SAYC, Quick Tricks & Beginner

[Sue601]

Am a serious beginner using SAYC as system. I'm reading many books based on 5 card majors and SAYC. Each mentions calculating "quick tricks" (also called "defensive tricks") such as AK = 2 quick tricks, AQ = 1 1/2 quick tricks, etc. during bidding. This is not the same as counting "sure tricks" for play of hand planning.

 

Besides using quick tricks to evaluate a preempt response these books also mention using this calculation when thinking of opening with a questionable hand and when thinking of doubling opponent. My questions are:

 

1. What is an minimum, average, and good number of quick tricks? 2? 2 1/2? How do I know a good number of quick tricks for a minimum opening hand?

 

2. What is a good number of quick tricks for doubling a contract? How do I incorporate this information with other facts such as singletons, or strength in opponent suit. Do I count on a minimum number of quick tricks from partner when making decisions? If so, how many?

 

I guess, basically, I don't understand the concept of "quick tricks" and how to benefit from their use.

 

Sue in Virginia

[han]

Question 2 is impossible to answer without knowing the contract, the auction and the rest of the hand. The only thing I can say is that quick trick are usually good both on offense and defense, while slow tricks (queens and jacks in suits without higher honors) are often useless on defense against suit contracts.

 

As for question 1, this depends on the opening style. I'll assume that you open most balanced 12 counts, but not too many 11 counts. In this case the average minimum opening contains about 2 quick tricks. With 3 quick tricks you should almost always open. With only one quick trick you might decide to pull in a notch.

 

Instead of thinking about quick tricks, I prefer to keep in mind that aces and 10's are worth more than their usual HCP's (4 and 0), while queens and jacks are worth less. So, I would open AQ10x xx AJ10x xxx, but pass KJxx Kx QJxx Qxx. Notice that the first hand has 2.5 quick tricks, but the second only 1.

[han]

Although I believe in what I wrote a minute ago, I forgot to mention perhaps the most important factor in hand evaluation: shape.

 

Since you are a serious beginner and apperently like to read bridge books, read books about shape too. I would recommend books by Marty Bergen (Points Schmoints and sequals), and Larry Cohen (Following the Law, To bid or Not to bid).

[Stephen Tu]

1. What is an minimum, average, and good number of quick tricks? 2? 2 1/2? How do I know a good number of quick tricks for a minimum opening hand?

 

A minimum opening hand is supposed to have around 2.5 quick tricks (QT). You might occasionally open with slightly less when it's an otherwise clear opener. Otherwise in a borderline case lack of QT should steer you towards passing instead (or preempting if you have a long good suit).

 

One reasonable rule of thumb for a minimum opener is the "rule of 22": add high card points, length of your two longest suits, and quick tricks. If >= 22, open. (This applies with most of your points in your long suits. Points in short suits should be partially discounted. Points in long suits are better because they help establish the long cards as winners. Points in short suits are worse because they don't produce the length tricks, and because the unprotected honors might be captured, e.g. if you have Qx, it's no better than xx if the opponents have the AKJ).

 

A great number of QT is when you have more QT than losers. Loser count is basically looking at each suit's highest 3 cards, and counting each non A/K/Q as a loser. E.g. AKxxx xxx KQxx x is 6 losers (1+3+1+1). You can deduct fractional losers for having J & JT combinations (AJTx, 1.5 losers), add fractional losers for unprotected Qs in short suits & such for more accuracy. Having more QT than losers is a common guideline used for opening with a strong artificial 2c opener.

 

2. What is a good number of quick tricks for doubling a contract? How do I incorporate this information with other facts such as singletons, or strength in opponent suit. Do I count on a minimum number of quick tricks from partner when making decisions? If so, how many?

 

Whether to double an opponent for penalty is a complicated matter, involving relative vulnerability, form of scoring, & the level of the contract. The questions you should be asking are:

1. How many tricks do I think I will take on defense?

 

Yes, you do count on partner to have some number of QT, depending on how much strength has been shown in the previous auction. If she opened the bidding, you might assign her 2.5 QT. If she only responded to an opening (and didn't show 10+ by making a 2/1 bid or other strong actions), you might assign only 1-1.5 QT.

Adding your QT to your estimate of partner's QT is only an initial estimate of your total defensive tricks, and can be very far off, so it must be adjusted heavily. For example, if you have AQJ in the opponent's trump suit, that's a great holding, with 2-3 tricks. If the opponent on the right showed the length in the suit, you would count the full 3 tricks as your estimate. Now AKQxx in your side's trump suit is 3 QT. But you can't count all 3 of them because the 3rd is going to be ruffed, the 2nd one maybe, and on a bad day you don't score any at all. If you think you only have an 8 cd fit you might guess to count 1.5-2 tricks here, with a 9 card fit you might only count it as 1-1.5.

 

Basically you count tricks in their suits at full value while discounting tricks in your side's long fits (trump suit & side suit if double fit). So if your partner opened, you probably discount the initial 2.5 tricks at least to 2, maybe even 1.75, since some are going to be in your trump suit.

 

Added to the QT estimate are other factors such as bad trump breaks, if you can see that you will surely get ruffs or can make declarer lose control of the hand.

 

Of course, you want your estimate of total defensive tricks >= number of tricks to set the level of the contract before you start to think about doubling.

 

It's going to be hard as a beginner to estimate how many tricks you are taking accurately. You have to have a lot of experience to eventually visualize typical hands from the bidding, then play it out in your head to see the result.

 

2. Do I think I will likely score better by bidding on instead of doubling?

This depends on how many tricks you think your side will make declaring, how much you estimate they are going down, and the vulnerability. If they are vulnerable, you are not, that tilts you toward doubling since the undertrick penalties are greater & your game (or slam) bonus is smaller. If it's the opposite, that would tilt you toward bidding on, if you think you are making that higher contract.

 

3. Am I doubling them into game?

At total points, rubber, Chicago, or IMPS, you have to be very careful about doubling the opponents in 2H->3S, 4C & 4D. They get a game bonus for making, which would wipe out gains from many 1 trick sets. Thus it's generally recommend that you only double them when you think they are probably going down 2 or more. This gives you margin for error when a trick disappears when an opponent is unexpectedly void in a suit, or you drop a trick in defense.

 

At matchpoints this doesn't matter as much, and you are supposed to be aggressive doubling the opponents vulnerable for a 1 trick set. But worry a ton more about improving your defensive accuracy than about optimal doubling strategy. Defense is the hardest part of the game to learn, and as a beginner you will gain the most by just learning how to set the contracts that should be set. This is much more important than remembering to double them for maximum payout when it's close. As a beginner the only time it's really crucial to make penalty doubles is when the opponents sacrifice over your game contract.

[Walddk]

Personally, I think the concept of quick tricks is a thing of the past. Don't we all open 1♠ on

 

KQJxx

KQ10xx

xx

x

 

I can't find many QT, but I like the hand (for the time being) and think it's a clear opener.

 

Roland

[xx1943]

Personally, I think the concept of quick tricks is a thing of the past.

100% agree

 

You have a lot of better possibilities to decide if you should open a hand:

 

1) Playing tricks

2) Suit quality

3) Distribution

4) Rank of your suits

 

 

A32, A32, A32, 5432 is 3 QT but I would pass in 2. and 4. hand

 

KJ1098, KDJ9, xxx, x is only 1,5 QT but a fine opener every seat.

 

A5432, K432, K32, 10 is 2 QT and I would pass in every seat.

 

Regards

 

Al

[Stephen Tu]

A32, A32, A32, 5432 is 3 QT but I would pass in 2. and 4. hand

 

Geez. I can't conceive of passing this hand in 4th seat. 2nd seat I would also open unless playing Roth-Stone. If you don't open partner will never be able to play you for a hand this good, 3 first round controls. Yes, on a really bad day you only have 3 tricks in NT you started with, and yes you do tend to end up in NT from the wrong side. But on the average day, you will certainly go plus. Aces are very good cards. They are worth more than their nominal point count. They dramatically improve the value of any honors partner might have in those suits.

 

A5432, K432, K32, 10 is 2 QT and I would pass in every seat.

 

I can't conceive of passing this in 3rd/4th either. Of course you would like better intermediates. But if you find a fit, and get the 68% 3-2 break, the intermediates won't matter. Bridge is a game of percentages, you have to play for the normal case.

[helene_t]

Although I believe in what I wrote a minute ago [........]

:) I wish I had that level of consistency, lol. Sorry, silly remark :)

 

Agree with you book recomendations, btw.

[han]

Personally, I think the concept of quick tricks is a thing of the past. Don't we all open 1♠ on

 

KQJxx

KQ10xx

xx

x

 

I can't find many QT, but I like the hand (for the time being) and think it's a clear opener.

 

Roland

This is how I learned to count quick tricks: A=1, AK=2, AQ=1.5, K=.5, KQ=1.

 

The hand you gave has 2 quick tricks.

 

 

I think that quick tricks can be a very useful concept.

[Trumpace]

Instead of thinking about quick tricks, I prefer to keep in mind that aces and 10's are worth more than their usual HCP's (4 and 0), while queens and jacks are worth less. So, I would open AQ10x xx AJ10x xxx, but pass KJxx Kx QJxx Qxx. Notice that the first hand has 2.5 quick tricks, but the second only 1.

Aces are worth more in suit contracts. Tens are usually worthless in suit contracts. In no-trump contracts Queens, Jacks and tens are quite useful. With a balanced KJxx, Jx, QJxx, Qxx hand, I would open, intending to play in 1NT... (expecting a 1H response from p).

 

I might be wrong (usually true when it comes to bidding), please feel free to correct.

[Walddk]

This is how I learned to count quick tricks: A=1, AK=2, AQ=1.5, K=.5, KQ=1.

 

The hand you gave has 2 quick tricks.

 

 

I think that quick tricks can be a very useful concept.

This just goes to show that the concept of quick tricks is an illusion. Which of the following two hands do you prefer to open with:

 

KQJxx

KQ10xx

xx

x

(my example above)

 

or

 

Axxx

Axx

xxx

Axx

 

2 quick tricks versus 3 quick tricks as I understand it. Does this mean that Hand 2 is better than Hand 1? Obviously not, since Hand 1 a priori has 5 losers whereas Hand 2 has nine!

 

Roland

[Blofeld]

Be reasonable, Roland; nobobdy is suggesting that one use quick tricks as a sole criterion for deciding whether or not to open, only that they should be taken into consideration (of course, one need not do this by explicitly thinking in terms of 'quick tricks', just by recognising that aces and kings have extra value).

[Walddk]

Be reasonable, Roland; nobobdy is suggesting that one use quick tricks as a sole criterion for deciding whether or not to open, only that they should be taken into consideration (of course, one need not do this by explicitly thinking in terms of 'quick tricks', just by recognising that aces and kings have extra value).

I honestly thought that no one taught their students "quick tricks" any more, but I am wrong apparently. Of course aces and kings are worth more than queens and jacks, but as far as I'm concerned, you can forget all about "quick tricks" when you consider whether to open or not.

 

Dump "quick" and concentrate on "tricks" and "losers"! Tricks don't always have to come "quick(ly)". Slowly is fine with me as long as they come.

 

Roland

[mikeh]

Quick tricks have their place, but any method that involves fractions should be abandoned :rolleyes:

 

I advise, instead, using a combination of three guiding principles (not 'rules').

 

13 hcp should be opened 99.9% of the time: exceptions: a hand with 0-2 controls (hence a lot of Q's and J's) and weak long suits: KQ QJ Qxxxx QJxx is not an opening bid for me.

 

with fewer than 13 hcp, open only when:

 

i) you hold 3+ controls: A = 2, K = 1

ii) you have an easy rebid

 

 

with fewer than 12 hcp, add:

 

iii) your losing trick count = 7 or fewer.

 

Losing Trick Count, simplistically speaking, is derived from counting 'losers' in each suit.

 

You can never hold more than 3 losers (the assumption for purposes of LTC is that the 4th and longer cards have 'length value').

 

Take each suit and subtract (from the greater of your length or 3), the number of top honours held in the suit: A/K/Q.

 

That gives you the LTC for the suit: add up your hand.

 

Thus a suit of xxx or xxxx or Jxxx has 3 losers. A suit of Jx has 2 losers: because of it being a doubleton. A suit of AQxxx has 1 loser. There are nuances (clearly a singleton Q is not worth the same as a singleton A), but this simplistic explanation will work on 90% or more of your hands.

 

Using controls combined with LTC gives you the benefits of the quick trick approach, while preserving the integrity of the much more common hcp approach. It also compensates for the main weaknesses of the 4321 count:

 

... undervaluing A/K's and overvaluing Q/J's

... ignoring the combining value of high cards in the same suit

... ignoring length factors

 

While LTC and controls may seem cumbersome to learn, they rapidly become second nature.

 

Furthermore, using such as guidelines, not rules, may seem a subtle distinction. However, you will never evolve beyond a certain, non-expert level until you realize that all of our valuation 'rules' are nothing more than imprecise estimates of playing strength. Once you begin to value and revalue your cards with each and every bid or pass, and treat 'rules' as suggestions (albeit, usually suggestions you should give heed to), your bridge horizons will expand.

 

The beauty of the game is that the more you learn, the more (and more enjoyable) there is to learn.

[Stephen Tu]

Aces are worth more in suit contracts. Tens are usually worthless in suit contracts. In no-trump contracts Queens, Jacks and tens are quite useful. With a balanced KJxx, Jx, QJxx, Qxx hand, I would open, intending to play in 1NT... (expecting a 1H response from p).

 

I might be wrong (usually true when it comes to bidding), please feel free to correct.

 

You're wrong :rolleyes:. Aces are worth more than their nominal work point count in both suit & NT contracts, more so in suit contracts. Tens most certainly are worth something in suit contracts; wouldn't you much prefer having AJT opposite xxx rather than AJx opposite xxx?

 

Q/J/T are useful in both, and have slightly greater value at notrump than at suits, but that doesn't mean your well below average 10 count hand example should be counted as 12 pts. It just means at NT you'd devalue it less. You might think of it as a bit better than an average 8 count for suit play, bit better than a 9 count at NT.

 

It's still bad to have a bad ratio of QJ vs. AK in NT. The reason is that it takes time to establish these tricks. If you have to keep knocking out the opp's A/K to set up your tricks, they are likely to have the tempo to set up their long suit & set you.

 

KJxx Jx QJxx Qxx is most certainly not an opening hand in a standard system. If you are playing a 10-12 opening 1nt, fine, but if you are going to pretend this is equivalent to a balanced 12 count you are going to overbid a lot.

 

Tricks don't always have to come "quick(ly)". Slowly is fine with me as long as they come.

The problem with slow is that sometimes means you never get use out of them. You build up winners but the opps have already cashed out the losers you hoped to discard, so you can only discard other winners.

 

Quick tricks are still useful to evaluate defensive strength & help you make a decision in borderline cases.

[han]

Great post Mikeh!