[Vampyr]

aguahombre, on 2017-March-25, 14:28, said:

After doing pretty much as you say for quite a while, we have adjusted it slightly (due to results). Major suit openings on trash 11's work fine, but we lost overall opening 1 of a minor on balanced 11's and (3-1) 4-5 11's. I think I met a 12 I wouldn't open once upon a time, but quickly forgot what it looked like.

I would definitely do this if I used a strong NT. Playing weak NT it is trickier; you may get in trouble if you don't have a good suit, since you might have to treat the hand as unbalanced. Even if it is unbalanced you may not get to show you second suit if partner bids 2/1 in a higher suit.

[johnu]

msjennifer, on 2017-March-25, 11:18, said:

I strongly disagree with the statement.Perhaps ,Culbertson alone might have agreed with the statement.Those OLD days are gone and better be forgotten.

You are forgetting Roth-Stone which is a little more recent, but maybe not that much more recent. There may be still some old players still playing Roth-Stone style on the east coast, but not many.

[rhm]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-March-23, 19:56, said:

Apparently the Kaplan-Rubens hand evaluator is obsolete.

Hand A came up at 8.95 points.
Hand A

Hand B came up at 9.35 points
Hand B

Hand C came up at 9.05 points.
Hand C

I didn't bring this up to argue with anybody, I was just curious. Bridge has come a long way since the days of Culbertson and two quick tricks.

I saw mention that these aren't even minimum. Does that mean that both of these would be opened as well? (Assume a strong notrump.)

(D) QJx QJx QJx QJxx
(E) QJx QJxx QJxx QJ

(At the time of this post, there were 12 votes to open them all and nothing for anything else.)

The person I was discussing this heard Phil's post (not even minimums) and interpreted it to mean "These hands aren't even minimum opening hands!" Judging from the votes, I am inferring that Phil meant "I would open with less."

Quote

Yes indeed!Kaplan and Reuben's hand evaluators are obsolete as they are too conservative.Forgotten for good as some would say!

You should have a little bit more respect for the hand evaluation skills of Rubens and Kaplan.
I am pretty sure their hand evaluation was and is much superior to yours and you are very unlikely ever coming close to theirs.
Having said this the Kaplan and Ruben's hand evaluator is quite precise with respect to suit contracts and that is what these hands will be worth on average at a suit contract.
Notrump evaluation, particularly at low level notrump contracts, is a bit different. Here the hands are worth a bit more, around 11 points.
For opening the bidding I would certainly prefer Axxx, Axxx, Kxx xx to any of the hands suggested here.
Those, who call the above hands 13 counts, should look for another game. Apparently they are unlikely to ever progress beyond the beginner stage.

Rainer Herrmann

[rhm]

johnu, on 2017-March-25, 12:01, said:

If you don't open these hands, you need to think about how you handle them if you pass and partner opens or competes. Once you do that, you should conclude that opening is the least worst option.

This is because you overvalue these hands.
Playing strong notrumps if partner opens in third or fourth position I would simply bid 1NT because I believe 3NT will often be a very poor contract opposite a 12-14 balanced hand and often partner will have less in 3rd of 4th position.
Likewise I will simply bid notrump if partner overcalls. You are unlikely to have game when RHO opens the bidding anyway and a 2NT response to a two level overcall invites 3NT and shows a amximm pass.
If partner opens 1♥ Drury is ideal with B and C to stop low if partner has a minimum.

If you are playing weak notrumps and partner does not open 1NT I would risk 2NT to show a maximum pass.
I am still likely ahead of those who open these hands, who will often reach 3NT with little play where I will stop at least in 2NT. .

Rainer Herrmann

[maartenxq]

SteveMoe, on 2017-March-23, 21:25, said:

Ugly for sure. But not making the first move, now THAT's REALLY UGLY.

Agree, if in C had 12 hcp I would pass. this is btw why an identical shaped 10-11 hcp responder should prceed with care, especially in mps.
Maarten

[johnu]

rhm, on 2017-March-26, 05:56, said:

This is because you overvalue these hands.

I don't have any problem responding with these hands because I would have opened them.

[rhm]

johnu, on 2017-March-26, 14:04, said:

If you don't open these hands, you need to think about how you handle them if you pass and partner opens or competes. Once you do that, you should conclude that opening is the least worst option.

...

I don't have any problem responding with these hands because I would have opened them.

But you claimed there would be if one would pass.

The opposite is true.
Opening on junk risks getting too high. Not you will have a problem, your partner will when he responds to your "opening bids".
Not on paper or in forums of course, but at the table.
I know everyone claims "my partner will not expect more".
But even if true simple logic tells anybody, who has an open mind, that increasing the range of your opening bids can not be cost free, whatever your partner does.

Rainer Herrmann

[nige1]

rhm, on 2017-March-26, 05:23, said:

You should have a little bit more respect for the hand evaluation skills of Rubens and Kaplan. I am pretty sure their hand evaluation was and is much superior to yours and you are very unlikely ever coming close to theirs. Having said this the Kaplan and Ruben's hand evaluator is quite precise with respect to suit contracts and that is what these hands will be worth on average at a suit contract. Notrump evaluation, particularly at low level notrump contracts, is a bit different. Here the hands are worth a bit more, around 11 points. For opening the bidding I would certainly prefer Axxx, Axxx, Kxx xx to any of the hands suggested here. Those, who call the above hands 13 counts, should look for another game. Apparently they are unlikely to ever progress beyond the beginner stage.

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.

[johnu]

rhm, on 2017-March-27, 04:27, said:

But you claimed there would be if one would pass.

The opposite is true.
Opening on junk risks getting too high. Not you will have a problem, your partner will when he responds to your "opening bids".
Not on paper or in forums of course, but at the table.
I know everyone claims "my partner will not expect more".
But even if true simple logic tells anybody, who has an open mind, that increasing the range of your opening bids can not be cost free, whatever your partner does.

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.

As far as increasing the range of opening bids, opening nondescript 11 pointers seems very common among good tournament players these days, and they have made the decision that the advantages of opening trump the disadvantages of overstating strength. Nothing scientific of course, but just an observation.

[RedSpawn]

rhm, on 2017-March-27, 04:27, said:

But you claimed there would be if one would pass.

The opposite is true.
Opening on junk risks getting too high. Not you will have a problem, your partner will when he responds to your "opening bids".
Not on paper or in forums of course, but at the table.
I know everyone claims "my partner will not expect more".
But even if true simple logic tells anybody, who has an open mind, that increasing the range of your opening bids can not be cost free, whatever your partner does.

Rainer Herrmann

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.

[RedSpawn]

.

[rhm]

nige1, on 2017-March-27, 10:27, said:

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]

Kaitlyn S, on 2017-March-23, 17:18, said:

(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

rhm, on 2017-March-28, 06:19, said:

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]

rhm, on 2017-March-28, 06:19, said:

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]

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

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.

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

[*]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?

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

[*]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?

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

[*]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.

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

[*]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]

RedSpawn, on 2017-March-27, 12:04, said:

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]

nige1, on 2017-March-28, 16:46, said:

#
# 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]

rhm, on 2017-March-29, 03:29, said:

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]

Vampyr, on 2017-March-28, 23:17, said:

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]

johnu, on 2017-March-28, 17:51, said:

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}