New Counting system of Honor Card Point

[neilkaz]

There is a difference in the value of an honour between trump and NT contracts. In trump contracts, the value of honours is more like:

A = 4.5

K = 3

Q = 1.5

J = 0.75

T = 0.25

(A = KQ = 3Q; K = 2Q; Q = 2J; J = 3T)

X4/3

 

A=6

K=4

Q=2

J=1

T=1/3

 

Not coincidental that your relative values and ZARs come out to the same, when you use a different total.

 

I kind of like it, because it totals to 52 points (excluding tens). You have 13 cards, and on the average, 13 points. It also means that on the average you win one trick per 4 points, and a trick has 4 cards. I think if we were starting over, this is the count I'd use.

 

Unfortunately Goren points are pretty much locked in for beginners, and required for alerting and annoucning points.

Off course if you like this method, just stick to the 52 pts and to be really nitpicky you can adjust for tens noting that the average hand is supposed to contain 1 ten. So if you have no tens substact 1/3 of a pt.

 

I do agree that there are better counts than 4321. I use 4321 and hope that I continue to improve my adjustments as my experience gains.

 

Zars is good, but when you don't fit a fit, it seems less good.

 

I expect there will be more small advances in this field to come from computers, but one thing to keep in mind is the thousands of bridge book written using 40 HCP count and that 40..ie 10 per hand is an easy number to work with mentally.

 

Then again, how hard would it be to use 52 pts, again noting we have 52 cards and 4 pts should equal a trick ?

[neilkaz]

I found this very interesting link

 

http://members.cox.net/4evanb/bigclub/chpt02.htm

[ASkolnick]

About ZARS count (I have talked to him as well),

 

1) yes, you can come up with things more accurate than 6-4-2-1, but you also need to include practicality as well. I am sure 5.85-3.72-1.96-.85 is more accurate, but who is going to remember to the x decimal place.

 

2) There are negative adjustments in misfit hands (minus 2 lengths)

 

3) Some of his premises about 5-3 fits are inconsistent on whether suits should be bid versus NT.

 

4) Short honors need to be deducted and interior spots need value. Also, interior spots are better when working with working honor and not in long suits. Kaplan created a value for this in a simulator, but once again, to what extent are you learning.

 

But we are just talking about a reasonable solution without using a calculator.

[DrTodd13]

IMHO, BUM RAP is a better starting point than Milton.

 

A=4.5, K=3, Q=1.5, J=0.75, T=0.25.

 

Still the same total points in each hand. You quickly learn how to add this up almost as fast as Milton. The same modifiers apply as you would with Milton like deducting for doubleton honors and adding for concentrated values and nice combinations of honors. For those relayers, it also have the nice property of decreasing the frequency with which you have to lie about point count because you don't have the required number of controls.

[NickRW]

For those relayers, it also have the nice property of decreasing the frequency with which you have to lie about point count because you don't have the required number of controls.

I'm not a relayer, far from it, but I can echo the general thought there. We've had quite a number of successful auctions such as 1H-5H-6H since using this 3:2:1 ratio for A/K/Q. It sounds terribly unscientific going 1H-5H-6H and not check for aces - but it seems to be much less necessary when you're properly valuing them in the first place B)

 

Nick