concentration

[kgr]

Kind of strange question...trying to improve to basis of my defence and declarer play... I read here in other posts that one should work on patern recognition, counting...

Now I try to count partner's point when defending: e.g. when declarer has opened 1NT then I count him for 16 HCP +- 1. That gives partner 7 HCP +-1 and when partner shows an Ace I (try to) remember: 3 +-1 left for partner.

 

What is the sequence, as a defender, to work on from here (it will not work all together from the 'start'):

- work out/remember declarer's distribution

- work out/remember partner's distribution

- work out/remember distribution of a suit

- ....

 

How are you doing this as declarer?

 

As dummy is it best to relax a bit or would you rather advice to continue the training?

 

Thanks,

Koen

[mikeh]

Well, I don't see how you can work out any player's distribution before working out how at least a couple of suits break. So I work on one suit at a time.

 

Now, it is often possible for 3rd hand to know, before declarer even calls a card from dummy, a lot about the shape of the hand, and the distribution of at least 2 suits. Declarer may have already either specified or strongly hinted at his length in some suit or other, while a spot card lead from partner, if playing 4th or 3/5 etc will often virtually cinch the distribution of that suit once dummy hits.

 

Personally, as I gather more info re known or strongly suspected suits, I begin to picture the missing hands, and combine those vague pictures with inferences from the bidding, the first few cards played by declarer, partner's contributions and so on.

 

BTW, I am NOT a big fan of count, as a defender, other than on opening lead, so I tend to reverse-engineer shape from the bidding and inferences from declarer's line or partner's approach to the defence. Religious count givers will sometimes build a picture of shape a trick or two before I do, but their declarers, if competent, will eat them alive... I mentally give thanks to the bridge gods whenever my opps are frequent count-signallers.

 

As for practicing when dummy.. I think that it is an excellent idea.

 

Many writers suggest that you relax when dummy... conserve your energies.

 

That may make sense if you are going to be playing a LOT of bridge over a short time, and if you are already happy with your card-reading abilities, but it results in a waste of a terrific opportunity to hone skills.

 

As dummy, you see only your cards (don't, repeat.. don't look at partner's hand). You have the least amount of info of all the players, but, if you practice, you can still work out an awful lot.

 

I promise you that if you get to the point of being able to correctly reconstruct all 3 hidden hands by, say, trick 8 or 9 on most hands, as dummy.. and this is entirely possible... then your abilities as defender or declarer will improve drastically... if you can do this at trick 8 while seeing only your 13 cards at trick 1, imagine how well you will do when you start by seeing 26!

[kenrexford]

One warning! Do not let yourself be sucked into treating your count as 100% assured. People open weird 1NT and 2NT openings (people like me), such that partner might very well have an additional HCP or two unexpected. Trust the count as probable, but do not either give up on a plausible line or blindly pursue a remote line without thinking.

 

That said, when you are finding exceptions to consider, you are well ahead of the field.

 

I agree with Mike's preference for what he calls "reverse engineering." Although superficially more complicated, I think that "big picture" count is more reliable and actually easier.

 

As an example, consider the lead of the deuce. Whereas this might tell you that this suit is splitting 4-whatever, it also might tell you that LHO has a probable 4-4 in two known suits, a klnown doubleton in the third, and hence three in the last. Or, a doubleton lead might prove RHO to have 6-5 shape in his two known suits, with a probable 2-0 in the other two suits because LHO cannot reasonably have, say, seven of the one suit. In other words, one card might give pictures of various suits, which limit other suits, and the interplay of the four suits between the two opponents blend well to create a picture.

 

Trying to remember the number of cards played in four suits, and the count shown in each, is quite a difficult way to get to the end result.

[Echognome]

I personally tried to encourage students to count, count, count as they were advancing. I think it helps them get into the habit of thinking in terms of shape and how to defend double dummy, rather than just relying on "feel". I readily admit that it can help an astute declarer more so than it might help them, but it's only a short-term loss.

 

Once they get comfortable thinking through the shapes of the hands, declarer's hcp, and counting the tricks needed and considering the line taken by declarer and what assumptions must be placed on the defenders, *then* I feel they are ready for the next step which is to practice defending without count. I recommend that they spend a short time giving no signals at all (not in serious competitions) and working on working out the missing hands through inferences from the play and the bidding.

 

The final step is to combine the two and figure out good rules for when they can rely on partners signals generally and when they should randomize to not give away crucial information to declarer. I think that's a subtle art and I don't like teaching my students to try to run before they can walk.

[MFA]

Yes, a lot of counting (distribution, not hcp). Hard work at first but one gets better and better with practice.

 

Defending "on the feel" alone should be unacceptable to the serious player (maintain self discipline).

[Mbodell]

I've personally found that one of the side benefits of sometimes playing a relay system is it increase how well/quickly/easily I could recognize the hand patterns of my hand. Like I know how to show a 6331 and 7321 and 5431 hand and as a result I got better at knowing that the pattern is 6331. That means that there is more instinct in coming up with the 6331 pattern than realizing someone has 6 cards and someone else has 1 card and I have 3 cards so the missing person must have 3 cards (without doing 13-6-1-3 implies 3 cards). My more or less instantly realizing that 6331 is a pattern that adds up to 13 which means I don't need to do as much calculation in a couple of ways as this pattern could be in my hand (6♠3♥3♦1♣) or it could be the way any single suit is splitting (6 cards N; 3 cards W; 3 cards S; 1 card E) or it could be declarers hand. Also, I get a qualitative feel for the relative frequencies of certain breaks if I think to myself how often have I had to relay 6331 versus relay 6421 versus 6430 etc.

 

One of the things I find hardest to balance is how the shape and the points fit together. Like if I want to know who has the, say, K♥. Let's say I can see 20 hcp myself and one of the hands has, through the bidding, shown 15-17 points (say LHO). But let's also say I can see 6 hearts myself and know one hand has 5 of the missing ones and the hand with the points has only 2 of the missing cards. So based on shape the LHO has only a 2/7 chance of the king. Based on points the LHO has, roughly, 16/20 likelihood of having the king. Combining the two is tricky (and obviously which lines people played and why they did that can influence things in addition to just shape and points).

[pclayton]

All that really matters is the end result of being able to picture the unseen hands. Of course, being able to count is only one aspect. You need the technical expertise of understanding themes of card play. Both need to be worked on simultaneously, since counting and themes are totally interrelated.

 

During the early part of my bridge, I read, and read and read. I became really good at recognizing themes, but I sucked at counting. Later as I played more, I became a better counter, but I think I'm an exception, since most people start out by playing a lot, and study as they go. After a while it becomes ingrained.

 

For the first several years, I think a person should try to count everything in sight. Distribution, points, etc.. Expect to miscount a lot of things in the beginning. Verify and double and triple check if something doesn't add up. After a single session of bridge, if you aren't mentally exhausted, you aren't trying hard enough.

 

Some time ago, I said I think its a great exercise to stop focusing on your own hand even during the auction. If I don't think I'll have any bidding decisions to make, I'll fold up my cards and just listen to the bidding (and the cadence), although I'll try not to convey to my partner this lol.

 

In the beginning, there will be middle and end game positions that you will feel totally lost on. These will become less frequent as you go along. As you continue to become a better counter, patterns will develop and counting will become easier. Great players still get hands wrong, but they get less of them wrong than the run of the mill.

 

Later, you will be able to utilize clues based on what a defender or declarer did or didn't do.

 

You will also learn to determine what is relevant information to a hand, which will help you conserve energy for the important stuff. However, you must fight off the urge to get lazy, and do what you are supposed to do.