Loser Count

[mike777]

Again all good reasons to read a book on LTC and use the full theory and not just incomplete parts of it. To repeat adjustments and some point counting method are a must part of the process as well. Yes, that means if your using Zar or Binky or whatever, use it! Again repeating, within the limited claims LTC makes I recommend it. Also try using FTL. Btw I use the Klinger's version of LTC.

 

Please keep in mind one of the major claims of FTL and LTC is that it is easy to use at the table. If you got another process that is an improvement, great, just let us know B).

 

At the table I seem to miss more games not using it and relaying on my level of judgement.

[han]

and relaying on my level of judgement.

you've been reading to much bridge Mike! :D

[Robert]

Hello everyone

 

Many good comments. I guessed that the 4H bid was something like rolling the dice. At IMPs Vul. you only need to make 38% of your games to break even.

Those are very good odds to gamble just bashing into game.

 

I would have made a short suit game try. At the Vul conditions, I would also have accepted with two fitting Queens plus a doubleton.

 

Bashing has a place in bridge, however, if the dummy was all diamonds or even mostly diamonds, 4H would go down. Bashing might avoid a double, however, few players double a 3H partscore at IMPSs.

 

I noted one book that stated that the LTC should be adjusted by the number of controls and also somewhat by raw HCP. AKxxx AKxxx xx x is a five loser hand

 

His five loser example hand is certainly not as strong as my five loser example.

Opposite two fitting queens a doubleton club is not needed.

 

Pure five loser hands should normally blast away after a single raise. The example hand posted might want to make a trial bid. A lot of bidding is just a matter of style. I am not normally a basher.

 

Regards,

Robert

[Chamaco]

For example,  recently I had a 12 HCP 4-3-3-3 hand and pard opened 1♣ with his 12 HCP 4-3-3-3 hand  (under ZAR, a sure pass).    We found our 4-4 ♠ fit.   Having a fit did not settle the issue.

Yet again, another judgment issue.

 

Since 4333 hands have less ruffing power, there is a downgrade to apply: however, this should be applied to 95% of the hand evaluation methods (except ZAR, perhaps).

 

In my opinion, using examples biased by evident factors (duplication of values/shape, total misfit, 4333, etc etc) is not a fair way to dismiss a method: it does say that it needs adjustment to take care of "warning signals" and/or to reevaluate hands with extra power.

 

But these disclaimers apply to all evaluation methods, and I'd say that this is the beauty of bridge: the evaluation of an expert works better than a mechanical hand evaluation rating system.

 

But, on many hands, using those systems with a grain of salt, and not blindly, might help in close decisions. (and, sure enough, sometimes they'll go wrong just like all the times we went down biddig game with a 28 hcp combined :lol: ).

 

So, before saying thet LTC works badly, let's try to apply it under the correct conditions and using adjustments to handle the reevlauation downgrade of the hand as the bidding progresses.

We'll often find out that this improves the performance and effectiveness of the LTC application.