Opening on junk

[RedSpawn]

.

[rhm]

As in the water-cooler, it might reduce misunderstanding, if we could agree some basic concepts e.g.

We beginners start with HCP, High Card Points, commonly, Milton Work Points, A=4 K=3 Q=2 J=1. Players apply adjustments to this basic evaluation. For instance:

• Context. e.g. quacks pull more weight in no-trump contracts.
• Honour placement. e.g. in short suits or long suits. Honours in the same suit re-enforce each other.
• Texture. i.e. intermediates e.g. AJ9 is worth more than AJ2
• Shape. e.g. xxxxxxxxx xxxx - - is worth more than xxx xxx xxx xxxx.
• Fit. e.g. In a suit contract, we regard KQxx opposite a singleton as duplication.
• To avoid confusion, we could call these adjusted values, Rubens points or whatever but IMO we shouldn't call them HCP.

You should be wary of opening poor hands, unless

• Partner expects it, and
• Your system can cope.

On those assumptions, IMO, the more hands you can open, the better.

I have nothing against point count. It is simple, and given its simplicity it is also reasonably effective on most hands.

It is also quite accurate for notrump partials.

But point count has its limitations.

Many experienced player never progress beyond point count, rely almost entirely on it for their hand evaluation and use point count for silly comments like, we never downgrade etc.

 

As K&R shows the above hands are closer to a 9 count if you end up in a suit contract.

If you claim you open all balanced 9 counts then go ahead and open these hands.

But do not tell the world these hands should be evaluated as 13 counts.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[nige1]

(A) S-QJx H-QJx D-KJx C-QJxx

(B) S-QJx H-QJxx D-QJxx C-KJ

(C ) S-QJx H-QJxx D-KJxx C-QJ

I have nothing against point count. It is simple, and given its simplicity it is also reasonably effective on most hands. It is also quite accurate for notrump partials. But point count has its limitations. Many experienced player never progress beyond point count, rely almost entirely on it for their hand evaluation and use point count for silly comments like, we never downgrade etc. As K&R shows the above hands are closer to a 9 count if you end up in a suit contract. If you claim you open all balanced 9 counts then go ahead and open these hands. But do not tell the world these hands should be evaluated as 13 counts.

#
# Junk opener. Dealer script. NG 25 Mar 2017.
# At notrump, how many points is the East hand worth?
# Uses Dealer by Hans van Staveren
#
predeal east SQJ3, HQJ5, DKJ7, CQJ92 
condition shape(west, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5332) and hcp (west) == 13
produce 10
action printoneline

n A987.T874.843.87 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K42.A92.T652.K53 w T65.K63.AQ9.AT64  
n AKT84.97.95.T875 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 65.AKT862.T64.43 w 972.43.AQ832.AK6  
n A75.9862.T5.K876 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K642.7.A98632.T5 w T98.AKT43.Q4.A43  
n KT5.984.T853.K65 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A92.T732.A6.8743 w 8764.AK6.Q942.AT  
n K742.A74.9532.75 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A95.T632.64.KT86 w T86.K98.AQT8.A43  
n KT9.984.A982.854 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A54.632.T643.KT7 w 8762.AKT7.Q5.A63  
n T95.KT72.T9843.K e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 7642.A964.A2.T84 w AK8.83.Q65.A7653  
n 7654.864.9865.K3 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 82.KT9.A42.AT864 w AKT9.A732.QT3.75  
n 854.9432.AT9542. e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s KT9.A6.86.KT7643 w A762.KT87.Q3.A85  
n A9754.32.864.A76 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K6.T9864.53.K543 w T82.AK7.AQT92.T8  
Generated 443 hands Produced 10 hands Initial random seed 1490741682 Time needed    0.001 sec

Please would somebody do a proper simulation with DD analysis.

[johnu]

But do not tell the world these hands should be evaluated as 13 counts.

 

Nobody (at least I think nobody) is suggesting that these are a (good) 13 count. Those who open are saying that they think opening is a better description and more likely to get a good result than passing.

[johnu]

Here are the costs of increasing the range of opening bids:

 

[*]Your team will frequently bully and commandeer the auction with woefully inadequate HCP values. This will subject the partnership to a higher risk of overbids, which your team will routinely blame on "card placement".

 

Does partner think I have a strong NT hand when I open? One would hope that partner doesn't play you for a Roth-Stone sound opening every time you open.

 

[*]You will create additional frustration and work for your partner who must now differentiate if your 1 level open is sound or junk. Your partner will have to figure out the new meaning of a 2NT response to a partner's 1 of a suit opening bid because "the opener" reserves the right to open junk material in 1st or 2nd seat.

 

Well, after a major suit opening, most play Jacoby 2NT so you must be talking about minors. Really, how terrible is it to get to 2NT if responder has 11-12 HCP and you have 13?

 

 

[*]Your team will frequently & incorrectly make 3NT gambits with inadequate values because Quick Tricks are not even on your team's radar for opening bid requirements.

 

Frequently? Gambits? OK, but would you believe that has never ever happened to me?

 

 

[*]Your team will began to heavily and unjustifiably rely on poor, novice level defense to make contracts since being 1st to open trumps common sense bidding.

 

That's a staple of my game, even against good players.

 

[*]You will eventually create derision and mistrust within your own partnership when you encounter teams that see through the "jedi mind tricks" and successfully employ the penalty double to knock your team out of competition.

 

Nope, I plan 2 steps ahead. After opening light, I routinely underbid by 2 tricks to even things out.

[Vampyr]

Here are the costs of increasing the range of opening bids:

 

• 
   
  
• Your team will frequently bully and commandeer the auction with woefully inadequate HCP values. This will subject the partnership to a higher risk of overbids, which your team will routinely blame on "card placement".
   
  
• You will create additional frustration and work for your partner who must now differentiate if your 1 level open is sound or junk. Your partner will have to figure out the new meaning of a 2NT response to a partner's 1 of a suit opening bid because "the opener" reserves the right to open junk material in 1st or 2nd seat.
   
  
• Your team will frequently & incorrectly make 3NT gambits with inadequate values because Quick Tricks are not even on your team's radar for opening bid requirements.
   
  
• Your team will began to heavily and unjustifiably rely on poor, novice level defense to make contracts since being 1st to open trumps common sense bidding.
   
  
• You will eventually create derision and mistrust within your own partnership when you encounter teams that see through the "jedi mind tricks" and successfully employ the penalty double to knock your team out of competition.
   
  

 

It sounds as if you have been badly burnt by opponents opening light and you are hoping they will get their comeuppance. They probably won't, though. It's a bidder's game.

[rhm]

#
# Junk opener. Dealer script. NG 25 Mar 2017.
# At notrump, how many points is the East hand worth?
# Uses Dealer by Hans van Staveren
#
predeal east SQJ3, HQJ5, DKJ7, CQJ92 
condition shape(west, any 4333 + any 4432 + any 5332) and hcp (west) == 13
produce 10
action printoneline

n A987.T874.843.87 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K42.A92.T652.K53 w T65.K63.AQ9.AT64  
n AKT84.97.95.T875 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 65.AKT862.T64.43 w 972.43.AQ832.AK6  
n A75.9862.T5.K876 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K642.7.A98632.T5 w T98.AKT43.Q4.A43  
n KT5.984.T853.K65 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A92.T732.A6.8743 w 8764.AK6.Q942.AT  
n K742.A74.9532.75 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A95.T632.64.KT86 w T86.K98.AQT8.A43  
n KT9.984.A982.854 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s A54.632.T643.KT7 w 8762.AKT7.Q5.A63  
n T95.KT72.T9843.K e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 7642.A964.A2.T84 w AK8.83.Q65.A7653  
n 7654.864.9865.K3 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s 82.KT9.A42.AT864 w AKT9.A732.QT3.75  
n 854.9432.AT9542. e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s KT9.A6.86.KT7643 w A762.KT87.Q3.A85  
n A9754.32.864.A76 e QJ3.QJ5.KJ7.QJ92 s K6.T9864.53.K543 w T82.AK7.AQT92.T8  
Generated 443 hands Produced 10 hands Initial random seed 1490741682 Time needed    0.001 sec

Please would somebody do a proper simulation with DD analysis.

I have got tired doing simulations for others because whatever I do my assumptions for the other hands will get criticized.

Assume the junk hand to be South.

What assumptions do you want for East, North and West?

My personal favorite would be to assume 12 balanced HCP in North and see how often 3NT makes double dummy or assuming a balanced North with 4 cards in haerts and 12 HCP and see how often game in hearts makes opposite hand 2 and 3.

I am pretty sure 4 hearts will be a disaster more often than not.

 

But you mileage may vary

 

Rainer Herrmann

[nige1]

I have got tired doing simulations for others because whatever I do my assumptions for the other hands will get criticized.

Assume the junk hand to be South.

What assumptions do you want for East, North and West?

My personal favorite would be to assume 12 balanced HCP in North and see how often 3NT makes double dummy or assuming a balanced North with 4 cards in haerts and 12 HCP and see how often game in hearts makes opposite hand 2 and 3.

I am pretty sure 4 hearts will be a disaster more often than not.

But you mileage may vary

We're trying to establish what each South hand is worth at no-trump. Nearer 13 HCP? Or nearer 9 HCP?

 

It's reasonable to assume..

• The junk hand is South, opening 1N, (ostensibly 12-14 HCP with the occasional "upgraded" 11 HCP),
• North would invite with a flat 12 HCP but South wouldn't accept with a bad 13 HCP,
• So North has 13 HCP (or 12HCP and a 5-card suit) for his raise to 3N or perhaps, 4M.
• North wouldn't use Stayman with 4333 shape.

Nevertheless, my (poor) attempt at a simulation is already posted. Obviously rhm is free to simulate, under whatever assumptions he deems appropriate..

[RedSpawn]

It sounds as if you have been badly burnt by opponents opening light and you are hoping they will get their comeuppance. They probably won't, though. It's a bidder's game.

 

Quite the contrary, I have been playing against a lot of the players who have joined the Dark Side of Bridge and open up junk bids with 0.0 to 0.5 quick tricks as 1 level bids.

 

What normally happens is I double their horrible 2NT bid for down 2, followed by a 3♦X bid for down 3, and these "MODERN-BRIDGE-ERA-Open-Whatever-You-Want-Players" run from the table in disgust because I see through the smoke screen, call the poker bluff for what it is, wield the penalty double battle ax, and defend well. Their partnership typically dissolves within 3-5 boards.

 

They will NOT continually trespass on my auction with sanitation values and leave unscathed. If they want to open up a 13 HCP hand that has 0 quick tricks and is lined with nothing but overvalued queens and jacks (not even 10's), go right ahead. I will look at the remaining aces, kings, and 10's in my hand and smile devilishly as the ruse plays itself it out in the auction.

 

I will press DOUBLE at the right moment, sharpen my battle ax, light up the oil drum grill, cook and serve what's left as BBQ for the kibitzers.

 

So, I am not waiting for their comeuppance. I am waiting for them to wake up and join the rest of the bridge community and perform sound, complete hand evaluations.

 

If you are a QUACKS (Queens & Jacks) believer, then I suggest you read this and other materials to make sure you understand the full risk you assume with this "method" of opening bids.

 

Card Evaluation - Bridge Depot

 

Karen Walker Opening Requirements

 

Bridge Guys Opening a Hand

[RedSpawn]

 

Nope, I plan 2 steps ahead. After opening light, I routinely underbid by 2 tricks to even things out.

 

Maybe you have forgotten what an opening bid means. An opening bid is a promise by you that you believe you hold a better than average hand and are therefore willing to put the TOTAL partnership's assets at risk to pursue a potentially profitable contract.

 

It is a representation by you that your partner relies on during his decision making in the auction.

 

When you open up QJX, QJX, QJX, QJXX and suggest to the opposition AND your partner that you have a better-than-average hand, you begin the auction with a convenient lie; a lie that you hope will not come back to haunt your partnership. That is why you routinely try to underbid by two tricks afterwards to offset the potential impact of said misrepresentation (lie).

 

You are essentially writing a check with insufficient funds and are hoping that no one will ever be smart enough to cash your check before the auction ends.

 

Good luck with that theory. (－‸ლ) FACE PALM

 

{sharpening my battle ax}

[johnu]

That is why you routinely try to underbid by two tricks afterwards to offset the potential impact of said misrepresentation (lie).

 

You are essentially writing a check with insufficient funds and are hoping that no one will ever be smart enough to cash your check before the auction ends.

 

That makes sense. In the future I will underbid by 3 tricks.

[nige1]

Thomas Andrews' brilliant articles on Hand Evaluation (Binky points) based on double-dummy simulation

For no-trump contracts A = 4, K = 2.8, Q = 1.8, J = 1, T = 0.4

Kings and queens are overvalued but notice the importance of knaves and tens and be aware of Thomas's caveats.

 

My father, Charles Guthrie, devised Winners as an alternative crude but simple evaluation method (now modified by Thomas Andrews' ideas),

A = 1.5, K = 1, Q = 0.5, J = 0.2 T = 0.1. (We used to ignore knaves and tens).

Doubleton = 0.5, Singleton = 1.5, void = 2.5 (revised from 1, 2, 3, respectively).

Trump control = 1.

Results are similar to the LTC (although arrived at by addition rather than subtraction).

[Kaitlyn S]

Open them all. Only wimps and people over 70 would pass any or all of these hands!! I doubt very much mechwell or welland/auken would pass any of these hands.

Don't Meckwell play Precision? Of course, this is a sound opening for Precision players who wouldn't dream of passing an 11-count protected by their system's low upper limit. I was asking in the context of using standard methods (and strong notrump.) Of course, I should have made this clear.

[nige1]

Don't Meckwell play Precision? Of course, this is a sound opening for Precision players who wouldn't dream of passing an 11-count protected by their system's low upper limit. I was asking in the context of using standard methods (and strong notrump.) Of course, I should have made this clear.

Now we are back to tautologies and truisms:

 

If you play unmodified SAYC or any system that, by definition, cannot normally cope with light openers then, by and large, you should restrict such openings to contexts, in which the system makes specific provision. e.g. 3rd in hand with 2-way Drury. Also partner should be aware of such possibilities.

 

Alternatively, if you agree to open light, then you can try to cope by modifying your traditional methods e.g.

• Change your opening bid structure, 1N = 15-17 BAL. 1♣ = ♣s or 18-19 BAL. 1♦ = ♦s or 11-14 BAL.
• Change your response structure e,g, after partner opens 1♠, 2♣ = ART F1. 2♦ = TRF 5+ ♥s. 2♥ = TRF good 3 card raise. 2♠ = NAT PRE.
• Gazzilli and XYZ (or transfers) everywhere.

Using modified Acol, the Hacket twins have opened light, successfully, for decades.

[rhm]

Using modified Acol, the Hacket twins have opened light, successfully, for decades.

 

How light is light.

Even if you open "light" most will agree you need a floor, below which you will only go in exceptional circumstances (e.g psyche etc).

 

Quote:

How light is too light for a 1-bid in (a) Precision (b) Standard?

Answer

Openings need to be sounder in Standard because it just gets too wide range. Opening the bidding a built in advantage, all your bidding tools now working for you. In Precision, nothing special 10 counts is too light. You need Shape or nice cards to open the 10's.

 

This answer was given yesterday by Meckstroth

 

see http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/in-the-well-jeff-meckstroth/

 

Further down the same link:

 

Quote

What do minimum strength Meckwell Precision 1D openers look like third seat white on red?

Answer

I have to say whatever we feel like doing at the time. Not going to go far down this path. I will say we pass a lot more now when we have crap.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

While deciding to open this hand is done without knowing the other hands, the fact that you have all or most of the queens and jacks in your pile of quacks allows you to make some assumptions about what points responder will have, namely that they will have (most) all their points in kings and aces. This tends to balance out the overvaluing of the opening hand.

This is a common fallacy.

It is of course true but trivial that the quacks you have can not be held by any other hand.

What matters is whether you have preponderance of lower honors and a lack of aces of first round controls or vice versa in both hands combined.

When do you think these scenarios, say a preponderance of quacks will happen in both hands?

When you are staring yourself in a preponderance of quacks or when you are staring at a preponderance of aces?

Nothing balances out unless you hold all 40 HCP in both hands together.

 

The only way to get this right is if both sides value their hand properly.

 

Rainer Herrmann

[the hog]

I can't see any of the example hand being passed in an expert event.

[RedSpawn]

.

[johnu]

How light is light.

Even if you open "light" most will agree you need a floor, below which you will only go in exceptional circumstances (e.g psyche etc).

 

Quote:

How light is too light for a 1-bid in (a) Precision (b) Standard?

Answer

Openings need to be sounder in Standard because it just gets too wide range. Opening the bidding a built in advantage, all your bidding tools now working for you. In Precision, nothing special 10 counts is too light. You need Shape or nice cards to open the 10's.

 

This answer was given yesterday by Meckstroth

 

see http://bridgewinners.com/article/view/in-the-well-jeff-meckstroth/

 

Further down the same link:

 

Quote

What do minimum strength Meckwell Precision 1D openers look like third seat white on red?

Answer

I have to say whatever we feel like doing at the time. Not going to go far down this path. I will say we pass a lot more now when we have crap.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

You are flailing and I would toss you a Lifesaver but I only have Altoids.

 

Meckstroth is talking about frequently (or not) opening random/bad 10 counts. The hands being discussed in this thread are 13 HCP hands. Even if you think the point count system overvalues them, there is a huge difference between a bad 10 count and these bad 13 counts.

 

As far as the 1♦ comment, since 1♦ is artificial in Meckwell, you are supposed to have a minimum 10 HCP in the ACBL. Many would rule that < 10 HCP makes it an illegal bid. I won't rehash the Spain-USA controversy about psyching artificial 1♦ openers in 3rd seat. This does not support your position in any way.

[johnu]

This is a common fallacy.

It is of course true but trivial that the quacks you have can not be held by any other hand.

 

How can it be a fallacy if it is true? The point is, if partner bids game, they've got an opening hand filled with aces and kings. If they ask whether you are minimum or maximum for you bid, you answer minimum.

[fred]

There are definitely many very strong players who play natural systems who would Pass some or all of these hands in at least some vulnerability/dealer combinations (including some who play weak notrump).

 

I believe that there exist some very strong Precision players who would at least consider Passing in some vulnerability/dealer combinations. I can tell you for sure that, contrary to popular belief, it is far from rare for some of the best Precision players in the USA to Pass hands with 11 (or even 12) HCPs in some circumstances. Yes I know these hands, on paper at least, have more than 11 HCPs.

 

Some things to learn from this:

 

- as others have suggested, following point count religiously is very much not a recipe for success.

- vulnerability and position are extremely important as far as such issues are concerned. The form of scoring and state of the match can also be relevant.

- do not listen to anyone who claims with authority that they *know* it is right to open (or not to open). Nobody knows and IMO simulations regarding such things should not be taken seriously.

 

Fred Gitelman

Bridge Base Inc.

www.bridgebase.com

[RedSpawn]

You are flailing and I would toss you a Lifesaver but I only have Altoids.

 

Meckstroth is talking about frequently (or not) opening random/bad 10 counts. The hands being discussed in this thread are 13 HCP hands. Even if you think the point count system overvalues them, there is a huge difference between a bad 10 count and these bad 13 counts.

 

As far as the 1♦ comment, since 1♦ is artificial in Meckwell, you are supposed to have a minimum 10 HCP in the ACBL. Many would rule that < 10 HCP makes it an illegal bid. I won't rehash the Spain-USA controversy about psyching artificial 1♦ openers in 3rd seat. This does not support your position in any way.

 

Are you reading or skim-reading the postings?

 

Meckstroth says,

 

"Openings need to be sounder in Standard because it just gets too wide a range. Opening the bidding has a built in advantage, all your bidding tools are now working for you."

 

Kaitlyn S' questions about junk hands were geared for players who bid SAYC 15-17 = 1NT.

 

So....why do you think that a hand with 0.0 to 0.5 quick trick qualifies as a 1-level "sounder opening in Standard"?

 

Walk me through this BBO voodoo logic -- especially when the hand in question, (QJX, QJX, QJX, QJXX), is the functional equivalent of a 8-9 HCP hand. <_<

 

http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi?hand=QJX+QJX+QJX+QJXX

[nige1]

Some things to learn from this:

- as others have suggested, following point count religiously is very much not a recipe for success.

- vulnerability and position are extremely important as far as such issues are concerned. The form of scoring and state of the match can also be relevant.

- do not listen to anyone who claims with authority that they *know* it is right to open (or not to open). Nobody knows and IMO simulations regarding such things should not be taken seriously.

IMO

• We should be wary of light openers unless partner expects them and our system has been designed of modified to cope.
• HCP is a crude measure of high card strength. Augmented by considerations of honour placement, shape, texture and fit, it's still a crude measure of trick-taking potential. But until we develop sophisticated judgement, if ever, it has the advantage of simplicity and some limited effectiveness.
• Expert judgement of the influence of vulnerability, position, form of scoring, state of match, and so on are similarly important. But beyond current abilities of most players.
• When deciding whether to open the bidding on marginal values, we must come to a decision, even if no authority "knows" the right answer.
• We should probably give less weight to an individual opinion, than to real-life high-level statistics, computer simulations (not necessarily double-dummy), and the actual practice of most top players.

[the hog]

How light is light.

Even if you open "light" most will agree you need a floor, below which you will only go in exceptional circumstances (e.g psyche etc).

 

Quote:

How light is too light for a 1-bid in (a) Precision (b) Standard?

Answer

Openings need to be sounder in Standard because it just gets too wide range. Opening the bidding a built in advantage, all your bidding tools now working for you. In Precision, nothing special 10 counts is too light. You need Shape or nice cards to open the 10's.

 

This answer was given yesterday by Meckstroth

 

see http://bridgewinners...eff-meckstroth/

 

Further down the same link:

 

Quote

What do minimum strength Meckwell Precision 1D openers look like third seat white on red?

Answer

I have to say whatever we feel like doing at the time. Not going to go far down this path. I will say we pass a lot more now when we have crap.

 

Rainer Herrmann

 

The Hackett twins did not play modified Acol. They played a variant of the Science.

[aguahombre]

Kaitlyn S' questions about junk hands were geared for players who bid SAYC 15-17 = 1NT.

Kaitlyn (downthread) said her questions were geared for standard methods, not SAYC. SAYC, a restricted system, indeed does not have the tools referred to by Meck in RedSpawn's reference; but 'standard methods' as a whole can easily have tools to cope with lighter openings.

 

So, Meck's opinions are relevant to this discussion. Now for the blasphemy: I dare to disagree with Meck. We have found that light openings, although they increase an already wide range for the natural opening bids, are still quite workable as long as we don't fall into the Modern Paradox.

 

The Modern Paradox was coined by a Canadian author reporting on a Canadian championship in the ACBL Bulletin several years ago. As opening bids got lighter, responders have not increased their requirements for game and slam probes proportionately. For instance, Kx AJxx Axxx xxx is a game invite, not a game force opposite a Modern 1m or 1s.