The play of the bridge hand and defense have changed very little over the decades. Once you have learned the basics and obtained a little experience, you skills will be whatever they will be. You may be a “natural” or a “digger”, but the one thing you do not have to worry about is seismic change taking place. Bidding does not demonstrate that same stability; it has changed dramatically since the days of Charles Goren and has moved very quickly since the mid 80’s when Marty Bergen started to preach that “bridge is a bidder’s game.” New bidding concepts are quickly accepted at the expert level, and slowly but surely trickle down to the club level over time. Nowhere is that more evident than in competitive bidding. For this reason, I think an occasional review of your bidding standards is worthwhile to make sure that you haven’t been left in the dust. If you find that opponents are getting good boards against you on low level contracts (either by making them or going down 1 or 2), it may be that you need to see if “yesterday’s bridge” is continuing to work for you. A good place to start is on the important concept of “balancing.”
In this post I would like to restrict my comments to balancing in the “pass out” seat. What agreements do you have with your partner about reopening the bidding? I confess to not having discussed this with all my partners, but if asked, I probably would have replied “have at least 1 1/2 quick tricks to reopen.” In other words AK, AQ/K, KQ/A, KKKK etc. This is an old standard and the benefits are that if opponents outbid you, you will at least have some defense, and partner will know to look for the 1 1/2 tricks in conducting the defense of the contract. In a recent bridge class, Pat Peterson talked about balancing in the pass out seat, and it was then that I realized that she was recommending balancing action that did not always meet this standard. I started to review the bridge literature on balancing in the pass out seat and found that my standard is too conservative and not consistent with competitive bidding as it is taught and applied today by better players.
The following seems to summarize contemporary balancing agreements among most experts:
1 diamond, pass, pass, (?)
(a) dbl= 8+ hcps
(b) 1 of a major= normal 1 level overcall
(c) 1NT 10-14 hcps (does not guarantee a stop)
(d) 2 clubs – normal overcall
(e) cue bid (needs partnership agreement: either Michaels or Game Force)
(f) 2 of major= Good 6 card suit + opening hand (not weak jump shift)
(g) Double and bid 1NT= 15-18
(g) 2NT (needs partnership agreement: either Unusual NT or 19-21 hcps).
1 heart, pass, pass, (?) This is pretty much the same as above except that the 1NT overcall is 12-16. The reason for this is that if you reopen with a double, partner's response will be at the 2 level and you will not be able to bid 1NT showing 15-18. We take up the slack with the opening 2NT bid that now is reduced to 17-19.
The theory of getting into the bidding is based on simple addition. If you give opener 14, and his partner 5 or less for his pass, we have accounted for 19 hcps. If balancer has as much as 8 hcps that leaves partner with an opening hand. Why didn’t partner overcall or double with opening values? The usual reason,is partner simply did not have the correct hand shape to take a call.
Consider opponent’s opening of 1 club and partner holding AT98, K2, 987, AQ32. He has a very nice hand, and yet is handcuffed by his shape. Suppose your cards in the pass out seat are Q765, QJT, QJ76, 3. Alternatively, consider K7532, 763, AJ2, xx. Each of these hands has 8 hcps with the major difference being shape. The experts are going to double with the first hand and bid 1 spade with the second. Are you ready to do that? If not, you need to polish your bidding shoes.
According to expert Karen Walker (http://www.prairienet.org/) the best time to balance is when you are short in the bid suit and have values in the other suits or have a good 5 card suit of our own. Being non-vulnerable is also a huge safety net. The worst time to balance is when you have less than 8 hcps, have length in opener’s suit or are vulnerable. Think about it. What is the worst that can happen if you balance? They double you for penalty? Never happen! They bid to a higher level? Good, maybe we can set them. We find a fit and effectively compete? Even better, we get a positive score. They set us a trick or two? Non- vulnerable we are not likely to get hurt. There are many more positives than negatives.
Now for some last minute decisions you and partner have to make. In the balancing seat is a cue bid Michaels or is it a huge playing hand that you want to force to game? Marty Bergen in More Points Schmoints (1999) says Michaels cue bids are still “on.” Other Experts insist that it has to be a game forcing one or two suiter like KQT9876, AK, AQT7, void. You cue bid since you do not want to risk making a take out double and having partner convert it to a penalty double. Without being authoritative, I prefer the Michael’s approach, mostly because I don’t think that I will ever see the other hand. I also believe that in match points it is critical to show your shape as soon as possible, since you often do not get 2 bids to describe weaker two suiters.
The other issue is the 2 NT balancing bid. It can be played as a strong no trump hand (19+) or as Unusual NT showing 5-5 (or 5-4) in the minors. An alternative, if you want to play 2NT as “Unusual”, would be to show the strong balanced hand by doubling and then bidding 2 NT. Again, the risk is that partner may convert the take out double and you end up defending. Even in the unlikely event that partner should convert the double it may not be the worst thing in the world. How badly do I want to play 2NT against a potentially entryless dummy? Again, from a purely personal style, I think in match points there is some significant competitive value in showing your hand distribution with the one opportunity you are likely to have. I am also persuaded by the frequency at which I expect to hold 19 hcps in the balancing seat.
If you are going to use Michaels and/or Unusual No Trump, the hands should be somewhat better quality than those minimum hands that you might bid defensively in the direct seat. You know, sensible stuff like having your points in the suits that you bid. After all, your intention is not to preempt anybody, it is to find a fit and be competitive. Bottom line, talk it over with your partners.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Bridge by the Numbers
In Duplicate Bridge we have lots of playing laws or rules that have been handed down to us over time. It all started many centuries ago when an English author (actually the famous Hoyle) described the Rule of 11 for whist fanatics in his first book on the game. Since then, authors and teachers seeking to simplify the game and make decision making easier for novices and intermediates have developed what they refer to as Laws or Rules for every number from 2-23 (yes, I have accounted for every one of them). Actually the laws that we probably should know best are the Laws of Duplicate Bridge as developed by the ACBL, but for the most part they are seldom read and little understood. Since there has never been a “Rule of One” that I can find, I am going to create it and it is one that it is well to remember. All this Rule and Law stuff is vastly overcooked. They are only Guidelines which only give you an “edge” when you understand their application and follow them rigorously. Mel Colchamiro in his book “How to Play Like an Expert" (2007) suggests that guidelines should give you the correct result 70% of the time. I suggest to you that many of the rules, laws and guidelines that are the most popular today do not meet that test.
A prominent one is the old rule for finessing when you have 9 cards in a suit missing the Queen such as AKJx opposite 98765. Do we finesse for the Queen or do we play AK from the top hoping to split the trump 2-2? Well, you probably remember the well known Rule taught in Bridge 101, “Eight Ever, Nine never, meaning always take the finesse with 8 cards, but never do so if you have 9 cards in the suit. Actually, when you have the 9 card set up, the odds favor the drop by only about 2% over the finesse for the queen. Hardly overwhelming for one of the best known rules in bridge. Think about that next time you see this setup. If you declare, and your left hand opponent has overcalled, doubled, is out of tempo or is moving restlessly in his seat, take the finesse. If you are right, you are in for a very high board, since everybody else will remember the rule, but forget that the odds are almost even. Oh by the way, the odds for the second part of the rule (favoring the finesse with an 8 card suit) are overwhelming. You would really have to be on life support to try to drop the Queen doubleton.
Another well known rule is the Rule of 15, a rule for opening the bidding if you are in the pass out (4th) seat. The rule (think guideline) states that if your total points and spade cards equal 15, you open the bidding. Parts of this rule are too obvious to deserve mention. Is there anybody that wouldn’t open a 13 point hand with a doubleton spade or a 15 point hand with a spade void? Peter Cheung is an expert in discrete mathematics, computer algorithms, game theory and the strategy of bridge and poker. I can’t testify as to his bridge skills, but for our purposes it isn’t important since we are only going to rely on his computer analysis of the efficacy of the Rule of 15. Peter analyzed millions of computer dealt bridge hands in making his analysis. Having already dispatched the 13=15 point hands, we can also get rid of the 12 point hands as the computer results show that they should be opened in 4th seat (no matter what your spade holding) unless you have 12 points that should be downgraded to 11. Yes, occasionally you have to bring some common sense to the process like understanding that a stiff honor needs to be downgraded.
So, this brings us to the 11 point hands where the Rule of 15 appears to have some validity. Taking a worse case scenario (11 points and 4-3-3-3), opening the hand will provide you with a positive result against opponents about 51% of the time. If you look at a fuller array of possible hand distributions (4432 and better), when you have 11 points and meet the Rule of 15, you overall percentage of success increases to about 62%. Still not up to Mel’s guideline of 70%, but very worthwhile. So with 11 hcps and 4 spades, open in 4th seat. Don’t expect miracles though; be prepared to have it be wrong 38% of the time.
How about hands with 10 or fewer points that meet the rule of 15? On these hands the rule of 15 did not present a positive advantage, although with 10 points and 5 spades it was close 49% favorable to 51% unfavorable. Do you feel like you need a high board? Just pass the hand and hope that the 51% is on your side. For sure, everybody else will be opening 1 spade. The computer also found out that there are some hands that do not meet the Rule of 15 that should be opened. In particular, it found that 1-4-4-4 hands with 11-12 hcps had a positive success ratio due to the strong distributional value of the hand.
Note that with all of these favorable results the win percentage is very narrow, and if you really want to take advantage of it, you need to follow it religiously or be very successful in your picking and choosing.
I examined the history of the Rule of 15. Some call it a Casino Count, a bastardization of the fact that Jonathan “Cansino” (a British expert) is one of the claimants to developing the rule. It has nothing to do with the old card game Casino. Others refer to the 15 points as Pearson Points after a California expert Don Pearson, who also claims authorship. It is not a new guideline as I saw it referred to in Marty Bergen’s Book “Points Schmoints” from the mid 80’s. It was interesting to me that both Cansino and Pearson talked about not only having points and spadeds totaling 15, but also added a quick trick requirement, 1 ½ quick tricks for Cansino and 2 quick tricks for Pearson. Where did that go? If you want to add a little common sense to the pure math, I would highly recommend adding a quick trick requirement of your own to the formula. It will give you that extra edge.
Recently I was at a table where with 3 passes, 4th hand was dealt KJxxx, K, xx, Kxxxx. A good player applied the rule of 15 and opened the hand. Do you like this bid? If you do, you have to also like being -200 at 2 spades! As you might expect, they opened the Ace of hearts and just pumped declarer to death in hearts until declarer lost control of the trump suit. This in spite of the fact that dummy held the AK of diamonds. I showed this hand to Mel Colchamiro and his reply was the King of hearts is not worth 3 points. Good observation, but how about the fact that the hand also has no defense, only a fair suit and no easy rebid if partner (a passed hand) bids red suit. The “Guideline” here is “you do not have to forget everything else you know about bridge simply to play by the numbers.”
A prominent one is the old rule for finessing when you have 9 cards in a suit missing the Queen such as AKJx opposite 98765. Do we finesse for the Queen or do we play AK from the top hoping to split the trump 2-2? Well, you probably remember the well known Rule taught in Bridge 101, “Eight Ever, Nine never, meaning always take the finesse with 8 cards, but never do so if you have 9 cards in the suit. Actually, when you have the 9 card set up, the odds favor the drop by only about 2% over the finesse for the queen. Hardly overwhelming for one of the best known rules in bridge. Think about that next time you see this setup. If you declare, and your left hand opponent has overcalled, doubled, is out of tempo or is moving restlessly in his seat, take the finesse. If you are right, you are in for a very high board, since everybody else will remember the rule, but forget that the odds are almost even. Oh by the way, the odds for the second part of the rule (favoring the finesse with an 8 card suit) are overwhelming. You would really have to be on life support to try to drop the Queen doubleton.
Another well known rule is the Rule of 15, a rule for opening the bidding if you are in the pass out (4th) seat. The rule (think guideline) states that if your total points and spade cards equal 15, you open the bidding. Parts of this rule are too obvious to deserve mention. Is there anybody that wouldn’t open a 13 point hand with a doubleton spade or a 15 point hand with a spade void? Peter Cheung is an expert in discrete mathematics, computer algorithms, game theory and the strategy of bridge and poker. I can’t testify as to his bridge skills, but for our purposes it isn’t important since we are only going to rely on his computer analysis of the efficacy of the Rule of 15. Peter analyzed millions of computer dealt bridge hands in making his analysis. Having already dispatched the 13=15 point hands, we can also get rid of the 12 point hands as the computer results show that they should be opened in 4th seat (no matter what your spade holding) unless you have 12 points that should be downgraded to 11. Yes, occasionally you have to bring some common sense to the process like understanding that a stiff honor needs to be downgraded.
So, this brings us to the 11 point hands where the Rule of 15 appears to have some validity. Taking a worse case scenario (11 points and 4-3-3-3), opening the hand will provide you with a positive result against opponents about 51% of the time. If you look at a fuller array of possible hand distributions (4432 and better), when you have 11 points and meet the Rule of 15, you overall percentage of success increases to about 62%. Still not up to Mel’s guideline of 70%, but very worthwhile. So with 11 hcps and 4 spades, open in 4th seat. Don’t expect miracles though; be prepared to have it be wrong 38% of the time.
How about hands with 10 or fewer points that meet the rule of 15? On these hands the rule of 15 did not present a positive advantage, although with 10 points and 5 spades it was close 49% favorable to 51% unfavorable. Do you feel like you need a high board? Just pass the hand and hope that the 51% is on your side. For sure, everybody else will be opening 1 spade. The computer also found out that there are some hands that do not meet the Rule of 15 that should be opened. In particular, it found that 1-4-4-4 hands with 11-12 hcps had a positive success ratio due to the strong distributional value of the hand.
Note that with all of these favorable results the win percentage is very narrow, and if you really want to take advantage of it, you need to follow it religiously or be very successful in your picking and choosing.
I examined the history of the Rule of 15. Some call it a Casino Count, a bastardization of the fact that Jonathan “Cansino” (a British expert) is one of the claimants to developing the rule. It has nothing to do with the old card game Casino. Others refer to the 15 points as Pearson Points after a California expert Don Pearson, who also claims authorship. It is not a new guideline as I saw it referred to in Marty Bergen’s Book “Points Schmoints” from the mid 80’s. It was interesting to me that both Cansino and Pearson talked about not only having points and spadeds totaling 15, but also added a quick trick requirement, 1 ½ quick tricks for Cansino and 2 quick tricks for Pearson. Where did that go? If you want to add a little common sense to the pure math, I would highly recommend adding a quick trick requirement of your own to the formula. It will give you that extra edge.
Recently I was at a table where with 3 passes, 4th hand was dealt KJxxx, K, xx, Kxxxx. A good player applied the rule of 15 and opened the hand. Do you like this bid? If you do, you have to also like being -200 at 2 spades! As you might expect, they opened the Ace of hearts and just pumped declarer to death in hearts until declarer lost control of the trump suit. This in spite of the fact that dummy held the AK of diamonds. I showed this hand to Mel Colchamiro and his reply was the King of hearts is not worth 3 points. Good observation, but how about the fact that the hand also has no defense, only a fair suit and no easy rebid if partner (a passed hand) bids red suit. The “Guideline” here is “you do not have to forget everything else you know about bridge simply to play by the numbers.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
