go to game or stop at 3?????

[phoenixmj]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa2hakt742dqtck82&n=skq873hq5d753c964&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1hp1sp3hp]266|200|We play Flannery - so the 1 spade bid over a 1 heart open implies 5+ spades[/hv]

 

What is north's next bid?????

 

Neither side is vulnerable.

 

Would you bid game? Why or Why Not?

 

What about the initial bidding sequence??

 

Any thoughts and help is appreciated. This is the kind of hand that is close to game. Tough call. Would you choose differently if playing a team game vs. just a regular matchpoint game?

[kuhchung]

Show only the hand that has the decision in order not to bias people.

 

Having said that, I would pass at both forms, and pass is definitely more appealing at MPs

[rmnka447]

The auction to the point of your question is entirely normal.

 

The North hand has 7 HCP, is an 8 loser hand with 3 possible cover cards. Opener should have 16-18 with decent ♥ and likely a 6 loser hand.

 

So, on point count, it looks like about 23-25 between the 2 hands. By LTC, an 8 loser and 6 loser hand yield 14 losers which implies 10 winners. Likewise, if your cards provide 3 cover cards for opener's probable 6 loser hand, then they'll only be 3 losers. Since you can't be sure exactly how your hand meshes with opener's hand, you're on the cusp between playing in a part score or in game.

 

At MPS, it's a pick'um. Do what you think is right given the field you're playing in.

 

At IMPS, I think you should clearly bid 4 ♥. Bidding and making "thin" games is winning IMPs even Non Vulnerable. Vulnerable, where you should bid any game with a 35% or better chance of making, bidding game is mandatory.

[cherdano]

As always, the worst possible argument goes to losing trick count. Counting the North hands as "9 losers" makes it look the same as KQxxx xx xxx xxx. Calling it "3 cover cards" makes it look the same as Kxxxx xx Qxx Qxx.

 

North has a very nice KQ holding in his 5-card suit, and the always-great-to-have Q of trumps. It's a 4♥ bid, and I don't even consider it close. (Game is only ok and not great, but South also has a minimum 3♥ bid.)

[ahydra]

It'd be interesting to do a simulation of this North hand vs various, say, 15-18 HCP hands with 6H and no 3 spades/4 minor for South. I'd bet game would be odds-on at IMPs, at pairs likely quite close.

 

ahydra

[Tramticket]

If West has the ♣A, you are likely going off in game (A diamond lead will be obvious with many West holdings on this auction and you would expect East to find a club switch). A bad split in either major could also present problems, so game isn't much better than 50:50.

 

I my opinion, North has a comfortable raise to four at IMPs or MPs. The 3♥ bid by South is marginal at best.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

 

one way of looking at is using LTC / Cover Cards.

A 3H bid showes a hand with 6 or less loosers, the North hand has 2 Cover Cards,

the Queen of hearts and a Spade.

The looser estimate of 6 may be to high, if you have stronger requirements for a 3H

bid, i.e. it is possible, that for you an average 3H is closer to 5 loosers than to

to 6 looser.

So bidding Game should be with the odds, at least playing IMPs.

 

With kind regards

Marlowe

[Cyberyeti]

Depends on what you bid 3♥ on, for us, easy pass, because ours is weaker than most.

[phoenixmj]

The North hand has 7 HCP, is an 8 loser hand with 3 possible cover cards. Opener should have 16-18 with decent ♥ and likely a 6 loser hand.

 

 

A 3H bid showes a hand with 6 or less loosers, the North hand has 2 Cover Cards,

the Queen of hearts and a Spade.

 

 

Two very advanced players quoted and the calculation of cover cards different.

 

I am spanking new to cover cards. Just did some reading and plan to do more. I can definitely see that the QH is a cover card, along with the King of Spades. Question - the queen of spades. It is ah adjacent honor - is this the reason that some will count it as a cover card? It seems that way to me and also seems like it is legit to count it. This would definitely then point to 4 - along with other info.

 

Now for LTC - at least one very advance player says 8LTC for north hand. I was north and calculated a higher number - using 2 different methods. Using the modern LTC - I get 2(hearts), 1.5(spades), 3 for each of diamonds and clubs. Total, 9.5. Now this would be added to the 6 and it would be subtracted from 25 - so marginal for 4.

 

The other way I calculate LTC - 2(hearts), 1spade, 3 for each of the minors - gives me a LTC of 9 (with a slight positive adjustment for the qh). This is added to 6 and subtracted from 24 - so I am still getting a marginal call here.

 

I am a relative newbie and trying to refine the way I look at these hands - so any clarification is greatly appreciated.

[P_Marlowe]

Two very advanced players quoted and the calculation of cover cards different.

 

I am spanking new to cover cards. Just did some reading and plan to do more. I can definitely see that the QH is a cover card, along with the King of Spades. Question - the queen of spades. It is ah adjacent honor - is this the reason that some will count it as a cover card? It seems that way to me and also seems like it is legit to count it. This would definitely then point to 4 - along with other info.

 

Now for LTC - at least one very advance player says 8LTC for north hand. I was north and calculated a higher number - using 2 different methods. Using the modern LTC - I get 2(hearts), 1.5(spades), 3 for each of diamonds and clubs. Total, 9.5. Now this would be added to the 6 and it would be subtracted from 25 - so marginal for 4.

 

The other way I calculate LTC - 2(hearts), 1spade, 3 for each of the minors - gives me a LTC of 9 (with a slight positive adjustment for the qh). This is added to 6 and subtracted from 24 - so I am still getting a marginal call here.

 

I am a relative newbie and trying to refine the way I look at these hands - so any clarification is greatly appreciated.

Given that 1S showed 5+, the 3H bidding hand will have at most 2 spades, hence KQ in spade will only cover one sure looser, but it will,

even when partner has only 1 spades, with 0 spades, ..., entries may be problematic.

Given that the North hand is bal. and you dont have primary support, counting cards instead of loosers will be better for the North hand.

In general: I dont think that you should use LTC for both hands, when the fit is only a 6-2. One core assumption is, that you can ruff the

4th card, if you have a 6-2, two rounds of trumps by opponents will stopp you ruffing the 4th card.

[rmnka447]

Two very advanced players quoted and the calculation of cover cards different.

 

I am spanking new to cover cards. Just did some reading and plan to do more. I can definitely see that the QH is a cover card, along with the King of Spades. Question - the queen of spades. It is ah adjacent honor - is this the reason that some will count it as a cover card? It seems that way to me and also seems like it is legit to count it. This would definitely then point to 4 - along with other info.

 

Now for LTC - at least one very advance player says 8LTC for north hand. I was north and calculated a higher number - using 2 different methods. Using the modern LTC - I get 2(hearts), 1.5(spades), 3 for each of diamonds and clubs. Total, 9.5. Now this would be added to the 6 and it would be subtracted from 25 - so marginal for 4.

 

The other way I calculate LTC - 2(hearts), 1spade, 3 for each of the minors - gives me a LTC of 9 (with a slight positive adjustment for the qh). This is added to 6 and subtracted from 24 - so I am still getting a marginal call here.

 

I am a relative newbie and trying to refine the way I look at these hands - so any clarification is greatly appreciated.

 

♥ Q is unlikely to be a loser when opener makes a jump rebid in ♥. Usually a jump rebid shows a pretty decent suit -- something like ♥ AKxxxx or ♥ AJ10xxx. I counted the doubleton ♥ Q as only 1 loser.

 

Your thinking on covers is right. Definitely ♠ KQ should provide at least one cover card. They may provide a second cover card if opener has a complementary holding in ♠. So maybe it's most accurate to say, the hand has 2 pretty sure cover cards and possibly 3. If it turns out to be 3, then 10 tricks are likely. But if it's only 2, then 9 tricks are probably the limit. Clearly, that puts the hand at least on the line between 3 ♥ and 4 ♥

[phoenixmj]

♥ Q is unlikely to be a loser when opener makes a jump rebid in ♥. Usually a jump rebid shows a pretty decent suit -- something like ♥ AKxxxx or ♥ AJ10xxx. I counted the doubleton ♥ Q as only 1 loser.

 

Your thinking on covers is right. Definitely ♠ KQ should provide at least one cover card. They may provide a second cover card if opener has a complementary holding in ♠. So maybe it's most accurate to say, the hand has 2 pretty sure cover cards and possibly 3. If it turns out to be 3, then 10 tricks are likely. But if it's only 2, then 9 tricks are probably the limit. Clearly, that puts the hand at least on the line between 3 ♥ and 4 ♥

 

Even though we are novices, the people we were playing against at the time have about 12000 points each. So, they are NOT novices:). We can count on them for good defense. It was an open game, with some very experienced players and then players like us.

 

Given that partner did not support my spade bid (he knew I had 5 because we play flannery) I think it is logical to "assume" that he does not have 3 spades and that my two spades only provides 1 cover unless it can provide a sluff. I am looking at 3 losers in each of the minors and partner has not indicated any controls in those minors (not sure how he would so he also has not indicated no controls).

 

As it turns out - the Ace of clubs is onside. Partner - with the ace of spades - can used the spades to sluff remaining losers after they take the ace of clubs and 2 diamonds. It was matchpoints. We got about a 33 percent on this board - because so many people bid to 4. I totally realize that in a team game - more people might go to 4 and the result is a large enough swing to cause a problem in imps - even though not vulnerable.

 

What I am hearing from the comments here - is that if you can get within a .5 say on ltc including cover cards etc - then you should go in either matchpoints or imps. Within 1 trick of game in IMPs - certainly if vulnerable - you should probably go unless there are counterindicators.

 

In this case - partner can have 16-18 points - he was at the low end but I should not assume that.

 

Am I reading this correctly?

[kuhchung]

listen to cherdano :)

[P_Marlowe]

listen to cherdano :)

I think he makes quite often valid points, and he is for sure a better player

than I am, or ever will be.

I agree also with his sentiment, that peoble use the LTC in a way, that it would

often be better for them, if they have never heard about the LTC.

Having said this:

 

The statement

 

Calling it "3 cover cards" makes it look the same as Kxxxx xx Qxx Qxx.

 

is plain wrong, his example hand, has at most one cover card, and even one

cover card may be stretching it. You dont count a Queens as cover cards, an

unsupported King in a suit partner did not bid, is also not a sure cover card.

The last time I looked at the definition what a cover cards is 15+ years ago,

but I am pretty sure about those to assemesments.

 

The hint, that we have a beautiful 5 card suit is great, but we wont be able

to use the suit unless partner has the Ace, due to a lack of entries.

Make it a different suit, and I am fine with using the suit as a reason to go on,

make it an empty 5 card suit, and distribute the 2 honors in the minors, I am

fine with arguing, that those 2 honors are pulling their full weight, but the

given 5 card suit is not a plus.

[Bad_Wolf]

Hand evaluation will come with experience. However tools like LTC and cover cards are off the mark. You need to be learning to appreciate what are good and bad holdings for your main purpose-taking tricks. Might I suggest a read of Lawrence's classic "Complete Book of Hand evaluation".

 

Here, as noted above (and again you can definitely trust anything by cherdano), you have good things - the spade suit is potential tricks and the HQ is gold.

 

Again this is all mainly experience - I think most good players will simply look at the hand and bid 4H without much conscious calculation. No good players (and I mean none) will use losing trick count here as a basis on what to bid.

[P_Marlowe]

<snip>

Here, as noted above (and again you can definitely trust anything by cherdano), you have good things - the spade suit is potential tricks and the HQ is gold.

<snip>

You did realize, that the auction was a Flannery auction, that 1S already showed 5+,

and that partner was not interested? A source of tricks is brilliant, ... if you can,

after developing the tricks, take the tricks. Please keep in mind, that the Queen of

hearts is gone.

[thepossum]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa2hakt742dqtck82&n=skq873hq5d753c964&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1hp1sp3hp]266|200|We play Flannery - so the 1 spade bid over a 1 heart open implies 5+ spades[/hv]

 

What is north's next bid?????

 

Neither side is vulnerable.

 

Would you bid game? Why or Why Not?

 

What about the initial bidding sequence??

 

Any thoughts and help is appreciated. This is the kind of hand that is close to game. Tough call. Would you choose differently if playing a team game vs. just a regular matchpoint game?

 

Its funny when people love to attack the losing trick count and then usually come to the same answer as people who use it and everyone else. However given the lack of an 8 card trump fit for the earlier bids it should only be used by north if at all on this hand

 

I reckon its a marginal 3 heart bid and a marginal pass/game bid depending on how you are feeling and the state of the tournament

 

regards P

[GrahamJson]

The auction to the point of your question is entirely normal.

 

The North hand has 7 HCP, is an 8 loser hand with 3 possible cover cards. Opener should have 16-18 with decent ♥ and likely a 6 loser

8 losers? I make it nine. One in spades, three each in the minors and two in hearts. You can’t count Qx in trumps as only one loser. You can hardly ruff the third round. Would a singleton queen be zero losers or a small singleton one loser? Obviously not. There must always be three losers to account for in the trump suit, so Qx is two losers, at least, not one. (You should probably count it as two and a half as it is clearly a worse holding than Qxx)

[Cyberyeti]

8 losers? I make it nine. One in spades, three each in the minors and two in hearts. You can’t count Qx in trumps as only one loser. You can hardly ruff the third round. Would a singleton queen be zero losers or a small singleton one loser? Obviously not. There must always be three losers to account for in the trump suit, so Qx is two losers, at least, not one. (You should probably count it as two and a half as it is clearly a worse holding than Qxx)

 

When partner is known to have a decent 6 card suit opposite your Qx, very likely AKxxxx, it's reasonable to count it as a cover card so one less loser. Worst case he has AJ10xxx and he counted it as one loser and it's now half a loser.

 

If partner had opened 4♥, I might not count a singleton queen as a loser, context is all important

[nudnikbp]

Bid game. The heart queen is excellent and partner could hold Ace doubleton in spades.

[GrahamJson]

It’s not often stated in articles on the LTC but the trump suit is generally considered to require at least eight cards in length with no partner holding less than three. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Losing-Trick_Count To take it to the extreme you can hardly count a void in trumps as a no loser holding. So, a holding of KQxxx Qxx xx xxx would be 8 losers on the given bidding so KQxxx Qx xxx xxx can hardly be the same.

[GrahamJson]

It’s not often stated in articles on the LTC but the trump suit is generally considered to require at least eight cards in length with no partner holding less than three. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Losing-Trick_Count To take it to the extreme you can hardly count a void in trumps as a no loser holding. So, a holding of KQxxx Qxx xx xxx would be 8 losers on the given bidding so KQxxx Qx xxx xxx can hardly be the same.

[phoenixmj]

I was aware of the 8 card fit rule - which is met here based on the jump to 3h - but not aware of the “each partner must have at least 3” rule. Is this rule univerally accepted? If so - i have been misapplying. I gave even used ltc as a guide if partner opens 4 of a suit - promising 8 plus.

 

Using judgement and feel “rather than more mechanical means” comes with more experience. In the meantime - trying to use as many methods of hand evaluation as possible. By and large - it has been helpful and amazingly accurate - but also had its fails.

[mikeh]

I use LTC as a guide to opening bid decisions on borderline hands: it is the least useful and least applied of the various metrics I use. I do not use LTC mid-auction. Now, I've played a lot of bridge and have played with some exceptional players, and discussed bridge with still more, so my valuation and judgment is informed more by what I learned from them than from reading books (tho I used to read many books). However, LTC is a blunt instrument mid auction.

 

Here, I think the decision is extremely close and wish the hand had been presented as a bidding problem with the South hand concealed. I don't think it possible to be sure that one is making the same call, seeing both hands, as one would seeing only the North hand.

 

With that in mind, I think that one bids game at imps, and should pass at mps.

 

At imps, there rates always to be a play for game opposite almost any 3H rebid hand. Vulnerable, bidding is clear. For one thing, your heart Queen pretty much guarantees that you won't get doubled even if the contract has no play. White, the decision is much closer, since a 50-50 game is take it or leave it. However, defence is harder than offence, and the opening lead often the hardest of all plays. So 50% games are often a bit better than that single dummy.

 

Mps, I'd pass. Mps is a game of pluses: I do realize that the OP scored 33% for passing, but analyzing bidding problems based on what actually happened is a mug's game.

 

Btw, flannery or no flannery, it is a mistake to argue that opener won't have 3 spades.

 

Axx AKJ10xx Kxx x: your bid over 1H

 

Anything but 3H is just silly.

 

x AKJ10xx Kxx AJx anything but 3H is just silly.

 

Btw, also, note that opener's heart suit was such that one will sometimes lose a trump trick, so anyone analyzing this hand who assumes otherwise doesn't know how to analyze hands. I gave opener a better heart suit in my examples:)

[PhilG007]

[hv=pc=n&s=sa2hakt742dqtck82&n=skq873hq5d753c964&d=n&v=0&b=1&a=pp1hp1sp3hp]266|200|We play Flannery - so the 1 spade bid over a 1 heart open implies 5+ spades[/hv]

 

What is north's next bid?????

 

Neither side is vulnerable.

 

Would you bid game? Why or Why Not?

 

What about the initial bidding sequence??

 

Any thoughts and help is appreciated. This is the kind of hand that is close to game. Tough call. Would you choose differently if playing a team game vs. just a regular matchpoint game?

 

A famous bridge master and writer once declared "When in doubt bid one more" My reasoning is not that 4♥ could make but because this will be the most

likely contract the rest of the field will be in. Its easy to forget that your real opponents are those sitting your way holding your cards.