clear that a simple form of precision is inferior to a simple form of 2/1….while a complex form of precision is up there with the best systems in the world.

[tgphelps]

mikeh, on 2023-August-30, 17:32, said:

One word of caution. Sitting down with a new partner (should that ever happen) and having him or her say ‘let’s play 2/1’ doesn’t tell you much about what methods partner plays. There is no such ‘system’ of 2/1…it describes a basic idea that underlies pretty well all methods that have wide range natural openings, with a 2-level non-jump suit response to a 1-level opening, in another suit, by an unpassed hand as forcing to game.

Left for agreement are such commonalities as:

Responses to 1N. Back in your day I suspect that jacoby and maybe texas transfers were ‘normal’ but these days….many play 4 suit transfers, many play extended transfers, many play forms of smolen and there are many usages for 3-level suit responses. Plus negative doubles and more esoteric stuff should the opps bid over 1N (which they will more often than you remember)

Responses to 1M….is 3M weak, mixed or limit? What’s 3C or 3D? What are the responses to a jacoby 2N? Is 2N in fact a forcing raise

After 1x 1Y 1N, do you play new minor forcing or two way new minor?

What are your 2 suit openings (other than 2C) and what are your responses?

Do you play lebensohl in any sequences and, if so, what kind of lebensohl

What are your responses to keycard/blackwood?

What do responders’s jump responses in a new suit show? Weak? Strong? If strong, what are the criteria?

What does a 2N response to 1C/D show?

Etc, etc.

I’m a big fan of Larry Cohen and you’ll do fine if you study his suggestions….just don’t expect that everyone plays it the same way.

Plus, while many of the best pairs in the world play highly souped up variants based, loosely, on Precision, don’t learn it until you’re comfortable with 2/1 or you’ll severely limit the number of prospective partners…not to mention that I think it’s fairly clear that a simple form of precision is inferior to a simple form of 2/1….while a complex form of precision is up there with the best systems in the world.

Wow. What a detailed response. I will have to digest all that, slowly, after I read up on 2/1. Thank you all very much.

A general comment: I'm astonished at how well all of your write -- you use English sentences and captitalization and you have well organized thoughts. I am SO accustomed to get semi-literate, or worse, responses when I post a question to non-bridge forums. I am delighted hear from such people as you.

[sfi]

One other point about 2/1 is that it fundamentally only describes a set of agreements over a 5-card 1H or 1S opening. Any text will also discuss what to do after other openings, how to respond to overcalls and competition, and agreements in later auctions, but none of that is necessary to understand the mechanics of the 2/1 bids. What this means is that you can use the ideas behind 2/1 with systems like Precision or Polish Club with little or no additional work to make them fit.

But yes, 2/1 with a strong NT is the right place to start as a returning player. Even if not everyone plays it the same way, it's very likely to be the most common system you encounter and will give your wife the most flexibility to start playing with other people down the track.

[akwoo]

During Covid, the Seattle club with the highest standard of play (and now I think the only evening game) ran an online individual (loosely restricted to people who've played at the club), and the folks running the game agreed on an imposed convention card that I think is a good synopsis of Seattle Flight A 2/1. I could dig it up. It is a good deal more sophisticated than Spokane Flight B 2/1, which I could provide a synopsis of also.

In general, mikeh summarizes the issues well. There are a few things that it's helpful to learn several options for so that you can accommodate less flexible potential partners.

[tgphelps]

All of your reponses have been enlightening. The big thing I have picked up is that "2/1-GF" is a framework, not a well-defined system. It's a base onto which you graft various other pieces to form a system for a partnership. I have much to learn about...

[DavidKok]

That's exactly right. The Larry Cohen version of it is a well-defined system, although even then only for uninterrupted auctions. But the general 2/1 GF style can be played in many different ways and applied in many different systems.
Personally I like the Cohen approach as it is one of the easier ways to implement 2/1 GF, while still being very effective.

[mw64ahw]

If you are comfortable with Standard American then perhaps that is the best place to start. I started there, but have not so far been tempted to move from a GI 2-level call to a GF one for a number of reasons. This hasn't stopped me making many tweaks along the way to the overall structure.

[mycroft]

Basically any system can be thought of as a "framework" with a bunch of answers to the questions set by the framework. So don't worry about that, whether it's "Standard", "2/1", "Acol", "Precision", or whatever you end up playing (I strongly recommend 2/1 for a Kentucky player who is getting back into the game - you'll understand what your opponents are playing, and will find it easier to pick up partners as well).

SAYC, SEF, and the EBU equivalent (which I can't remember now) would be exceptions because they are defined as "set cards" with the questions answered a specific way for you. Of course, there's a reason nobody plays SAYC (even the ones who claim to, they play Standard American with the answers they "know are YC"), and the EBU equivalent is basically equally unknown. (SEF, the default french system, seems to be more widely played in toto from my hearing (or at least most french players *can play* SEF straight up if needed), but that's an outlier. YJ<year> as well, if you happen to be Polish).

Setups like Larry Cohen's are good because they give a good, integrated, thought-out and explained set of answers to the 2/1 questions, that if both players read and understand, work well. Just know that there are different answers to all those questions that others play.

If you want to be able to play with your local club:

• Learn a coherent set, like Larry Cohen's. Many people will be able to adjust and play your system.
  
• There probably is a <your area> "standard flight A 2/1", like akwoo's Seattle individual card. I know I could basically write out a "standard flight A 2/1" card for my two "locals" (and that they're quite different, as is the local "standard flight B 2/1" in each area). See if you can find it (or get someone to does know well to show you their "starter card" for new partnerships, that'll be close) and see how close you can get to learning that as well. Don't worry about getting it all - everybody ends up with "Calgary standard 2/1 with the following differences: <X>, <Y>, <Z>, <Q>" but it's a lot easier to remember during that first session as "what I play, with a couple of exceptions" rather than "all of this card".

Also, until you are comfortable with things, just say "I can't play that" and make the more experienced half of the pair come to you. They may find it very frustrating, but less frustrating than you forgetting something they've explained at the last minute, or worse yet, getting it half-right. Note: I played spare earlier this week (benefits of being a director), and did exactly that - played his card, minus a couple of things that "I can't play". Sure, I could do all the rest, but as a playing director, I also need to avoid (more) memory load that detracts from the game my partner gets.

[akwoo]

I don't have more details of your locale, but I do want to say that the most isolated places still haven't shifted to 2/1. The only weekly game within 70 miles of here is still on "substandard American", but the nearest city supporting 4 games a week is pretty much entirely 2/1

[mycroft]

heh, that's what I call 2/1. Yes, as a joke...

But many years ago pd and I played (and put on our card) "Substandard Canadian". It was basically "K/S, minus the forcing NT, and with some strange gadgets". Most got the joke - but many (especially when we played on the other side of The Falls, in upstate NY), we'd be asked "why Canadian?" To which the answer was, of course, "because we're not American."

But, to the OP, akwoo's not wrong. If you're not in the big city, it is likely that 2/1 GF is a rare, advanced breed. I'd still learn it, though. It's pretty easy to downgrade (but you'll hate it), and the 2/1 people will be happy that's one more thing they don't have to downgrade to play with you.

Back in the "many years ago" day, I was told by my bridge teacher "learn 2/1. If you go to the partnership desk, and find a 2/1 partner, you can be pretty comfortable that they play the gadgets that make 2/1 work [see MikeH's questions for examples]. They're also needed for standard, but you can't guarantee the standard players know them." Not as much any more in general (because we teach 2/1 off the hop most places), but the kind of fields that akwoo is talking about are closer to Waterloo in the 1990s than Calgary in the 2020s.

(I won't bring up my one "yeah I play 2/1" story from back then. Just say that "sometimes, it doesn't help." And sometimes, "the best Martini in Toronto" does.)