[Antrax]

I'm considering adding another regular partner. It seems like a good idea because it will give me a chance to try out new things and get more feedback on my play, and it seems like a bad idea because it will increase memory strain and will take away hours I'm currently investing in my current partner.
So, which considerations am I missing and which should prevail? Should a casual aspiring intermediate focus on a single partnership, or is it better to branch out?

[glen]

It is better to branch out if your partners have different skill sets. This would then assist your overall development as a player.

[ggwhiz]

Not to mention building stamina and capacity in the memory department.

We have a player who once played on a 5-man team in our National championships as a swing man. He had 4 different convention cards to switch, often between matches. Very impressive.

[Codo]

I get worse playing serious with different players. But you need to find out for yourself.

[mgoetze]

Codo, on 2012-February-04, 11:28, said:

I get worse playing serious with different players. But you need to find out for yourself.

I have to add that "worse" in Codo's case is still pretty good, even when he has to play Polish Club which he doesn't do with his "serious" partner.

Then again, I did agree to play his weird carding.

[jillybean]

Branch out.
It is definately good for my game and confidance to play with different partners. I do try to insist that we simplify things rather than
add more to an unfamilair CC. If you find that you click as a partnership you can quickly add things on.

[awm]

I've found it actually helps to play *very* different cards with my various partners. It seems that if I play strong club with one partner, standard with another, and 2/1 with a third... I actually have fewer accidents than playing slightly different flavors of 2/1 with several partners.

YMMV of course.

[rogerclee]

In my experience, starting out, it was useful to play a lot with various different people of varying skill levels. You get lots of opinions, filter them for yourself, and see lots of different styles of play that you can choose to leave or adopt.

As a non-top player, playing with non-top partners in non-top fields, you will hear lots of stupid opinions about bridge, even among the best players in your area. It's easy to stagnate if you only ever play with one person, whose stupid opinions sound increasingly reasonable to you as the years go on. If you are a talented and rapidly improving player (from your posts I would guess that you are), changing partners will be a common occurrence to you, as you outgrow your old partner every year or so, unless you and your partner are equally dedicated, something which is rare.

However, if you want to make the change from being a mid-level expert to being a great player, forming a serious partnership is key. One of the problems in my game is that I never developed a serious work ethic for one partnership, memorizing theoretically good system notes, getting in sync in terms of bidding and defensive signaling, etc. Bridge players are naturally lazy, and putting in the work away from the table is an underrated aspect of bridge even among the best players.

[fromageGB]

If you are thinking of playing less frequently (or putting less effort into the agreements) with one partner for the sake of trying another, I think the answer is "it depends".

While a good idea in principle to have a variety, as others have said, in my view it is a mistake if your current partner (that you would be partially dropping) is better than you, you are learning from him, and you are both putting in the effort to get comprehensive agreements and trying out different ideas. A good partner that you get on with is worth keeping.

[HighLow21]

Just be sure to use protection.

[Hanoi5]

The problem might be getting used to different approaches, but other than that I think it's fine.

[wyman]

A very strong player once told me that you should have 3 partnerships: one where you're the pro, one where you're the client, and one where you're equals. Trust me that you can learn a lot from all three partnerships.

[mgoetze]

wyman, on 2012-February-05, 10:06, said:

A very strong player once told me that you should have 3 partnerships: one where you're the pro, one where you're the client, and one where you're equals. Trust me that you can learn a lot from all three partnerships.

Looking for someone who wants to be my client so I can finance the partnership where I'm the client. Serious offers only please.

[diana_eva]

For me it was a very useful exercise to play with different partners who have different styles. Not just different systems, but some are more aggressive, others are ultra cautious, or some hate any attempts to get out of the system (unless they do it lol). Learning to cope with these things is good for discipline.

[Antrax]

Thanks all, some interesting thoughts. I'm not sure I can grade people with any degree of confidence - and I'm sure nobody would want me as a sponsor
Playing a completely different system does sound interesting, which means new partner will have to be on BBO since I'll be shot if I introduce anything that's not a SA variant to the local club game.

[pirate22]

The mind game of bridge is all about Wavelength-Discipline-Panache {at the right time}
yes enlarge one's harem,but start with basics,and build up specific agreements,
such as carding-defences to opps bidding-- and stamina comes into it,your own meanings
to bids in competitive bidding situations. learn to walk before you run.
Kibbing top players although their bidding methods today are "Advanced" to our
own,watching the defence-or play of a hand is all beneficial to ones own expertise..
not blowing a trumpet my harem is 20/25 friends at present,but we play what we have agreed.

[Free]

I find it interesting to have various partnerships. For me, the main point is to have variety so you get a better (objective) look at what you're playing in your other partnerships, so you can get an idea what style and system you prefer. I have 2 serious partners (and some other less serious partners), with one I play a solid 2/1 GF (except rebid), with the other I play a very aggressive strong ♣ system. Both are fun, both seem to work, and yet they are totally different. It gives you a better understanding of different methods.

Also, in the past, I used to play all sorts of systems played at the club (and others as well). The main reason was to learn the systems, see how they work, and find weaknesses, so when I play with another partner against these systems, at least I know what (not) to do. This has also helped me in developing some knowledge about bidding theory.

[Mbodell]

I'd agree with Clee that having multiple different regular partners is very good especially for us non-expert players. It is too easy to end up learning a style that fits your regular partner and not realize what parts are standard/good versus non-standard/bad and you tend to get different perspectives when you play with more people. It is also good because it leaves you more flexible if you have to play with a pickup some time or if your regular partner can't make some event, you have a backup.

[blackshoe]

What about those things that are standard/bad or non-standard/good?

[Antrax]

Such as?