Antrax Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Two hands, one I downgraded, one I didn't. Should either of these be downgraded? ♠K53 ♥A42 ♦A63 ♣AT75 ♠QJ8 ♥AJ5 ♦J85 ♣KQJ9 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I vote, no. But I actually looked at the hands; some here don't need to look before saying no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broze Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 First one: no Quacks so no downgrade. Second one closer IMHO (I'm sure this is the one you chose) but that ♣ suit is gold: no downgrade. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Should either of these be downgraded?What gives you the idea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bbradley62 Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 No downgrade here either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ggwhiz Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 An emphatic no. Just giving partner a problem they don't deserve otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilkaz Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 I'd not downgrade either hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petterb Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 15.60 http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=K53+A42+A63+AT75 12.55 http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=QJ8+AJ5+J85+KQJ9 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TWO4BRIDGE Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Two hands, one I downgraded, one I didn't. Should either of these be downgraded? ♠K53 ♥A42 ♦A63 ♣AT75 ♠QJ8 ♥AJ5 ♦J85 ♣KQJ9 Quite awhile ago, I ran across the following ( but I don't use it ) :A = 4.5K = 3.25Q = 1.75J = 0.5 10.0 First hand = 4.5 + 4.5 + 4.5 + 3.25 = 16.75 Second hand = 1.75 + 0.5 + 4.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 3.25 + 1.75 + 0.5 = 13.25 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aguahombre Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Quite awhile ago, I ran across the following ( but I don't use it ) :Good. In addition to not using it, don't try to find it again :rolleyes: How does that counting method feel about tens? Right or wrong, it seems to work if we just assume something will be wasted when choosing an opening bid, then upgrade if our points are all the nuts. Otherwise, we just stay in the boat. For downgrades, we look for KQ tight and QJ tight, but have found that to be wrong at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gszes Posted April 28, 2012 Report Share Posted April 28, 2012 Two hands, one I downgraded, one I didn't. Should either of these be downgraded? ♠K53 ♥A42 ♦A63 ♣AT75 ♠QJ8 ♥AJ5 ♦J85 ♣KQJ9both highly reasonable minimum 1n bids just remember ifp makes a mild slam try hand 1 is worth pursuing slam(all controls) hand 2 is not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antrax Posted April 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Oh wow, I'm terrible. I actually downgraded the first hand but not the second one, figuring it's more suit oriented and then the poor distribution is a minus. The second one seemed adequately no-trumpish with slow tricks and all that. I *think* I'm trying to apply concepts from Lawrence's hand evaluation book, but clearly I'm too pessimistic.Thanks :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nigel_k Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Definitely don't downgrade the first, aces are undervalued already. I think the theoretically correct values, given you know nothing about where the contract will be played, are 4.4, 2.8, 1.6, 0.8 and 0.4 for tens. So this is 16.4 as a starting point. I would downgrade the second though. Kaplan/Rubens overstates the first and understates the second, assuming you play in notrump. If you play in a suit though, the second is going to be quite a lot worse than partner will expect. Downgrading has the added bonus of indicating a club lead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Yeah downgrading the 2nd one seems fine. I wouldn't do it personally but would never criticize it. The first hand is nothing special if youre going to play in NT opposite a balanced hand, but it is a huge error to downgrade if partner has either a trick taking based NT hand or a suit hand. I would be horrified if my partner had a distributional hand and he was bidding assuming I had 12-14 balanced. I actually downgraded yesterday, I had Qx KQ KQx A987xx and opened a 14-16 NT (ok, well I failed to upgrade, but 16 and a 6 bagger is a downgrade in my book!). Joe said HOW CAN YOU OPEN 1N with 16 and a 6 bagger! To me, the best features for downgrading are short honors (KQ doubleton, Qx, QJ doubleton, KQJ third etc), lack of aces, and a bad long suit. For instance, KQ KQ QJxx Qxxxx would be an easy downgrade. The first hand has a lot of jacks, but it doesn't really have short honors, only one honor is unsupported, and the 4 card suit is good. It definitely suffers from lack of aces and only has one king though. It doesn't even have any tens, though that 9 of clubs might be worth something. If you made it QJx AJx KQJ Jxxx I would think it is an easy downgrade. But yeah, basically this is the same argument as always, I think it's only right to downgrade the really extreme ones, and the 2nd one is just a well below average hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwnn Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 15.60 http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=K53+A42+A63+AT75 12.55 http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=QJ8+AJ5+J85+KQJ9Wow, the second one is shocking, I've never seen such a huge discrepancy. I guess I will stop using K&R in arguments from now on since I wouldn't downgrade this hand. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcphee Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I vote no. The first one is clear NT, the second one sucks a tad, but my turn and what the heck 1N. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 Wow, the second one is shocking, I've never seen such a huge discrepancy. I guess I will stop using K&R in arguments from now on since I wouldn't downgrade this hand. K&R is quite easy to game if you want to see some funny ones. But yeah, it is definitely stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgoetze Posted April 29, 2012 Report Share Posted April 29, 2012 I think K&R is reasonable for evaluating for suit contracts. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zelandakh Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 Quite awhile ago, I ran across the following ( but I don't use it ) :I think there is a big difference between quacks with a supporting higher honour and those without. It makes more sense to me to downgrade those without by 0.5 points and not downgrade others at all than to uniformly downgrade them by 0.25/0.5. Similarly for tens in combination with higher honours. The second hand is probably a downgrade if you switch the ♣Q to diamonds (♠QJ8 ♥AJ5 ♦QJ5 ♣KJ98). The first hand is not close to a downgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P_Marlowe Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 Hi, If you downgrade, that you would downgrade the 2nd. I wont downgrade. A reason not to downgrade - usually the agreement set after a NT opening will be fairlydetailed, compared to the rest of the sytem. With kind regardsMarlowe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mbodell Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 If you believe in Banzai points (see other forum thread) then the second one is better for NT. Hand A is 19 Banzai points. Hand B is 23 Banzai points. A strong NT is 22-26 points in that system. Most people are not a fan of that system, needless to say. If you were willing to guarantee that my partner is either some 4333 or 4432 pattern and has 10-12 HCP then I think I'd rather have hand B. Otherwise, I'll take hand A. And I'd open both 1nt in 15-17 but I might downgrade either if I was swinging or if my NT range was 12-14 (since opening 1NT is great, not matter the range). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 Without having done any analysis in advance just at a quick glance, I'd consider downgrading the first in 3rd seat but not first. Why ? Well some of the distributional hands that will play well opposite all the controls can be ruled out by partner's failure to open, as can a slam where this hand may be quite good. Do you fancy playing game opposite Jxxx, KQx, KQx, xxx, I certainly don't and this is not a bad hand for partner, I suspect most balanced 10s will struggle opposite this, so if I can rule out many of the hands where this shines (AQxxxx, x, xx, J9xx is plenty for example), I don't think it pulls its full high card weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 If you were willing to guarantee that my partner is either some 4333 or 4432 pattern and has 10-12 HCP then I think I'd rather have hand B. Think again! On 200 double dummy hands Hand A takes 1810 tricks in notrump and Hand B takes 1753 tricks. Sometimes conventional wisdom is correct. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyberyeti Posted April 30, 2012 Report Share Posted April 30, 2012 Think again! On 200 double dummy hands Hand A takes 1810 tricks in notrump and Hand B takes 1753 tricks. Sometimes conventional wisdom is correct.Try 10-11, 12s probably have enough raw grunt to make a very high percentage of the time, and you may well still be in game if you downgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmnka447 Posted May 1, 2012 Report Share Posted May 1, 2012 Marty Bergen talks about point count system discrepancies in the point values assigned to honors versus their actual value in his book on Slam Bidding. Basically, he says As and 10s are undervalued while Qs and Js (or quacks as he calls them) are overvalued. So he recommends comparing the number of As and 10s to the number of "quacks". If they are close, there is no adjustment, but if there is a large difference a point adjustment should be made. So Hand #1 has 3 As and no quacks and is worth about a point more than actual point count. Hand #2 has 6 quacks and 1 A (no 10s)-- a difference of 5, and is worth about 2 points less value than actual point count. By that light, Hand 1 is Ok to open 1 NT and hand 2 is not. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts