[BunnyGo]

Hi all,

I've decided to start a bridge club at my new college, and seem to have enough interest for a couple tables. I don't think any of the students (or professors) who will be showing up will have played before. I have access to the "Learn to Play" program, but I'm wondering what advice you may have about how I should run the 1-1.5 hr sessions. Any suggestions on what I should teach? I must start at the beginning, of course, but any suggestions of order and content are welcome. In particular:

1) I'll start with the card play...I figure just the rules, counting, and maybe finesses to start

2) what system should I teach? I don't want to overwhelm them at all, so I want it to be mostly natural. I was thinking standard american, or 2/1 with a basic NT system, and not much else. Does this make sense?

3) What am I forgetting? I'm thinking that after I get them playing, I'll do a 15-20 minute lecture about something new every week, and then have them play, but any suggestions are welcome.

Thanks,

Ben

[Quantumcat]

Hi Ben,
When I learnt at the ANU bridge club, there would be about two tables most of the time, one table would be playing and chatting and the other would have any complete beginners at it, for learning the basic rules. When there weren't any complete beginners we'd just play random hands and the more experienced members would answer questions from the less experienced, or make a short lesson if a good example hand came up. The rest of the time was chatting, laughing, and having fun. Sometimes only two of us turned up so the teacher would give us more "advanced" lessons, like Stayman, or how to give signals. Memorably on one occasion I was the only one who turned up, it was about my fifth or sixth time, and the teacher taught me about simple squeezes. lol. I spent the next four sessions going down in cold contracts because I would be trying to find squeezes.
This might not help but all I wanted to say is you don't necessarily need strict lesson plans or anything, just have people play and have a good time, and whenever there is an opportunity you can sneak in quick lessons here and there.
If they can already play 500 you can launch right into bridge, just explain the differences (13 cards not 10, bids start at 1 not 6, there's a dummy), and just let them play. If they can't play 500 you can teach them Whist on the first lesson and get them used to following suit and having a partner, then the next lesson quickly cover the differences and launch them into it.
It's more fun learning by discovery than lectures, and even more fun if you are joking around with friends and playing a game than learning something serious.
Edit: Oh yeah, and of course give them instructions on how to download the ACBL learn to play program. I learnt heaps from this as a beginner, and it was fun too. If the system you teach them is consistent with this you'll probably be fine.

[BunnyGo]

Quantumcat, on 2012-September-15, 07:45, said:

Hi Ben,
When I learnt at the ANU bridge club, there would be about two tables most of the time, one table would be playing and chatting and the other would have any complete beginners at it, for learning the basic rules. When there weren't any complete beginners we'd just play random hands and the more experienced members would answer questions from the less experienced, or make a short lesson if a good example hand came up. The rest of the time was chatting, laughing, and having fun. Sometimes only two of us turned up so the teacher would give us more "advanced" lessons, like Stayman, or how to give signals. Memorably on one occasion I was the only one who turned up, it was about my fifth or sixth time, and the teacher taught me about simple squeezes. lol. I spent the next four sessions going down in cold contracts because I would be trying to find squeezes.
This might not help but all I wanted to say is you don't necessarily need strict lesson plans or anything, just have people play and have a good time, and whenever there is an opportunity you can sneak in quick lessons here and there.

Cool, thanks. I'll keep that in mind. At least at first, unfortunately, I'm not sure I'll have any students who even know the rules.

Quote

If they can already play 500 you can launch right into bridge, just explain the differences (13 cards not 10, bids start at 1 not 6, there's a dummy), and just let them play. If they can't play 500 you can teach them Whist on the first lesson and get them used to following suit and having a partner, then the next lesson quickly cover the differences and launch them into it.
It's more fun learning by discovery than lectures, and even more fun if you are joking around with friends and playing a game than learning something serious.

I'm not sure that I know what 500 is. I was thinking of teaching "mini-bridge" which is just learning to count HCP, and the hand with the most HCP is declarer and gets to call the contract after seeing dummy.

And yes, I hope they do just have fun, and learn to play as an aside.

[hrothgar]

Hi Ben

When I teach novice (which, admittedly, hasn't happened for a while) I prefer to completely ignore bidding for as long as possible.
Instead, have them play the following simple game.

Step 1
Each player announced how many HCPs they hold.

• The side with the most points declares
  
• The side with the second most points defends
  
• The player (on the declaring side) with the most points declares
  
• That player's partner is dummy

If there is a tie, the dealers side declarers

Step 2

Dummy is tabled and declarer gets to chose the contract

Legitimate contracts include

• 1 NT
  
• 2 of either major
  
• 3 of either minor
  
• Any game contract
  
• Any slam contract

Step 3

The player to declarer's left deals
Play proceeds as normal

The "theory" behind this all is that until players have a good understanding what constitutes a "good" contract they really aren't going to be able to understand bidding.
The only thing that introducing bidding systems is going to do will be to frustrate people.

What you can do is start teaching people things like

Discovering major suits are important
4-4 fits play well
Running suits and stoppers are good for NT contracts

Once folks have a good feeling for what's going on you can introduce them to any one of a number of bidding systems...
(Odds are you can just plop down a copy of "52 weeks" and be done with it)

[Quantumcat]

BunnyGo, on 2012-September-15, 07:51, said:

I'm not sure that I know what 500 is.

500 is "fun" bridge with some randomness added. It's quite popular amongst highschoolers here.

The joker is the highest trump, and can beat any card in notrumps. Jacks are called "bowers" and become trumps of the same colour (i.e. the jack of clubs becomes a trump if the contract is spades). This makes bidding be more "spirited" (if you have some jacks your hand becomes better if you can make them trumps). There is a "kitty" of a couple of cards that declarer wins, and can swap any cards in his hand for the cards in the kitty. This makes things more random and you can't count suits so well (you don't always know how many cards are in each suit).

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page. Didn't know till I had a quick skim through it that it is mostly only popular in Australia/NZ. http://en.wikipedia..../500_(card_game)

[BunnyGo]

Quantumcat, on 2012-September-15, 08:12, said:

500 is "fun" bridge with some randomness added. It's quite popular amongst highschoolers here.

The joker is the highest trump, and can beat any card in notrumps. Jacks are called "bowers" and become trumps of the same colour (i.e. the jack of clubs becomes a trump if the contract is spades). This makes bidding be more "spirited" (if you have some jacks your hand becomes better if you can make them trumps). There is a "kitty" of a couple of cards that declarer wins, and can swap any cards in his hand for the cards in the kitty. This makes things more random and you can't count suits so well (you don't always know how many cards are in each suit).

Here is a link to the Wikipedia page. Didn't know till I had a quick skim through it that it is mostly only popular in Australia/NZ. http://en.wikipedia..../500_(card_game)

Interesting. It sounds a lot like Euchre, which is a popular game here (especially in Michigan).

[BunnyGo]

hrothgar, on 2012-September-15, 07:58, said:

Hi Ben

When I teach novice (which, admittedly, hasn't happened for a while) I prefer to completely ignore bidding for as long as possible.
Instead, have them play the following simple game.

Step 1
Each player announced how many HCPs they hold.

• The side with the most points declares
  
• The side with the second most points defends
  
• The player (on the declaring side) with the most points declares
  
• That player's partner is dummy

If there is a tie, the dealers side declarers

Step 2

Dummy is tabled and declarer gets to chose the contract

Legitimate contracts include

• 1 NT
  
• 2 of either major
  
• 3 of either minor
  
• Any game contract
  
• Any slam contract

Step 3

The player to declarer's left deals
Play proceeds as normal

The "theory" behind this all is that until players have a good understanding what constitutes a "good" contract they really aren't going to be able to understand bidding.
The only thing that introducing bidding systems is going to do will be to frustrate people.

What you can do is start teaching people things like

Discovering major suits are important
4-4 fits play well
Running suits and stoppers are good for NT contracts

Once folks have a good feeling for what's going on you can introduce them to any one of a number of bidding systems...
(Odds are you can just plop down a copy of "52 weeks" and be done with it)

Thanks Richard. That's sort of what I was thinking at one point, but managed to get convinced to try something else. It certainly sounds the most fun for everybody, and keeps the focus on card play.

[phil_20686]

My experience is that you will get a number of people who are unsure of the concepts of "trick", and "leading", and "trump".

You need to start with the really basic stuff.

If you are lucky enough to get people who have all played whist, or trumps, or any of the other trick taking card games, then start with mini bridge.

[jonottawa]

Richard Pavlicek's Beginning Bridge teaching materials are excellent imo.

I'd second what was said about teaching play before bidding. You might just always make dealer the declarer (in a trump suit of his choice upon seeing dummy), though (so that everyone gets a turn.)

[sasioc]

I taught the beginners' lessons at my university for a while and have also taught bridge through clubs. As people have suggested, I found it best to start off with minibridge and get them used to points, tricks, trumps and the basics of card play before I went anywhere near bidding. Learning card play is massively more important than learning how to bid at the first stages of the game imo and it lets the students get straight into playing and enjoying playing rather than worrying about the memory load of even basic bidding. I was severely constrained in the number of sessions I was able to provide but would have liked every student to have been fairly comfortable with techniques such as basic counting (of trumps and maybe outside honours), finesses, crossing between hands, ruffing losers and counting winners and losers before moving on to bidding.

Once I did start on bidding I covered one basic idea every session and then gave the students some random or prepared hands to play to practice that idea (prepared hands were used for things like 1NT openings and whenever else I had the time). I would have liked to allow one session in every 3 or 4 to just recap what we'd done but time did not really allow this. I think my order of bidding lessons went something like this:

1. One level openings and simple responses
2. 1NT openings with natural responses
3. Overcalling and simple bidding in competition
4. 2 level openings and jump overcalls
5. Takeout doubles
6. 'Advanced' 1nt responses (stayman, transfers)
7. Basic conventions (blackwood, fourth suit forcing).

Many students found bidding significantly easier if it was explained to them as being like a conversation. I'd encourage them to think about what they'd already "said" to their partner and what their partner had "told" them. I also produced a bidding flowchart, which grew over the course of the lessons, to reduce the amount that students had to remember and get them putting it into practice.

After the lessons, students were encouraged to join the main university bridge club, which was very friendly and relaxed, where they'd be exposed to more advanced bidding and play ideas.

I strongly agree that the first system you teach should be as simple and natural as possible and that gadgets should only start to be built in when they are comfortable with the basic ideas behind bidding.

[VMars]

I like Hrothgar's suggestion.

I would also recommend not teaching a system that you don't play. For example, if you play 2/1 and not SA, when you eventually teach systems teach 2/1 and not SA.

[Zelandakh]

Start with whist - trick-taking, following suit, trumps, etc. No need for a dummy. This is fundamental. Teach them leading from top of a sequence, 4th highest from length and playing 3rd hand high with lowest of equals. All the usual whist stuff.

I do not know much about Minibridge - it may or may not be a good intermediate suggestion. From trick-taking I personally just moved straight on to the auction, partly because new learners are always keen to start learning "real bridge" and if you wait too long just dealing with cardplay they lose interest. First stage is obviously point count but that goes pretty quickly. Don't confuse by saying that an ace is worth a bit more than 4; an ace is exactly 4! Same for game - game in NT or a major is 25+ points. Simple!

Bidding itself is really easy - just have crib sheets for the first 4 rounds of 1X plus some basics over NT openings. I always taught Acol and used a priority system, that is I listed the bids by category and order of preference. Priority 1: Raise partner's major, etc. Teach bidding like you would a computer - set rules, set point counts. There's no point in teaching judgement at the start - first they need to learn that bid X is stronger than bid Y. Let the pupils play with open crib sheets to start and encourage questions. Make it clear that everything on the sheets must be learned though - don't let them become a crutch. It helps in this to keep the sheets as short as possible. That also helps to make the game look simple so they do not give up!

Once they are at this stage you just want them to play as much as possible. Familiarity is a big help. Most of all, you have to be incredibly patient and provide lots of positive affirmation when they do things right while not being negative when it goes wrong. This is not always easy and some teaching or training experience is somewhat useful.

[wyman]

And while teaching cardplay, they need to learn to finesse and lead toward honors. You do not need to show them squeezes!

(I know you...)

[BunnyGo]

wyman, on 2012-September-17, 09:44, said:

And while teaching cardplay, they need to learn to finesse and lead toward honors. You do not need to show them squeezes!

(I know you...)

Ouch...I thought you knew me to be a better teacher than that...


Thanks for all the suggestions--I'm glad we all agree that mini-bridge or whist is a good place to start--make it fun and they'll find reasons to learn to count and find the extra tricks, and that after a while introduce a minimal/natural system.

[daveharty]

Make sure you provide lots of snacks.

[blackshoe]

daveharty, on 2012-September-17, 16:56, said:

Make sure you provides lots of snacks.

Heh. Several years ago, I went to a seminar given by Audrey Grant at one of our local regionals. The subject was "how to run a club game". I was sitting at a table with two ladies who owned one of the more successful local clubs. The first thing Audrey said was "don't serve food". My two companions looked at each other, and simultaneously said "that's not going to happen". One of the draws at that club (always > 25 tables, often > 30) has always been the food. It's a pain sometimes. "Where are your opponents?" "I don't know." Then, four or five minutes into the round, "Sorry, we were in the kitchen". If taken to task, they emit an aggrieved "Well, when we finished the last round (usually 3-4 minutes before the round was called) this table was still playing!"

[mycroft]

Well, don't serve popcorn or potato chips or other greasy snacks - unless you like replacing cards every month. Not as big a problem with the plastic cards, but it manks up the boards as well...

food before, food after, but food during has to be very careful.

[debrose]

Hi Ben,

SCORING seems to be missing from your original post. Perhaps it's been mentioned in comments and I missed it.

Maybe you assumed scoring to be part of teaching the rules. If so, I apologize for thinking otherwise. That's how it should be imo, but I've found that most beginners are taught little or nothing about scoring. I know it's complicated, but in order to understand the game (any game?), you have to know how it's scored. I suggest teaching duplicate scoring, rather than rubber bridge. You can give them a sheet with all the calculations, but also the little cheat sheets with the scores for making and defeating contracts. I have something written up I can send you if it would be helpful.

One of the comments mentioned teaching that "game" is 25 points. I'd want to teach that game is contracting for 9,10,or 11 tricks respectively, and what bonus you receive if you make it, long before they knew anything about high card points.

I strongly agree with not teaching bidding, in the sense that most people think of it. I believe new players should learn how to bid sufficiently, and what bids "mean" only in terms of the number of tricks required, and the scores for fulfilling contract or failing in them. With that, plus basic card play rules, they can play real bridge (not mini), without knowing any bidding language.

Once they see how inaccurate their bidding is - both of in terms of getting too high, or losing out on bonuses - they will presumably want to know something about how to communicate with partner. Only then should a bidding system/language even by introduced.

Full disclosure: I've taught a lot of bridge, but I have not taught beginners for many years, and back when I did, I never taught as I am advocating. It is a combination of having thought about this issue a good deal, along with my experience teaching low intermediate players, that leads me to advocate what I do. In part, it's also just a feeling that it is purer to teach the RULES of bridge, including scoring, before mentioning bidding systems. It's also more fun to be able to play, and then understand why you are bidding, before getting bogged down with systems.

[Quantumcat]

debrose, on 2012-September-22, 17:52, said:

I strongly agree with not teaching bidding, in the sense that most people think of it. I believe new players should learn how to bid sufficiently, and what bids "mean" only in terms of the number of tricks required, and the scores for fulfilling contract or failing in them. With that, plus basic card play rules, they can play real bridge (not mini), without knowing any bidding language.

Once they see how inaccurate their bidding is - both of in terms of getting too high, or losing out on bonuses - they will presumably want to know something about how to communicate with partner. Only then should a bidding system/language even by introduced.

This is what I suggested originally - tell them the differences (in basic procedural rules) between bridge and 500/whist/euchre and let them experiment for themselves for a lesson or two. Learning bidding when they don't see the purpose in it will seem like unnecessary complication. They will appreciate it (like you said) when they repeatedly find themselves in a stupid contract and would like to know how to consistently get to good ones. Also telling them about HCP right at the beginning I think will still be useful, even if you don't teach bidding. When holding some random collection of cards it's hard for a beginner to tell if they have a good hand or a weak hand - if they know about HCP and that ten is average, they can start to gain an appreciation for being strong or weak.

[BunnyGo]

debrose, on 2012-September-22, 17:52, said:

Hi Ben,

SCORING seems to be missing from your original post. Perhaps it's been mentioned in comments and I missed it.

Maybe you assumed scoring to be part of teaching the rules. If so, I apologize for thinking otherwise. That's how it should be imo, but I've found that most beginners are taught little or nothing about scoring. I know it's complicated, but in order to understand the game (any game?), you have to know how it's scored. I suggest teaching duplicate scoring, rather than rubber bridge. You can give them a sheet with all the calculations, but also the little cheat sheets with the scores for making and defeating contracts. I have something written up I can send you if it would be helpful.

Yes, I wondered whether I should teach rubber scoring or not. It certainly can be more fun with just friends to play for small stakes or a beer or bragging rights, or something--but of course I'm not allowed to encourage any of those things (except bragging) with my students.