"PriorKnowledge" <priorknowledge@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:1157551162.416100.253800@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I don't think Nick showed hostility by summarizing your opening bid
> structure. Your do***ent includes many promotional comments and
> non-specific recommendations rather than specific information about
> what to bid with which hands.
This morn (mine started an hour ago) I had an offer or two to play the
system. First up will be bidding a bunch of BW Challenge the Champs hands,
I
hope. (Haven't responded to them yet, thought I'd 'quickly' do the ngs.)
>
> Your system has merits and problems. There are many lite-opening
> systems out there. Meckstroth-Rodwell open and respond lite also and
> have achieved great success with it. There is no doubt it is a "bidders
> game."
I'll google them.
>
> Please be aware that success at the club level does not mean that you
> will achieve success with the system at higher level competition.
I have in the whopee! thread, at least, said I was not a great card
player,
so I'd not delude myself as to me being such a cham**** competitor.
> There
> is always the possibility that much of your success is due to the opps
> unfamiliarity with your system. One of the requirements in the USA when
> playing a new system or convention is a reasonable defense to the
> system/convention must be provided and approved before you can play it.
> When arriving at the table, you must provide the written defense to the
> opponents prior to the round. Also, the opponents may refer to the
> notes before making their bids.
Long ago, at least, natural bids - or even treatements - needed no
approval.
That is one reason for the >=8 HCP rule, the outlawing of natural light
bids.
> Another popular open-everything system is EHAA and EHAA+ which I find
> very compelling. EHAA = Every Hand An Adventure. There is a net
> do***ent somewhere for EHAA+ that is very thorough.
Yep. I was jealous and suspicious about Larssen's rating of its
obstruction
value as compared to WELOS.
(Although 90% perhaps of the WELOS idea was/is to be constructive by
competing early.)
My google yesterday gave me Landau's page, which was selling a book and
did
not describe anything in any detail at all.I'll look further.
> Good luck with your system. I hope you get a book out of it.
lol
Thanks!
--
eleaticus
ee-lee-AT-i-cus
eleaticus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --PK
>
>
> eleaticus wrote:
> > "Nick Hughes" <nhughes@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:8MuLg.24191$rP1.17649@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > eleaticus wrote:
> > > > This do***ent introduces and details a radically 'new',
all-natural
> > bidding
> > > > system, Webster's Extra-Light Opener System. WELOS. WEE-lohss.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Summary to save everyone's time:
> > >
> > > Openings (count 3-2-1 for shape)
> > > 1x 4+ cards, 8-11 or 16+
> > > standard responses boldtered but change of suit non-f, jumps
strong
> > > 1NT 12-15 balanced-ish
> > > 2x 4+ cards (usually 5), 11-15
> > > step relays
> >
> > lol.
> >
> > You got the ranges for openers fairly well (but not nearly right
overall),
> > and nothing of the essence(s)/ramifications.
> >
> > And you didn't show evidence of any thought, as suggested, about 3rd
and
4th
> > seat.
> >
> > Your brevity and error both made me think you were showing (undue)
> > hostility.
> >
> > Am I wrong about that? Apologies, if so!
> >
> > Well, <g>, I may be wrong since I don't know what 'boldtered' means.
> >
> > Altered? Bolstered.
> >
> > Definitely NOT standard responses. Well, depending on how they are
> > boldtered.
> > --
> > eleaticus
> > ee-lee-AT-i-cus
> > eleaticus@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > >
> > > Nick Hughes, Sydney
>
|
