FTL sucks and here's why

[hrothgar]

There is something here that is mystifying me.  It is the assumption about responder's shape.  I would have thought that a response of 1nt must have 4 clubs or possibly 5, otherwise would bid the 4 card suit be it diamonds hearts or spades.  So if opener does not like to leave in the double of 2s, (say min with 2245) he must bid 3 clubs with 4 or more.  A bid of 3 diamonds by opener knowing that responder had 4 clubs and not 4 diamonds must have a hand that is making a game try.  Clearly here this is not the understanding..... but why not?  To me (coming from an Acol background) it seems wrong in principle to respond 1nt with a 3343 distribution in preference to 1d.  But it seems to be the universal assumption with all posters that responder could have 4 diamonds. Is this the 2/1 system? If so I don't like it.  btw I am happy with responding 1M with 4 in preference to 1d with 4.

I'd bid 1NT with a 3=2=5=3 shape and the right strength...

[kenberg]

I don't think opener can be 3-1-4-5 but 1-3-4-5 seems completely possible. His 3D bid might even suggest this shape, and perhaps he should wait for that shape before making such a bid.

I am not quite sure why you think opener has to have a singleton to bid 3D. On this auction, if responder had 4C, he might very well bid 3C himself rather than make a speculative double. So for the double, responder surely has 4D's more often than not. Even with 1345 you would not want to play in 2Sx even if you beat it one for the reasons stated above. I don't think you can draw any inference about partners shape (well if he was 3145 he would have passed the double I guesss).

Oh I agree you cannot be certain opener has a stiff spade when he bids 3D. I don't suppose the auction shows a nine card spade fit, but it doesn't deny it either.

 

I am not particularly defending the 4C bid. Responder, when he must choose, knows that his side holds 16 cards in the minors, their side holds 16 cards in the majors. Often it pays to bid once more in such a situation. Not always. I see it as a tough choice. Getting five defensive tricks in the minors is a bit of a surprise, and then a heart trick comes in because opener shows up with the jack of hearts. Double!

 

Of course I would have gotten it right.

[chicken]

If I understand you correctly, the hand takes 9 tricks in clubs and 7 tricks in spades which means the LOTT also is off by a trick on this hand, in fact maybe more than a trick since double fits suggest upward adjustments.

 

 

 

the lott is rather precise here in my opinion. the positive adjustments for purity (discussable if doublefit=purity) are definately compensated for lack of shape and more important weak honor holding in spades + missing interiors in our diamond suit. (following the law, page 45-46). the adjustment priorities suggest a deduction of 1-1.5 tricks.

[helene_t]

To me (coming from an Acol background) it seems wrong in principle to respond 1nt with a 3343 distribution in preference to 1d.

With 3343 it's quite normal to respond 1NT, unless you want partner to declare. Especially if you tend to open 1♦ with 44m which most people do nowadays. A diamond fit is not really interesting.

 

This is matchpoints, nobody vulnerable. With a weak hand,you should try to keep opps out of their spades fit. Bypassing a 4-card hearts or a 6-card diamonds would not be absurd. Especially if you play four-cards majors so that opener is less likely to hold a four-card in a major when he opens 1♣.

[Wackojack]

To me (coming from an Acol background) it seems wrong in principle to respond 1nt with a 3343 distribution in preference to 1d.

With 3343 it's quite normal to respond 1NT, unless you want partner to declare. Especially if you tend to open 1♦ with 44m which most people do nowadays. A diamond fit is not really interesting.

 

This is matchpoints, nobody vulnerable. With a weak hand,you should try to keep opps out of their spades fit. Bypassing a 4-card hearts or a 6-card diamonds would not be absurd. Especially if you play four-cards majors so that opener is less likely to hold a four-card in a major when he opens 1♣.

Yes I have become aware from reading this thread that it is normal to by-pass diamonds with a balanced 6-10. My question is why?

 

Originally and still playing Acol 12-14 no trump, all 1 club openings promise at least 4 clubs. A popular method with balanced 15-19 hands was to bid 4 card suits up the line. Thus 4-4 fits cannot be missed although, of course, one may choose no trumps in favour of a 4-4 minor suit fit. This a simple and workable method which I still play with some partners.

 

Then I learned to play 5 card majors with 15-17 no trump, and similarly bid up the line with 12-14 and 18-19 balanced hands. Then I studied BBO Advanced and learned about Walsh sructures with check-back. I liked this structure because it right sided the contract, didn't unecessarily give away the existence of a 4 card major and most importantly did not overlook possible minor suit contracts. However, I can only see disadvantages if responder skips a diamond suit when a 4 card major is not held.

 

Lets take the 3343 distribution with 6-10 points:

1. If responder bids 1nt, the contract is more likely to be wrong sided when opener is balanced.

2. If opener is min with 4 diamonds and 5 clubs and 3-1 in the majors, you will be likely be playing in a generally inferior 5-3 club fit as opposed to a 4-4 diamond fit.

3. If opener is strong and unbalanced you miss out on delicate inferences when investigating the best game or slam.

4. If opponents intervene over the 1nt response you can get problems as encountered in this thread. Much better to let them intervene at the 1 level and go from there.

 

With a 2353 distribution the problems are magnified. I can't take seriously the skipping of a 6 card diamond suit.

 

Can anyone persuade me that I am wrong?

[helene_t]

1.  If responder bids 1nt, the contract is more likely to be wrong sided when opener is balanced.

You have a choice. If you think the contract is better played by partner, it is a case for bidding 1♦.

 

2. If opener is min with 4 diamonds and 5 clubs and 3-1 in the majors, you will be likely be playing in a generally inferior 5-3 club fit as opposed to a 4-4 diamond fit.

 

If you have a minor suit fit, opps have a major suit fit. They won't let you play 2♦. Besides, some would open 1♦ with 45m.

 

3. If opener is strong and unbalanced you miss out on delicate inferences when investigating the best game or slam.

Yes, but that may happen anyway if you start with a (somewhat) neboulous 1♦ response and opps preempt.

 

4. If opponents intervene over the 1nt response you can get problems as encountered in this thread.  Much better to let them intervene at the 1 level and go from there.

If it's lucrative for opps to intervene at the 2-level, they will do so anyway. Part of the reason for bidding 1NT is that you force the opps to bid at the 2-level even when they'd rather not do so.

 

It makes a lot of sense what you say, and I'm not arguing that you should always bypass diamonds. Just that it's sometimes right to do so. Nonvulnerable at matchpoints I think it's right more often than not, but I may be wrong.

[hrothgar]

Lets take the 3343 distribution with 6-10 points:

 

1. If responder bids 1nt, the contract is more likely to be wrong sided when opener is balanced.

2. If opener is min with 4 diamonds and 5 clubs and 3-1 in the majors, you will be likely be playing in a generally inferior 5-3 club fit as opposed to a 4-4 diamond fit.

3. If opener is strong and unbalanced you miss out on delicate inferences when investigating the best game or slam.

4. If opponents intervene over the 1nt response you can get problems as encountered in this thread. Much better to let them intervene at the 1 level and go from there.

Here are my thoughts:

 

A 1NT advance immediately clarifies both shape and strength.

- You promise at least xx in every suit.

- You narrow your strength down to a 5 HCP range.

 

I'd argue that you are better positioned in the event of a competitive auction.

Equally significant, your 1♦ advance over 1♣ promises an unbalanced hand and denies a 4 card major unless you have sufficient strength to reverse. Once again, you're very nicely positioned for competitive auctions.

 

Finally, there is an AWFUL lot to be said for jumping to an acceptable contract as quickly as possible. A 1NT advance forces the opponents to start describing their hands at the 2 level in a no-fit auction.

 

As to you're specific points

 

1. You can't have it all. This is all about trade offs. I will note that its rather amusing to see an Acol player who uses a 12-14 NT raising this point. If yuo genuinely believed that its important to have the lead going into the strong hand, you should switch to a 15-17 NT.

 

2. Personally, I open 1♦ with this shape. (I like my 2♣ rebid to suggest 6+ clubs). Not everyone here will agree with me on this.

 

3. I don't consider the 1N response to be overloaded.

 

4. Me, I prefer not having them intervene at all... Best way to do so is to force them to start describing their hands at the 2 level.

[lowerline]

Counting the ♠Q as 2WP is clearly a mistake. Counting the ♥K as 3WP is already optimistic. If partner has a singleton ♠ (very likely), you have a SST of 4. The FTL method now predicts you can take 9 tricks (19-21WPs + SST of 4).

 

You can not use this method to determine how many tricks you can take on defense. But you "know" that bidding 4♣ is only right when 3♠ makes...

 

The FTL book clearly states that the method is there to help you in your judgement, not to eliminate your judgement. It was bad judgement to count the ♠Q as 2WPs. That was the real problem. Don't blame the method.

 

Looking at both hands, you can see that there probably are 9 tricks in ♣. The SST is worse than you expected (5 i.s.o. 4) but there are more WPs to compensate for that.

 

Note: also the LOTT tells you not to bid 4♣...

[kenberg]

If you believe partner has a singlton spade it is not clear that the LOTT tells you not to bid 4C. They then have nine spades, you have nine clubs, this puts the trick total at 18 (before adjustments). With a singleton spade in dummy, you have a fine play for 9 tricks in clubs, the LOTT then gives them 9 tricks in spades. Further, if you can make 10 tricks in clubs the LOTT gives them 8 in spades. This is mps, and 130 beats 100. This in fact was the scenarion Whereagles envisioned.

 

 

Ben doubts you should assume a stiff spade in dummy, and as it turns out there isn't one. But if you believe a stiff spade is in the dummy, I think 4C is clear.

 

I think the best argument for not bidding 4C is that the king of hearts and the queen of spades are apt to be useful defensive cards, as one of them turns out to be. Actually both are useful since declarer will have entry problems. Still, if you defend and dummy turns up with one club and four diamonds instead of two clubs and three diamonds, you may have a tough time beating 3S. Declarer is threatening to ruff in dummy if partner doesn't start by leading trumps, but if he does lead trumps it may give him the entries and the timing to take five spades and four hearts, or maybe five spades, three hearts and one ruff.

 

You largely know the shapes here except you don't know if there are stiffs in the minors for the opponents and you don't know if there is a stiff in spades for you. Place a bet, imo.

[whereagles]

Well, when I bid 4♣ it was also because I knew opps had a double fit. I also know they didn't know they had one!

 

Actually, if their shapes were not mirrored, say 5323 opposite 3541, 3♠ will roll home most of the time.

[inquiry]

Ben doubts you should assume a stiff spade in dummy, and as it turns out there isn't one. But if you believe a stiff spade is in the dummy, I think 4C is clear.

I don't understand the "logic" of if you "believe" there is a stiff spade in partners hand, you should bid. IF you are going to use LOTT you should allow the partner use the information at his disposal to make the decision. There is no need for any quess work at all.

 

Here is the situation...

 

Opener has shown 45 in the minors and maybe 31, 13, or 22 in the majors, responder is either 43, 44, or perhaps 53/52 (with diamonds).

 

Here is how I think the bidding should go over 3S... if Responder is:

 

3-3-4-3, he should double again, we have an 8 card fit, tell partner we lack a nine card fit. With a singlton, partner can still remove, but he knows we lack 4 clubs.

 

3-3-3-4, he should pass to invite 4C on 9 card fit. This pass, inviting him to bid on, shows we have a nine card fit.

 

3-3-5-2, With this I would double, but pass is also a reasonable option. If you pass at least you have a nine card diamond fit if partner pulls to 4C

 

3-2-5-3, here I would simply pull to 4D

 

3-2-4-4, here I think pass to invite 4C, again showing a 9 card fit.

 

If responder doubles, showing 2 or 3 clubs, opener should probably respect his wishes. If responder passes, showing 4 clubs, opener is free to use LOTT and his own judgement as to rather or not bid on. And what helps him here? Why the very issue you mention. 1) He nows know about the 9 card fit for us, and he can look in his hand and count the number of spades he holds. If he has one, he can and probably will bid 4C. If he has two (or happy days, 3), he can double. No guess work involved.

 

What good is LOTT if you "blind guess" in a situation where you and your partner can cooperate to apply it correctly? As I have pointed out, I think whereagles post on this subject are wrong in many ways but one thing he was right on is that after the double of 2S at matchpoints, EW are not going to be allowed to play in 3S undoubled. For better or worse, if this responder passes, surely opener will do something. If this was imps, that might not be the case. Whereagles uses the quality of his spades to decide if double or pass is right. I use the quality of our fit to determine. Doubling with less than 9 card fit for us, and passing with 9 card so partner can determine the best course of action.

[hrothgar]

One point that no one seems to have mentioned yet...

 

Why did opener pull the double to 3♦ without Heart tolerance?

2NT looks a a lot more flexible...

[whereagles]

One point that no one seems to have mentioned yet...

 

Why did opener pull the double to 3♦ without Heart tolerance?

2NT looks a a lot more flexible...

I didn't ask pard why he bid 3♦, but I think the only reasonable explanation is he expected me to have 4-card diamond.

 

I would have bid 3♣ on his hand, instead of 3♦. 2NT might be better but I woudn't bid it unless I was 100% sure responder would take that as artificial.

[lowerline]

If you believe partner has a singlton spade it is not clear that the LOTT tells you not to bid 4C. They then have nine spades, you have nine clubs, this puts the trick total at 18 (before adjustments).  With a singleton spade in dummy, you have a fine play for 9 tricks in clubs, the LOTT then gives them 9 tricks in spades.  Further, if you can make 10 tricks in clubs the LOTT gives them 8 in spades. This is mps, and 130 beats 100. This in fact was the scenarion Whereagles envisioned.

 

 

Ben doubts you should assume a stiff spade in dummy, and as it turns out there isn't one. But if you believe a stiff spade is in the dummy, I think 4C is clear.

 

I think the best argument for not bidding 4C is that the king of hearts and the queen of spades are apt to be useful defensive cards, as one of them turns out to be.  Actually both are useful since declarer will have entry problems. Still, if you defend and dummy turns up with one club and four diamonds instead of two clubs and three diamonds, you may have a tough time beating 3S. Declarer is threatening to ruff in dummy if partner doesn't start  by leading trumps, but if he does lead trumps it may give him the entries and the timing to take five spades and four hearts, or maybe five spades, three hearts and one ruff.

 

You largely know the shapes here except you don't know if there are stiffs in the minors for the opponents and you don't know if there is a stiff in spades for you. Place a bet, imo.

 

You are right about the LOTT. I misread the vulnerablity...

But this makes even a better case for the SST/WP method. It predicts you can only take 9 tricks. You now only have to judge whether 3♠ makes or not...

The original poster bid 4♣ because he made a bad judgment in assessing his WPs.

[kenberg]

If you believe partner has a singlton spade it is not clear that the LOTT tells you not to bid 4C. They then have nine spades, you have nine clubs, this puts the trick total at 18 (before adjustments).  With a singleton spade in dummy, you have a fine play for 9 tricks in clubs, the LOTT then gives them 9 tricks in spades.  Further, if you can make 10 tricks in clubs the LOTT gives them 8 in spades. This is mps, and 130 beats 100. This in fact was the scenarion Whereagles envisioned.

 

 

Ben doubts you should assume a stiff spade in dummy, and as it turns out there isn't one. But if you believe a stiff spade is in the dummy, I think 4C is clear.

 

I think the best argument for not bidding 4C is that the king of hearts and the queen of spades are apt to be useful defensive cards, as one of them turns out to be.  Actually both are useful since declarer will have entry problems. Still, if you defend and dummy turns up with one club and four diamonds instead of two clubs and three diamonds, you may have a tough time beating 3S. Declarer is threatening to ruff in dummy if partner doesn't start  by leading trumps, but if he does lead trumps it may give him the entries and the timing to take five spades and four hearts, or maybe five spades, three hearts and one ruff.

 

You largely know the shapes here except you don't know if there are stiffs in the minors for the opponents and you don't know if there is a stiff in spades for you. Place a bet, imo.

 

You are right about the LOTT. I misread the vulnerablity...

But this makes even a better case for the SST/WP method. It predicts you can only take 9 tricks. You now only have to judge whether 3♠ makes or not...

The original poster bid 4♣ because he made a bad judgment in assessing his WPs.

This hand is, to my mind, a good showcase for the strengths and weaknesses of various approaches. First try it using no algorithms:

 

Whatever one thinks of opener's 3D bid, when responder has 3S passed back to him, he can reason that opener is 5-4 with most all of his values in the minors. This makes it virtually certain that in a club contract he will score exactly nine tricks in the minors (perhaps by ruffing the last diamond), and a tenth trick depends soley on the location of the ace of hearts. (Against best defense anyway. If LHO begins with AK of spades ....). If the ace of hearts is to the right of the king, 4C will make and 3S will hopefully go down in flames. Suppose the ace is to the left (as it is). It then makes sense to try to estimate the number of tricks available to the opponents in a spade contract. This is tougher. Suppose he decides, perhaps a little optimistically, to give opener Jx in one of the majors. Jx in either major will give the defense a trick in a spade contract. Can they take four more tricks in the minors? It depends on how the ten minor suit cards held by the opponents are arranged. With some arrangements of those ten cards you should bid 4C, with other arrangements you should double 3S. An algorithm can help you decide, but how the opponent's ten minor suit cards are arranged is both important and unknown.

 

I tend to favor double on the grounds that few points are likely to be on my right (partner opened, I have values, LHO bid) so it might not be so easy for declarer to get to dummy to take the necessary finesses to pick up my major honors, even if partner forgets to be dealt Jx. This tends to lower the number of total tricks. If dummy shows up with a stiff club, partner will not listen to my explanation as they score up 530.

 

 

It's a fact that LOTT is off by a trick here (it predicts 17 total tricks but there are 9 in clubs and 7 in spades). Well, LOTT isn't always right and no one says that it is. But here, with the number of total tricks below prediction because of Jx, we should double. If it is higher because of a stiff club in dummy, we need to bid. Same with other algorithms. WP requires you to figure out which cards are W. Flexibility, using the right tool at the right time, seems best.

 

 

I feel like I am repeating myself so I won't comment further on this thread, but I will read with interest what others have to say and I hope to see more discussion of competitive bidding decisions and how the various algorithms work in practice.

 

Best wishes,

Ken

[inquiry]

Ok. here are two I witnessed today, Pclayton was at the table so his comments might be useful here as well. To avoid double dummy hand analysis, we will will only show one hand each time, with all the alerts etc.

 

First hand. You pass, your LHO opens 1S, partner bids 2H, you try a natural, NF 2NT, partner pulls to 3H, back to you.

 

[/ONEHAND][hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

 

Second hand, you are third seat. After your partner passes, you overvall your RHO 1♥ bid with 2♦, partner, as a passed hand bids 2♠ which with three card support (see below) you pass. Your LHO wakes up now and bids 3♣ which gets passed back to you.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

 

So your choice on this one is, pass and let them play 3C, rebid your diamonds, raise partner to 3S, or double I guess. What does ZAR, FTL, and LOTT say here? And what would be your choice?

[inquiry]

Here is another one.

 

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=skjt84ha96d954ck9]133|100|Scoring: IMP

Partner opens 1C,

Next hand overcalls 1H

LHO bids a non-forcing 2D

Partner freely bids 2S (not playing Support X, so 3 or 4)

 

RHO passes

What does LOTT, FTL and ZAR say? And your bid is? [/hv]

 

BTW, none of these three are tricks or difficult... just three hands to practice using the method of your choice, should you decide to give it a try.

[mikeh]

Ok. here are two I witnessed today, Pclayton was at the table so his comments might be useful here as well. To avoid double dummy hand analysis, we will will only show one hand each time, with all the alerts etc.

 

First hand. You pass, your LHO opens 1S, partner bids 2H, you try a natural, NF 2NT, partner pulls to 3H, back to you.

 

[/ONEHAND][hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

 

Second hand, you are third seat. After your partner passes, you overvall your RHO 1♥ bid with 2♦, partner, as a passed hand bids 2♠ which with three card support (see below) you pass. Your LHO wakes up now and bids 3♣ which gets passed back to you.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

 

So your choice on this one is, pass and let them play 3C, rebid your diamonds, raise partner to 3S, or double I guess. What does ZAR, FTL, and LOTT say here?  And what would be your choice?

On 1, I don't use LOTT (and have not read FTL, but already know that LOTT is imperfect) for this kind of decision. And I don't pretend to know how to count Zar. So maybe my answer is irrelevant, but, as someone who routinely posts that the use of formulae is an obstacle, rather than a help, to learning how to play well, let's see what results my 'judgment' suggests.

 

I have described my hand to my partner. He has said that his hand is ill-suited to play in either 3N or 4♥, and that his hand suggests 3♥ rather than 2N. I have no extras: the 10♥ and the ♠9 are nice, but I hold no Aces and the ♠98 are not the same as 109, for example. I pass. Maybe I have missed game and, if so, maybe partner made the right bid, but I have to suspect that if game is on, then partner made an error: and I should not and will not bid in anticipation of an error.

 

 

On the second one, once again my ignorance of FTL and Zar renders my response of dubious value. I think that for LOTT purposes one can usefully assume that partner lacks 3♦s else he ought to bid in front of me. It is probable, but not certain, that he has 3♥...certainly it is most unlikely that LHO holds 3♥, but rho might well hold 6 or even a bad 7 and be unable to bid over 2♠. The most likely construction is that partner is 5=3=2=3 and that accordingly we hold a double fit and our hand is reasonably pure.. the ♣J is the only flaw.

 

The LOTT therefore suggests that there are approximately 18 total tricks, strongly suggesting that I compete. Which suit? Well, the main danger of competing is that opener has a good hand with, say, 4♠ and the AK of ♥... he may have a double available, knowing that we are on a 5-3 fit with minimal values and he has an easy path to a set. So I will bid 3♦, even tho that may be anti-positional in ♥. BTW, at the table, I would refer to LOTT as a check on what my instincts tell me: it can nudge me one way or the other on close decisions.

 

I will be interested to hear what the other valuation methods suggest... and to see how they accord with what passes (in my hands) for judgment.

[ArcLight]

Hand 1 -

Pard should have 6 hearts, and probably 1 Spade.

maybe 1=6=3-3 or 1=6=2-4

 

I think the Spade K = 0 with LHO bidding them and pard showing shortness.

We haev around 20 WP and a SST of 4. Im not ruffing anything.

3H is high enough.

 

 

Hand 2 -

We have the death holding in Hearts 3-3. Else LHO would have raised to 2.

Pard should have 5 Spades. With 6 and some points he'd bid a weak 2.

 

* - I assume pards 2S is not forcing, since he's a passed hand. I don't assume its a "fit raise". He bid to get us out of a bad contract.

 

Pard has a bunch of Clubs and is short diamonds.

5=3=1=4 ?

One thing the FTL website says is with fewer HCP you need more trumps to handle being forced.

 

I pass 3C.

[mike777]

1) Pass seems straight forward here.

2) 3D

 

I think pard will be 5=3=2=3

I do not think pard would bid 2s with a stiff D.

KQxxx...xxx...xx...Axx

or

KQxxx..Axx...xx...xxx

 

With a decent 4clubs he would X 3C.

[luke warm]

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

P (1S) 2H (P) 2NT (P) 3H (P)

 

here i'd discount my ♠K and pass... i also don't think my club honors are placed correctly, but i could be wrong

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

 

P (1H) 2D (P) 2S (P) P (3C) P (P)

 

and here i bid 3D... i think partner has 3 hearts and, probably, 3 clubs to go with his 5 spades... that leaves 2 diamonds and two 8 card fits... he can't be positive i hold 3 card spade support, but if my read is wrong (for example, if he does have 4 decent clubs and a stiff diamond) maybe my earlier pass of 2S will move him to 3

[inquiry]

First hand. You pass, your LHO opens 1S, partner bids 2H, you try a natural, NF 2NT, partner pulls to 3H, back to you.

 

[hv=d=s&v=n&s=sk985hjtdj843ckq8]133|100|Scoring: IMP

What does LOTT, FTL, and ZAR say?[/hv]

First hand is, I think a no-brainer. But lets look at the three methods, and compare with both dogma and expert (mikeh) judgement.

 

ZAR - South has 10 hcp, 2 cp, 10 dp for 22. He will lose one for the Jx (well JT) of hearts for 21. When his partner overcalls at the two level in hearts, this is most often 6+, so assume 8 card H fit, he gets his point back for the heart JACK, and the theory is he gets an additional point for both the Jack and the ten of hearts too. That brings him from 21 to 24. However, counting JT as 3 points is a stretch without a fit, and the spade king on this auction is not carrying its full weight. So there should be a few point deduction. You told your partner you had around 23-24 points and short hearts. With major deduction of 2pt or so for the spade king ZAR clearly suggest pass.

 

LOTT - not much to go on. PArtner probably doensn't have seven hearts (no jump to game opposite 2NT) so you have 8 card fit. They might have a nine card spade fit, but 7 card is much more likely since your RHO didn't raise to 2S over 2H, you can expect partner to have one to three spades. They may have an 8 card minor fit, but looks about 16 total trumps, maybe 17. Not sure who can make what but the king in their suit is a red flag especially in the "wrong hand". LOTT suggest passing.

 

FTL - you can't count the short suit in your hand, since it is trumps, and your partner rates to have only a one suiter here, so the thought is partner is either 6322 or maybe 7222, but a strong 6 card suit and weak 4 card suit is still possible. I would estimate our "SST" at 4. What about working points. Is the spade king working? Probably not. But all the other points should be worknig, so we offer 7 wp. For partners opening bid, we assume a minimum (due to the weak response). This will be around 12 to 14 points. We will assume the middle of this range, and call it 13. 13 + 7 = 20. With SST, the base for tricks is 9, and with between 19-21 WP, FTL suggest no adjusment to the base. So pass is the suggested bid. But note, if partner has 6421, and same WP, FTL would suggest bidding on unless the singelton was in clubs (then your your 5HCP would not be working).

 

DOGMA - good old fashion, mom and pop bridge: You defined your hand with your 2NT bid on 1) distribution, and 2) Strength. Since you were a passed hand the stregth is even clearer. Youo are therefore the "mate" and partenr is the captain. PArtner said not 3NT, not 2NT,and not 4H. I want to play 3H. You have nothing unusal to over ride his decision.

 

Expert opinion - from mikeh was to pass.

 

So I think this one was easy,and everyone should arrive at the same conclusion. At the table, everyone had their bids, and pass was the winning call. But who knows. if you assume partner has a singleton for pulling 2NT, FTL would favor bidding game.

[inquiry]

[hv=d=n&v=n&s=sa53ht42daqt843cj]133|100|Scoring: IMPS

P - 1H - 2D - P

2S - P - P - 3C

P - P - ?[/hv]

 

So your choice on this one is, pass and let them play 3C, rebid your diamonds, raise partner to 3S, or double I guess. What does ZAR, FTL, and LOTT say here? And what would be your choice?

On this one, as others, before you can draw conclusion from LOTT or FTL or ZAR, you need to visualize what you know. Partner has at least five spades, but didn't open and didn't preempt. So 7S is surely out of the picture, and 6S is probably not that likely. PArtner didn't support your diamond overcall that is surely odds on to be 6+ suit, so he probably lacks 3 diamonds.

 

ZAR - you have 11 hcp, 4 cp, and 14 dp. Subtract one for the singleton Jack of clubs, brings total to 28 ZARS. In support of spades, you pick up one for the spade ace. There is some question about the singleton with three trumps only. Since you lack an excess trump, I would not count it. So you have 29 ZARS. With spades, partner would have opened with 25 ZARS, and he is unlikely to get an upgrade when yuo support him (he has promised 5S, so he can not count extra distribution unless he has the unlikely 6th spade). So his max is 24 ZARS, and is probably in the range of 20 to 24, say 22.5 on average. So you have a combined 51.5 ZARS. Close to game values (why did you pass 2S ZAR might ask?). Zar would suggest bidding on. But there is a bother, that ZAR doesn't cover here. What ever points you partner has is hearts will clearly be in the wrong hand. WEST surlly lacks heart legnth, and is weak with long clubs. I see no way to use ZAR from your side to evaluate that.

 

LOTT - We have an 8 card spade fit, they likely have 8 or 9 club fit. LOTT suggest 16.5 tricks. If they can make 3C, we are down one/two in 3S, if we can make 3S, they are down one/two in 3C. Is there any factor that might influence your bid? Yes, you are concerned about partners honors out side of spades. They will be in clubs or hearts and either of those will not be good for you. Those hcp in those suits represent lack of purity issues. To make matters worse, the heart honors will be under the gun, and we are vul. I think LOTT suggest passing and taking -110 or +50 rather than risk -100 or more (especially if West has diamond honors behind you for his first pass).

 

FTL - we have a fit (spades, ignore the legnth). Our hand contains 10 wp, and we have a singleton. Partner will have 8 to 11 points (he is a passed hand), but some of his points are surely in hearts or clubs and will not be working. Lets assume that he has three hcp in those two suits (a king, a queen and a jack), that will leave him with 8 WP, for a total for us of around, 18 WP. We have a singleton and a three card side suit, so SST can not be less than four. What about partner? He has (likely) five spades, and 2 or fewer diamonds, if he had only 1D he might have passed istned of encouraging us, so we will play him for something like 5332 or 5422. That give us an SST of 4, but in the later case, we have three short suits, so reducing it to an SST of 3. In fact, we will also have an SST of 3 if partner does have a singleton, so we will estimate SST of 3. With SST of 3, the base tricks is 10. With 16-18 wp, subtract one level. So FTL suggest we can win 9 trick in spades, like ZAR, it suggest bidding on.

 

DOGMA - patner didn;t open, I got 11 hcp, we shouldn't be in the auction at the three level, suggest pass.

 

Expert opinion - mikeh (he really is an expert), suggesting bidding on to the three level.

 

ZAR was the most agreesive, it would not have passed on the last round, FTL and expert opinion were both to bid on as well.

 

LOTT might suggest a cautious pass, but others could reach a different opinion on that issue. And DOGMA was clearly in favor or pass.

 

The winning action at the table was pass, since you are down two. To be fair, your partners biddign was not the best. He held KJxxxx Qxx void xxxx. clearly he should have passed 2D. That would have been doubled then he could run to 2S. But the actual result on the hand is irrelevant, the trick is to see what they different evalaution methods suggest.

[ArcLight]

Since when does FTL say to bid on in the 2nd hand?

It also says on the website that you can't count SSP at full value if you dont have many trump.

A couple of spade leads and your ruffing value of clubs is diminished.

 

You also need to think about that heart suit xxx. Pard also has xxx. Thats very easy to lose 3 quick tricks (AK ruff).

[mikeh]

The winning action at the table was pass, since you are down two. To be fair, your partners biddign was not the best. He held KJxxxx  Qxx  void  xxxx. clearly he should have passed 2D. That would have been doubled then he could run to 2S. But the actual result on the hand is irrelevant, the trick is to see what they different evalaution methods suggest.

This statement is, with all respect, absolute nonsense and this kind of argument is precisely why I still maintain that trying to play bridge by the use of formulae is counter-productive beyond the beginner/intermediate stage, where formulae are necessary evils.

 

To conclude that a judgment to bid is mistaken is ludicrous when the justification for that assessment is the fact that your partner made an error.

 

Now, had you given partner a cross-section of real 2♠ bids and then shown that on balance bidding on led to a poor result, I might (would) look closely at why and place that info in my databank of results.

 

But to state that bidding on was an error or that LOTT or Zar or an abacus would be a poor guide BECAUSE they suggest bidding and bidding works poorly is plain illogical.

 

Partner opens a strong 2N and I hold a balanced 19 count. The correct bid is 7N, but ... lo and behold, partner miscounted and opened on a 15 count. The result is down 1. And you use that result to argue that using the 4321 count in order to bid 7N reveals a flaw in the method, rather than a flaw in partner?