Who uses Losing Trick Count?

[pigpenz]

I have played LTC back in 70's....it works ok, but as you gain experience you begin to see its flaws....

to Losing Trick Count its sort of a corollary to THE LAW.

[AL78]

I occasionally use it as an additional tool alongside other methods/judgement.

[pescetom]

I occasionally use it as an additional tool alongside other methods/judgement.

 

I use it mainly to figure out what the rest of my club will decide :)

But I agree with mycroft that all tools have some value and none can supplant overall judgement.

[bluenikki]

I use it mainly to figure out what the rest of my club will decide :)

But I agree with mycroft that all tools have some value and none can supplant overall judgement.

A defense:

 

Losers-covers tells you to respond 1NT with 4333 including AQx in partner's 5-card suit. No matter how much your partnership claims *not* to be playing sound single raises, your partner will always always subconsciously play you for more offense than this if you raise directly. Whether it is phrased in terms of covering losers or not.

 

Likewise, straining not to open 8-loser hands works. Subtracting a point for 4333 does almost as well.

[thepossum]

I use it mainly to figure out what the rest of my club will decide :)

 

:lol:

[EarlPurple]

I'm the one who, sometime around 1994-95, wrote an article on Losing Trick Count which was published somewhere on the internet. I may still have it.

 

It was intended mostly for beginners+ and intermediates, those who continually miss game contracts or don't compete enough with big trump fits. And there are many who over-compete of course.

After giving what I called the "raw" losing trick count, I put in various adjustments, which end up almost as sixths of a trick, and said it should be used as guidance, together with the law of total tricks and point count, and that establishing how side-suits fit with partner is an important part in decision making too.

 

When you open 1 of a minor and partner bids 1 of a major for which you have 4 card support, how far do you raise? And if partner opens one of a minor, you bid one of a major and partner raises to 3 of your major invitational, do you bid game or not?

[thepossum]

I keep analysing my hands and without being able to prove it the number of times using HCPS against the judgement of losers in our hands has proved unwise.

It could just be confirmation bias but I had a beautiful example just the other day. Considered passing 2S, made the mistake of inviting and ended up one down

[mw64ahw]

I keep analysing my hands and without being able to prove it the number of times using HCPS against the judgement of losers in our hands has proved unwise.

It could just be confirmation bias but I had a beautiful example just the other day. Considered passing 2S, made the mistake of inviting and ended up one down

Sounds like you need to modify

[helene_t]

I presented some analysis of hand evaluation for suit contracts in this thread: https://www.bridgebase.com/forums/topic/32125-hand-evaluation-for-suit-contracts-investigated/

 

The analysis shows that if you are in a 4-4 fit, an ace is worth almost twice as much as a singleton. Compare this to unmodified LTC (where a singleton is worth twice as much as an ace) and modified LTC (where a singleton is worth 4/3 of an ace).

 

It gets a bit less severe when you are in 9-card fit, but even then, LTC overvalues shortness.

 

Modified LTC does get the relative value of the honours about right, although the queen of trump is worth more than the queen of a long side suit, and mLTC does not allow for that.

 

If you modified LTC a bit further by counting a doubleton as 2 1/2 loser, a singleton as 2 losers and a void as 1 1/2 loser, or some such, you would get a decent, albeit still crude, evaluation system.

[thepossum]

Sounds like you need to modify

 

I need to go with my instincts and not overthink and overanalyse things - this hand has too many losers but enough HCPs. I know I will go with the HCPS :)

-it could possibly work if partner does not always accept invites :)

[P_Marlowe]

HCP is pretty good at evaluating balanced hands, Helene did some analysis,

coming up with better numbers for AKQJ, but the numbers were 4 digit long,

and the improvements was existing but ... not really worth it (5%?), in short the

old fashioned 1-2-3-4 count was already pretty accurate.

 

LTC was developed to evaluate unbalanced hands, assuming a reasonable trump fit

exists. If you use the LTC for bal. hand, ... suprise / suprise, the usefulness goes

down, it may not even exist.

What works is using Cover Cards (estimating / determining) for the bal. hand,

LTC (estimating / determining) for the unbalanced hand.

 

Reasonable Trump Fit: 5-4, 4-4 ( with minimal caution )

A bit more caution is needed, with a 5-3, and you should not really do it with 6-2.

 

The main point I want to make: If you use a tool, try to understand, for which situation the

tool got developed, and for which it was not.