How many QPs for slam?

[straube]

Any rules of thumb out there for deciding when to explore for slam and when not?

We're using QPs. Obviously it depends on distribution.

 

How many for each situaton, for instance...

 

2 balanced hands-8 cd fit

2 balanced hands-9 cd fit

1 balanced hand opposite a 5431 or 4441 hand?-8 cd fit

1 balanced hand opposite a 5431 or 4441 hand?-9 cd fit

1 balanced hand opposite a 5-5-2-1 hand-8 cd fit

1 balanced hand opposite a 5-5-2-1 hand-9 cd fit

 

Anyone care to take a stab? The question is how many before we start to explore for slam (risking the 5-level). thanks

[hrothgar]

My MOSCITO notes make some suggestions

[straube]

My MOSCITO notes make some suggestions

What do they suggest?

[hrothgar]

You can find an OLD OLD OLD incomplete version of the notes as http://www.bridgeguys.com/pdf/MoscitoNotesRichardWilley.pdf

 

I think the section on slam bidding starts around page 80 or so

[straube]

Thanks. I'd be interested in specific recommendations.

 

For example, if I have 4-4-3-2 opposite 4-1-4-4 I need AKQ x AKQ AK or 17

if suits behave. Except that that would require 2 ruffs (unless we have the diamond jack) so maybe we need 18 as a minimum.

 

If the balanced hand is captain, it has an easier time diagnosing the mesh. If the 144 hand is captain, maybe it needs 19 or so in combination just to ask.

 

Any thoughts?

[rbforster]

18 requires good shape and no wastage

19 requires a little luck (off AK or KKQ) but is worth exploring

20+ bid the slam or at least relay out everything

 

If you don't have a suit fit or a potential source of tricks, you might be a little more conservative.

[awm]

I'll just mention that I've played a QP-based relay system for quite a while now and I really don't think of things in this way. My tendency is just to visualize possible hands for partner once the QP total is known and try to figure out what we can make opposite various holdings. It really depends a lot on the shapes and how the hands fit.

[hrothgar]

I'll just mention that I've played a QP-based relay system for quite a while now and I really don't think of things in this way. My tendency is just to visualize possible hands for partner once the QP total is known and try to figure out what we can make opposite various holdings. It really depends a lot on the shapes and how the hands fit.

This is really good advice

 

The single best thing that you can do is to get a hand generator, deal out a lot of borderline slam hands, relay them out, and then see whats what....

[straube]

It's easier to do this when I'm balanced and relaying out an unbalanced hand. A lot harder the other way. If I'm unbalanced, I can picture the cards that partner needs for slam to make, but didn't Hamman say "I don't have the cards you're looking for"?

 

So say partner has shown 8 QPs and 3-4-4-2 and I have AQxxx x KQx AQJx. That's 19 if I did the math right. Do I ask? Still looking for rules of thumb here.

[rbforster]

So say partner has shown 8 QPs and 3-4-4-2 and I have AQxxx x KQx AQJx.  That's 19 if I did the math right.  Do I ask?  Still looking for rules of thumb here.

For that hand, key card in spades follorwed by a club asking bid seems best.

[akhare]

So say partner has shown 8 QPs and 3-4-4-2 and I have AQxxx x KQx AQJx.  That's 19 if I did the math right.  Do I ask?  Still looking for rules of thumb here.

For that hand, key card in spades follorwed by a club asking bid seems best.

Also, with only 11 QPs this hand should have reverse relayed and let the balanced hand do the asking.

 

Assuming that the reverse relays are limited to 12 QPs, a balanced hand with sub-par QPs can can quickly terminate the auction after discovering the basic shape...

[Free]

I remember in general to need 21 QP's (missing an A / K+Q / 3 Q's). However, if partner has a singleton opposite a suit where I don't have any values, we obviously need only 18 QP's (partner can have max 3 QP's in his singleton, so there are at least 3 QP's that opps hold which are irrelevant for us).

 

This is just a general idea, visualizing makes things more easy for sure.

[shevek]

It's easier to do this when I'm balanced and relaying out an unbalanced hand.  A lot harder the other way.  If I'm unbalanced, I can picture the cards that partner needs for slam to make, but didn't Hamman say "I don't have the cards you're looking for"?

 

So say partner has shown 8 QPs and 3-4-4-2 and I have AQxxx x KQx AQJx.  That's 19 if I did the math right.  Do I ask?  Still looking for rules of thumb here.

David (DinDip) could set you right here.

Basically, if partner has a balanced hand and you have a shortage. you should be describing. You can't easily evaluate your shortage but partner can.

 

We have methods like this

 

1♣  2♣ = 8+ HCP bal with a major

 

2♦ = relay

2M = usually unbalanced, planning to show shape, strain in doubt

3x = shortage

 

Anyway, say you realy to find 3-4-4-2 & 8 SPs. Probably the bid to show that is about 4♦.

Kxx  Axxx  Axxx  xx

is enough and not unlikely.

With the same and ♥KQxx slam is reasonable.

Note that Axxx is twice as common as KQxx. You need to know a bit of simple combination to assess chances.

There are less common layouts where slam is poor. You need DCB or equivalent to sort them out. Hands without ♠K are bad, even though partner will have ♠J half the time. I would press the DCB button and stop opposite ♥AK or no spade king.

3♥  4♦  8 SPs

4♥  4♠  0 ♥s or 2 including A (AK or AQ)

 

4♥  5♣  H - y, D - y, S - no

5♠

 

Yes 5♠ may fail. Too bad.

Otherwise have a go.

In the early days, guidelines are helpful. like 20 SPs, or 25 total of SPs & 3-2-1 shortage points.

[dake50]

Anyone have copy of hammick's site? He had a paper on slam types: bal-power, 2-suits, ruffs, X-ruffs with postulated frequency. That at least addresses the spectrum of cases. I lost my copy in a system crash.

[straube]

How about this for a rule of thumb? I know those who are more experienced with relays don't need a rule of thumb, but I'd like one for myself.

 

Add total QPs and total trump and decide whether to DCB

 

26 Don't investigate

27 Investigate but probably no slam

28 Investigate and probably bid slam

29 Almost certainly bid slam

[Free]

How about this for a rule of thumb? I know those who are more experienced with relays don't need a rule of thumb, but I'd like one for myself.

 

Add total QPs and total trump and decide whether to DCB

 

26 Don't investigate

27 Investigate but probably no slam

28 Investigate and probably bid slam

29 Almost certainly bid slam

That's a very poor rule imo. With a 5332 opposite 5332 distribution you have 10 trumps, so with your rule 19 QP will be enough, you need more like 21.

 

Make it 5143 vs 5413 and you still need 19 QP. However, here you can have enough with 15...

 

If you want to make a rule that depends on distribution, I'd advise you to take short suits into account, not long suits.

[straube]

Fair enough. Shortness is like the engine and trump like gasoline and my rule only takes into account the latter. If you look at my original post, I asked for recommendations for QPs for various patterns including shortages but no one took a stab at that.

 

I know this seems silly to others, but having a guideline for when to start dcb and when not is going to save my partner and I some imps and we're preparing for a tournament. Obviously no rule is going to work for every situation but for example I tried out my rule in our bidding practice last night and even that poor one seemed like it would be helpful. Maybe the rule should add points for shortness? Can you come up with a better rule, Free? It's not meant to supplant judgment. Just assist.

 

Maybe something along the lines of QPs + trump + shortness = a number and if that number is high enough, then DCB?

[straube]

How about this for a rule of thumb?  I know those who are more experienced with relays don't need a rule of thumb, but I'd like one for myself.

 

Add total QPs and total trump and decide whether to DCB

 

26  Don't investigate

27  Investigate but probably no slam

28  Investigate and probably bid slam

29  Almost certainly bid slam

That's a very poor rule imo. With a 5332 opposite 5332 distribution you have 10 trumps, so with your rule 19 QP will be enough, you need more like 21.

 

Make it 5143 vs 5413 and you still need 19 QP. However, here you can have enough with 15...

 

If you want to make a rule that depends on distribution, I'd advise you to take short suits into account, not long suits.

Ok, I looked up what Mike Lawrence had to say in "I fought the Law". Assuming a trump fit, he looked at the partnership's two shortest suits.

 

Let's say 5431 is opposite 4144. We have a trump fit (spades) and shortness in clubs and hearts.

 

Our Short Suit Total is 1+1 = 2.

 

Looking at that 5332 opposite 5332 our short suit total is 3 + 2 = 5 because you can't be looking at the same suit (clubs) twice.

 

I gathered that the SST difference equates to roughly a trick and a trick is roughly a king or 2 QPs. So perhaps if I subtract twice the SST from the QP total I can get a number and then I can use this number as a check before deciding whether to dcb and venture into the 5-level.

 

You were suggesting that 5332 opposite 5332 needed 21 QPs. So if we subtract 2 * 5 from 21 we'd get 11.

 

With your 5143 opposite 5413 you suggested we might need 15. If we subtract a SST of 2*2 from 15 we get 11.

 

Am I on the right track? Suggestions?

[Free]

Fair enough. Shortness is like the engine and trump like gasoline and my rule only takes into account the latter. If you look at my original post, I asked for recommendations for QPs for various patterns including shortages but no one took a stab at that.

I said the following:

 

I remember in general to need 21 QP's (missing an A / K+Q / 3 Q's). However, if partner has a singleton opposite a suit where I don't have any values, we obviously need only 18 QP's (partner can have max 3 QP's in his singleton, so there are at least 3 QP's that opps hold which are irrelevant for us).

 

This is just a general idea, visualizing makes things more easy for sure.

 

This is still the best advice I can give. Setting up a rule for this is probably VERY complicated, because lost values in partner's short suit have to be accounted for, the comparisson between length of partner's short suit in your hand and the number of trumps in partner's hand may be important,...

 

Rules are to be broken, but if you really want to create a simple rule I'll be happy to give critisism if you're going the wrong way :D

[Free]

Ok, I looked up what Mike Lawrence had to say in "I fought the Law". Assuming a trump fit, he looked at the partnership's two shortest suits.

 

Let's say 5431 is opposite 4144. We have a trump fit (spades) and shortness in clubs and hearts.

 

Our Short Suit Total is 1+1 = 2.

 

Looking at that 5332 opposite 5332 our short suit total is 3 + 2 = 5 because you can't be looking at the same suit (clubs) twice.

 

I gathered that the SST difference equates to roughly a trick and a trick is roughly a king or 2 QPs. So perhaps if I subtract twice the SST from the QP total I can get a number and then I can use this number as a check before deciding whether to dcb and venture into the 5-level.

 

You were suggesting that 5332 opposite 5332 needed 21 QPs. So if we subtract 2 * 5 from 21 we'd get 11.

 

With your 5143 opposite 5413 you suggested we might need 15. If we subtract a SST of 2*2 from 15 we get 11.

 

Am I on the right track? Suggestions?

Problem is that you can have enough with 15 if you have the 5431s, but it's not always the case. It depends on what partner holds in our short suit, and what we hold in partner's short suit.

 

I'm not sure where you're going, but am I correct to assume you consider 11 some kind of constant?

[Cascade]

A simulation suggested you were a little too conservative.

 

        <25     25     26     27     28     29     30   >30     Sum
 <9    311     20      5      1      0      0      0      0    337
  9   1107    153     38      3      1      0      0      0   1302
 10   1814    557    245     66     15      1      0      0   2698
 11   1100    964    659    279    103     25      3      1   3134
 12    272    329    491    410    279    129     32     10   1952
 13     22     33     79    122    104    115     64     38    577
Sum    4626   2056   1517    881    502    270     99     49  10000
       6.3%  17.6%  37.6%  60.4%  76.3%  90.4%  97.0%  98.0%  25.3%

 

I generated 10000 hands with a combined total of 24 or more hcp and a guaranteed 8 card or longer fit somewhere.

 

I then simply found the longest fit (combined length between the two hands) and calculated the double dummy tricks.

 

The results are tabulated against QPs + combined trumps.

[Cascade]

1000 hand simulations similar to the above with additional criteria for short suits

 

QPs + combined trump length with no shortage

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low      52     14      3      0      1      0      0      0      0     70
  9    109     68     32     12      1      1      0      0      0    223
 10    110    120     82     38      8      5      0      0      0    363
 11     20     38     64     51     34     12      1      2      0    222
 12      1      3      5     26     28     16      7      1      1     88
 13      0      0      1      2      7      8      6      5      5     34
Sum     292    243    187    129     79     42     14      8      6   1000
       0.3%   1.2%   3.2%  21.7%  44.3%  57.1%  92.9%  75.0% 100.0%  12.2%

 

QPs + combined trump length with a singleton in the shorter trump hand (or either hand if equal length)

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low      18      7      0      1      0      0      0      0      0     26
  9     75     25     10      3      0      0      0      0      0    113
 10    105     78     56     10     10      0      0      0      0    259
 11     51     91     83     55     34      7      3      0      0    324
 12     12     19     51     55     48     29     13      2      1    230
 13      0      0      4     10      7     12      8      5      2     48
Sum     261    220    204    134     99     48     24      7      3   1000
       4.6%   8.6%  27.0%  48.5%  55.6%  85.4%  87.5% 100.0% 100.0%

 

QPs + combined trump length with a singleton in the longer trump hand

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low      19      8      1      1      0      0      0      0      0     29
  9     60     42     19      3      0      0      0      0      0    124
 10     92     92     68     19      8      1      0      0      0    280
 11     45     70     90     70     35     15      6      0      0    331
 12      6     17     30     52     32     22     16      1      0    176
 13      1      0      6      5      8     17      7     13      3     60
Sum     223    229    214    150     83     55     29     14      3   1000
       3.1%   7.4%  16.8%  38.0%  48.2%  70.9%  79.3% 100.0% 100.0%

 

QPs + combined trump length with a void in the shorter trump hand (or either hand if equal length)

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low       5      0      1      0      0      0      0      0      0      6
  9     40     11      4      1      2      0      0      0      0     58
 10     61     49     25      2      1      0      0      0      0    138
 11     91     86     81     31     15      2      1      0      0    307
 12     52     56     62     59     45     14      8      1      1    298
 13      8     20     30     51     32     26     15      8      3    193
Sum     257    222    203    144     95     42     24      9      4   1000
      23.3%  34.2%  45.3%  76.4%  81.1%  95.2%  95.8% 100.0% 100.0%

 

QPs + combined trump length with a void in the longer trump hand

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low      16      3      1      1      0      0      0      0      0     21
  9     66     34     14      8      2      0      0      0      0    124
 10     92    104     52     29      8      1      0      0      0    286
 11     37     84     88     61     30     17      5      0      0    322
 12      5     16     39     42     39     23     12      2      2    180
 13      0      0      2      9     17     10     15     11      3     67
Sum     216    241    196    150     96     51     32     13      5   1000
       2.3%   6.6%  20.9%  34.0%  58.3%  64.7%  84.4% 100.0% 100.0%  

 

 

QPs + combined trump length with a singleton or void (non-matching) in both hands

 

        Low     24     25     26     27     28     29     30   High    Sum
Low       4      1      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      5
  9     42     12      4      1      0      0      0      0      0     59
 10     66     63     20     11      3      2      0      0      0    165
 11     77    104     91     41     23      3      1      0      0    340
 12     20     39     70     83     49     29      8      5      1    304
 13      4      7     10     24     32     17     16     13      4    127
Sum     213    226    195    160    107     51     25     18      5   1000
      11.3%  20.4%  41.0%  66.9%  75.7%  90.2%  96.0% 100.0% 100.0%      

[straube]

Ok, I looked up what Mike Lawrence had to say in "I fought the Law".  Assuming a trump fit, he looked at the partnership's two shortest suits.

 

Let's say 5431 is opposite 4144.  We have a trump fit (spades) and shortness in clubs and hearts.

 

Our Short Suit Total is 1+1 = 2.

 

Looking at that 5332 opposite 5332 our short suit total is 3 + 2 = 5 because you can't be looking at the same suit (clubs) twice.

 

I gathered that the SST difference equates to roughly a trick and a trick is roughly a king or 2 QPs.  So perhaps if I subtract twice the SST from the QP total I can get a number and then I can use this number as a check before deciding whether to dcb and venture into the 5-level.

 

You were suggesting that 5332 opposite 5332 needed 21 QPs.  So if we subtract 2 * 5 from 21 we'd get 11.

 

With your 5143 opposite 5413 you suggested we might need 15. If we subtract a SST of 2*2 from 15 we get 11.

 

Am I on the right track?  Suggestions?

Problem is that you can have enough with 15 if you have the 5431s, but it's not always the case. It depends on what partner holds in our short suit, and what we hold in partner's short suit.

 

I'm not sure where you're going, but am I correct to assume you consider 11 some kind of constant?

I totally get visualization. The nice thing about visualization is that you can rule out slam for certain hands. You can give partner the perfecta and if it's still not enough, you don't explore. Of course, sometimes partner can have several combinations of cards that are sufficient for slam. But the fewer QPs one's side holds, the more perfectly aligned they have to be to produce slam and then one has a probability decision...what is the likelihood that partner's QPs are useful vs what is the risk of them not being useful and getting too high trying to find out? That's what this is about for me.

 

I don't think 11 is a constant exactly. I was trying to come up with an equation that results in a number that would signal the likelihood of a slam being present. With this particular rule, 11 seems to be the point at which slam has a likelihood. Of course, that's just looking at 2 hands.

 

Here's 2 more from last night

 

AKx KQ KQTxxx Axx vs Tx Axxx Axxx QJx

SST=4 so 21- (2*4)=13

 

AQx AKQxx Qxx Qxx vs xxxxxx x AJx Axx

This hand feels funny because the shortness of one hand is opposite length of the other. anyhow...

SST=4 so 18- (2*4)=10

 

I still think that length in trump matters. Obviously it doesn't matter if the hands are mirrored or there is no shortness, but hands with shortness and only an 8 cd fit can have handling problems that 9 cd fits don't have. Perhaps SSTs indirectly take trump length into account.

[straube]

Cascade, thanks a lot for your work. Seems like a degree of shortness is about a trick.

 

If you're interested in seeing how the SSTs bear on the solution, maybe you can run QPs (not QPs + trump length) for each scenario. It can confirm or disprove the SST rule.

 

 

4333 vs 3334 (specific) for 6 SSTs

 

5332 vs 3442 (specific) for 5 SSTs

 

4432 vs 2443 (specific) for 4 SSTs

 

5431 vs 2443 (specific) for 3 SSTs

 

5431 vs 1543 (specific) for 2 SSTs

 

5440 vs 1543 (specific) for 1 SST

[straube]

I've looked into Lawrence's method even more. For trick estimation he says that 13-SST=tricks expected if we have 19-21 hcp. For each 3pt range (22-24, 25-27) he adds 1 trick.

 

hcp.....tricks..QPs

19-21.....7.....12

22-24.....8.....14

25-27.....9.....16

28-30.....10...18

31-33.....11...20

34-36.....12...22

37-39.....13...24

 

Is that right? I'm not sure.

 

So converting hcps to QPs...

 

(QP total)/2 + 7 - SST = trick expectation.

 

let trick expectation = 12 (solving for small slam)

 

(QP total)/2 + 7 - SST = 12

 

(QP total) + 14 - 2*SST=24

 

QP total - 2*SST = 10

 

So if the total is ten or higher then slam should be on. All of this assumes that the QPs are working and that may not be knowable until after dcb. So perhaps the more we rely on distribution and perfectas the more reluctant we should be to use this rule.