Jump to content

Cover losers


Recommended Posts

A rough rule of thumb for hands is every ~3 points removes a loser and an opening hand has 7 losers. So 12-14 = 7 losers, 15-17 = 6 losers, 18-20 = 5 losers, 21-24 = 4 losers. Also 6-9 = 9 losers, 10-12 = 8 losers. Obviously, distribution is very important and a distributional hand will have far fewer losers. A very flat hand will have more losers. I'd expect a 15-17 nt hand to have 6 losers most often, but 7 much more often than 5. So, say 6 1/3 losers on average.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I meant more as covering the other hands losers. i.e if my pd opens a 15-7 nt, shows a 18-9 nt, or 20-21 nt, how many of my losers can i expect pd to cover. Going by the ~ 3 hcp removes a loser, a 15-7 can at max. in general removed 4-5 losers, a 18-9 cover about 5-6 losers, and 20-21 remove about 6-7 losers?

So it is probably reasonable to think of slam with a 6 loser hand against a 15-7 NT, 7 loser hand against a 18-9 nt, 8 loser hand against a 20-21 nt? ofcourse depending on whether the #'s are closer to the lower or upper range. and going by this general rule, one can pretty much forget thinking of a slam if they have a 7 loser hand against 15-7 nt, 8 loser hand against 18-9 nt, and 9 loser hand against 20-21 nt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to your question must exist, but as MattieShoe points out, it is not particularly useful on any particular hand. To take an extreme example:

 

JT9xxxxxxx x x x

 

vs

 

AKx Axx x AQJxxx

 

You have 5 losers to cover in either case, but of course it is much easier to cover the losers in the second hand than the first hand. The first hand's losers can only be covered by extremely specific cards, whereas there are many ways to cover the five losers in the second hand. That is why this method of hand evaluation is not effective if used blindly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No nothing wrong. Just that would be quite rigid. So if pd opens a 15-7 nt, and u have 15 points, this is a max of 32, and hence not slam going, but we all would make some try. So wondered how the equation comes into play with LTC. Maybe LTC is even more rigid. i.e on general forget distribution etc. doesnt make sense to even try for slam over a 15-7 nt with 16 hcp, cos you "rate" to have approximately 1.7 losers, so may only work 30% of the time. Well ofcourse that is why we have bidding systems, conventions, RKC etc to stop below the 6 level. This was just a curious thought/exercise. The thread can end.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...