So someone tells you bridge is fun and you decide you want to learn to play. After all, you like playing cards in general. Your instructor sits down patiently and tells you that Aces are worth four points, Kings are worth three, etc. What he/she usually forgets to tell you, but what you find out later, is that this point count system is supposed to tell you the relative strength of the hand and help you in the bidding. So you learn to "open" hands with more than an average number of points in the deck per deal, usually 13 points.
As you evoke this rather simplistic hand evaluation technique, it becomes clear to you that this method is hopelessly inadequate. First off, barring a ruff, an A will take a trick, always. A king will only take a trick when the A is onside, i.e. half the time and risks getting ruffed. A "Q" is even more likely to become a nothing trick and if it's in rho's suit and lho hasn't raised, it's going to get ruffed out for sure. The proportions 4/3/2/1 just don't seem to be quite right. Thereby a hand such as this: AK,8732,A84,8742 and this: A874,7,87,AK8765 are given the same raw point count but the latter definitely has more trick-taking power. The raw point count technique definitely does not tell the whole story.
So if you're like most developing players, you're introduced to another evaluation strategy: the losing trick count. For most, losing trick count asks you to count one loser in each suit that is missing and A/K/Q. (Most experts make .5 loser adjustments for A vs Q but most "instructors" don't tell us that). Be that as it may, now hands like AK,8732,A84,8742 become eight loser hands and hands like A874,7,87,AK8765 become six loser hands and bidding decisions are made on these evaluations. This evaluation technique accounts for shape, but flattens out the honor cards A/K/Q and ignores J's completely to wit: A654,A65,A65,A65 and Q654,Q65,Q65,Q65 register the same 8 loser count (before the adjustments). Which hand would you rather have?
Thereby neither of the techniques above account for any card less than a J. Which hand would you rather have: AKT9,AT5,T93,K98 or this hand AK32,A32,432,K32? Would you rather have this six loser: A432,2,32,AK5432 or this six loser: AT98,T,T9,AKT9876? Or better yet this one: AJT9,J,JT,AKJ987.
Another example
This is "six" points (raw) but you can get four trick from it: KQJT9
This is "nine" points but only guarantees three tricks AKQ53
Luckily, we have very accomplished bridge players such as Kaplan/Rubens/Goldsmith who help us out of this dilemma. A very helpful tool for hand evaluation is the K & R hand evaluator applet:
http://www.jeff-goldsmith.org/cgi-bin/knr.cgi
I've used it tons as I learned the ins and outs of the trick-taking potential of my hands.
This hand evaluation tool adjusts the raw point count to something more realistic. The evaluator consistently correctly evaluates A/K's versus Q/J's. It accounts for shape as well. (incorporating losing trick count techniques). It adds the dimension of spot cards and adjusts if spot cards are present in long suits as opposed to short suits.
What is also remarkable about this tool is that it evaluates hands that might fit well opposite a possible hand partner may have. For example this hand: AKJT65,A65,A5,98 (K&R (AKJT76 A65 A5 98) = 20.00) is equal in strength to this hand AKQJT,A65,A54,98? (K&R (AKQJT A65 A54 98) = 20.00) Aren't both spade suits worth five tricks in general. Well "No!". Opposite Q, Q4,Q32,432,7432 hand number one will give you six tricks in the spade suit.
Here are some hands to help you test out the above theories. Figure out a raw point count, losing trick count and evaluator count. See what you get and see if the above phenom isn't presented in your outcome data. I can assure you it is!
Have fun.
A654,A65,A65,A65
Q654,Q65,Q65,Q65
AKT9,AT5,T93,K98
K432,QJ5,Q54,KJ5
AK43,T9,7,A78543
J432,Q9,K,KQ543
Saturday, March 19, 2011
Thursday, January 13, 2011
A from AK. Ins and Outs explained
Hi Folks,
The above treatment has caused an appreciable amount of problems in my bridge experiences so I thought I’d write a definitive explanation of the subject. Hope you enjoy the discussion.
First, last I checked, K from AK is still standard. So, if you’ve decided to juxtapose this lead agreement, please don’t explain your treatment as “standard”. This almost caused a committee hearing once, so remember, K from AK is standard. If you lead A from AK your treatment is not “standard”.
So why do lots of pairs reverse the standard K from AK treatment? We reverse this lead so we can distinguish the AK from KQ leads. This is extremely helpful when playing standard carding and you hold something like J7. If partner leads the A, you signal high low for the third round ruff (hopefully you have trump). If partner leads the K promising the Q you might not want to blow all your honors on the first trick. At any rate, if partner leads the A promising the K you usually give attitude for the Q or a ruff. If partner leads the K from KQ you give attitude for ruffs or the J but know that you have to wait for one control card to disappear –namely the A. It’s probably with opponents.
In some very specific situations, one often leads the A w/out the K. Now what? Leading A from AK precludes the partnership from knowing whether that A is backed by the K or not. It isn’t often that we lead an unsupported ace except in the following situations:
1) At the five level or above
2) When you’ve bid and raised your suit
3) In the middle of the hand and
4) Against preempts at any level.
Example: Your partner and you have raised hearts. The opponents have violently competed in spades. Wouldn’t you lead the A without the K. Often you would. If you insist on using your A from AK agreement, your partnership will not be able to give attitude towards the K. This has happened several times in my partnerships. Partner led the A, I presumed he didn’t have the K and carded accordingly. Confusion ensued.
In these situations it’s more important to know that your partner has led a blank ace then it is to distinguish K from KQ. Why? As noted above, reversing standard treatments helps you negotiate J7(3) –like holdings. Now tell me, how often is that an issue at the five level or above, when you’ve bid and raised your suit, in the middle of the hand or against preempts. Jacks usually don’t cash in these situations.
Hope this is helpful. There is one other time one leads K form AK. That is when you have AK dry. Partnerships just have to figure that one out from the bidding and from the trump holding.
Have fun.
The above treatment has caused an appreciable amount of problems in my bridge experiences so I thought I’d write a definitive explanation of the subject. Hope you enjoy the discussion.
First, last I checked, K from AK is still standard. So, if you’ve decided to juxtapose this lead agreement, please don’t explain your treatment as “standard”. This almost caused a committee hearing once, so remember, K from AK is standard. If you lead A from AK your treatment is not “standard”.
So why do lots of pairs reverse the standard K from AK treatment? We reverse this lead so we can distinguish the AK from KQ leads. This is extremely helpful when playing standard carding and you hold something like J7. If partner leads the A, you signal high low for the third round ruff (hopefully you have trump). If partner leads the K promising the Q you might not want to blow all your honors on the first trick. At any rate, if partner leads the A promising the K you usually give attitude for the Q or a ruff. If partner leads the K from KQ you give attitude for ruffs or the J but know that you have to wait for one control card to disappear –namely the A. It’s probably with opponents.
In some very specific situations, one often leads the A w/out the K. Now what? Leading A from AK precludes the partnership from knowing whether that A is backed by the K or not. It isn’t often that we lead an unsupported ace except in the following situations:
1) At the five level or above
2) When you’ve bid and raised your suit
3) In the middle of the hand and
4) Against preempts at any level.
Example: Your partner and you have raised hearts. The opponents have violently competed in spades. Wouldn’t you lead the A without the K. Often you would. If you insist on using your A from AK agreement, your partnership will not be able to give attitude towards the K. This has happened several times in my partnerships. Partner led the A, I presumed he didn’t have the K and carded accordingly. Confusion ensued.
In these situations it’s more important to know that your partner has led a blank ace then it is to distinguish K from KQ. Why? As noted above, reversing standard treatments helps you negotiate J7(3) –like holdings. Now tell me, how often is that an issue at the five level or above, when you’ve bid and raised your suit, in the middle of the hand or against preempts. Jacks usually don’t cash in these situations.
Hope this is helpful. There is one other time one leads K form AK. That is when you have AK dry. Partnerships just have to figure that one out from the bidding and from the trump holding.
Have fun.
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Attitude on Opening Lead --the Plot Thickens
So you've agreed to play "attitude on opening lead". It's a pretty standard treament and most experts can field it even though it may not be their preferred method. I play nothing else, but know that even this standard treatment takes a lot of work.
The comments that follow refer to standard carding against suit contracts. Upside down carding is relatively the same with some minor twists.
So, positive attitude means you want the suit continued, and you "echo" with your suit. Holding 87 and wanting a ruff, or not wanting a shift, you play 8 followed by the 7. If you do not want a ruff, there is no reason to "echo" in the suit. Ask for a switch by playing the 7. If you wish the suit continued and you hold 973. Play the 7 (continue) then play the 9 --now switch.
As per usual in bridge when it concerns carding, the plot thickens fast.
Suppose you hold Ax, Kx, Qx, KQ, or QJ. Now what.
With Ax, you should only be concerned about overtakingthe K --should you overtake and ask for a ruff by returning your small card? Usually that is a good idea. However if you're staring at Jxxx in the dummy and you have a natural trump trick, why would you overtake and ask for a ruff. That might be crashing your tricks in order to set up dummy's suit.
The general principle with Kx and Qx is that one generally should not signal with an honor if there is a reasonable chance that it is needed for tricktaking purposes, i.e., if playing the honor is likely to reduce the number of tricks that you and partner can take.
So, if you hold Kx and partner leads the A, play K only when the K ranks to block the cashing tricks. You don't want to be stuck with Kx in your hand and let declarer run the rest of the tricks. Consider a hand where partner shows 5 good spades and is unlikely to have a quick side entry (for example, dummy has 1st round control of the other suits) and dummy has xxx in spades and top cards in another suit that are likely to provide quick pitches. Or perhaps you are defending 5m at IMPs and can tell that the only tricks for the defense are likely to be in spades. Now it might well be right to play K from Kx so hopefully the defense can cash 3 quick tricks, which would be impossible if one held onto the K.
If you don't see that happening, play low and let partner figure it out. If you pound the K in situations where blocking and cashing are not issues, partner is going to think you have a singleton and underlead. Oooops.
Playing the Q on an opening lead of A or K usually promises a singleton or the J.
So unless you're dire for something to happen, play low from Qx. Partner will underlead if he/she wants you in for a timely return through declarer's values. He/she thinks you hold the J with your Q, or that your Q is singleton.
Most folks echo with Jx if they wish to show partner a doubleton or want a ruff for some reason. Jx's usually don't compress tricks if the J is blown on another top honor. Playing the J from Jx would be appropriate if one wants the suit continued for a ruff, or in a count situation, if playing standard carding. But if one does not want to ruff (from one's natural trump trick, perhaps) or if partner leads the K showing the Q and not the A, and dummy has 10xx, then generally one should not play the J from Jx, because it will cost a trick.
Hope this is helpful. Ask if you have questions.
The comments that follow refer to standard carding against suit contracts. Upside down carding is relatively the same with some minor twists.
So, positive attitude means you want the suit continued, and you "echo" with your suit. Holding 87 and wanting a ruff, or not wanting a shift, you play 8 followed by the 7. If you do not want a ruff, there is no reason to "echo" in the suit. Ask for a switch by playing the 7. If you wish the suit continued and you hold 973. Play the 7 (continue) then play the 9 --now switch.
As per usual in bridge when it concerns carding, the plot thickens fast.
Suppose you hold Ax, Kx, Qx, KQ, or QJ. Now what.
With Ax, you should only be concerned about overtakingthe K --should you overtake and ask for a ruff by returning your small card? Usually that is a good idea. However if you're staring at Jxxx in the dummy and you have a natural trump trick, why would you overtake and ask for a ruff. That might be crashing your tricks in order to set up dummy's suit.
The general principle with Kx and Qx is that one generally should not signal with an honor if there is a reasonable chance that it is needed for tricktaking purposes, i.e., if playing the honor is likely to reduce the number of tricks that you and partner can take.
So, if you hold Kx and partner leads the A, play K only when the K ranks to block the cashing tricks. You don't want to be stuck with Kx in your hand and let declarer run the rest of the tricks. Consider a hand where partner shows 5 good spades and is unlikely to have a quick side entry (for example, dummy has 1st round control of the other suits) and dummy has xxx in spades and top cards in another suit that are likely to provide quick pitches. Or perhaps you are defending 5m at IMPs and can tell that the only tricks for the defense are likely to be in spades. Now it might well be right to play K from Kx so hopefully the defense can cash 3 quick tricks, which would be impossible if one held onto the K.
If you don't see that happening, play low and let partner figure it out. If you pound the K in situations where blocking and cashing are not issues, partner is going to think you have a singleton and underlead. Oooops.
Playing the Q on an opening lead of A or K usually promises a singleton or the J.
So unless you're dire for something to happen, play low from Qx. Partner will underlead if he/she wants you in for a timely return through declarer's values. He/she thinks you hold the J with your Q, or that your Q is singleton.
Most folks echo with Jx if they wish to show partner a doubleton or want a ruff for some reason. Jx's usually don't compress tricks if the J is blown on another top honor. Playing the J from Jx would be appropriate if one wants the suit continued for a ruff, or in a count situation, if playing standard carding. But if one does not want to ruff (from one's natural trump trick, perhaps) or if partner leads the K showing the Q and not the A, and dummy has 10xx, then generally one should not play the J from Jx, because it will cost a trick.
Hope this is helpful. Ask if you have questions.
Monday, September 27, 2010
Two Level Overcalls--Discipline
Hi Folks,
One of our own is frustrated without having partnership discussions about two level overcalls. If you don't set parameters around those bids, it's hard to engage in constructive bidding, and advances may be much of a "potuck" affair. A ZERO in the making, I say.
I would be happy to give you some parameters my experts partners and I use. It might help if you adhere to some of these guidelines.
First, repeat after me, "If you make a two level overcall you have a good suit." (goes for one level overcalls, too actually). Then repeat after me again. "I will not make a two level overcall w/out a good suit".
Ok, so let's define the qualities of a "good suit". I would much rather make a two level overcall on QJT987 than AK543. Why is this? If the layout is foul, one would much rather defend with QJT93 in the suit than AKxx(x). Why is this? Prime cards help bring in no trump contracts and stop quick losers in opponent's suits playing your contracts. However, QJT93 are purely defensive cards. The T for example will be a cool defensive trick but it will do precious little in an opponent's offensive contract. It's like a "gift" from the bridge gods on D; as good as an ace. Value solid intermediate cards and honors when you overcall and be cautious about suits like AJ8532. Yuck.
Remember, when you're making a two level overcall in direct seat you are launching in an "non-fitting" auction where no one has, as of yet, claimed a majority of the points. It may just be that your "fit" is with your lho and he/she may have the remainder of the deck. This is why you need to be relatively solid. I say have this:
1) 10 points non vul
2) Opening hand with six card suit vul.
3) And all together now: "A good suit".
If you have less than that and your partnership and/or teammship gets in trouble, you have no one to blame but yourself. And if partner makes a reasonable raise and you still get in trouble, once again, the blame rests with the dubious overcall.
Sometimes you hear "one needs to stretch bidding 2C over 1D to make it hard for opponents to find their 4/4 major fits". What are you going to do with A54,QJT9,JT98,Q3 when the auction goes 1D (2c)?
"Stretching" is being at the bottom end of the overcall ranges.
Sometimes folks forget this fact. This might not be the last time you get in the auction. Perhaps if you lay quiet now, you know you'll belong in the auction after the opponents have settled in a low level fit aution. Now you can balance and tell partner volumes about your hand due to the delayed entry
Hope this helps.
One of our own is frustrated without having partnership discussions about two level overcalls. If you don't set parameters around those bids, it's hard to engage in constructive bidding, and advances may be much of a "potuck" affair. A ZERO in the making, I say.
I would be happy to give you some parameters my experts partners and I use. It might help if you adhere to some of these guidelines.
First, repeat after me, "If you make a two level overcall you have a good suit." (goes for one level overcalls, too actually). Then repeat after me again. "I will not make a two level overcall w/out a good suit".
Ok, so let's define the qualities of a "good suit". I would much rather make a two level overcall on QJT987 than AK543. Why is this? If the layout is foul, one would much rather defend with QJT93 in the suit than AKxx(x). Why is this? Prime cards help bring in no trump contracts and stop quick losers in opponent's suits playing your contracts. However, QJT93 are purely defensive cards. The T for example will be a cool defensive trick but it will do precious little in an opponent's offensive contract. It's like a "gift" from the bridge gods on D; as good as an ace. Value solid intermediate cards and honors when you overcall and be cautious about suits like AJ8532. Yuck.
Remember, when you're making a two level overcall in direct seat you are launching in an "non-fitting" auction where no one has, as of yet, claimed a majority of the points. It may just be that your "fit" is with your lho and he/she may have the remainder of the deck. This is why you need to be relatively solid. I say have this:
1) 10 points non vul
2) Opening hand with six card suit vul.
3) And all together now: "A good suit".
If you have less than that and your partnership and/or teammship gets in trouble, you have no one to blame but yourself. And if partner makes a reasonable raise and you still get in trouble, once again, the blame rests with the dubious overcall.
Sometimes you hear "one needs to stretch bidding 2C over 1D to make it hard for opponents to find their 4/4 major fits". What are you going to do with A54,QJT9,JT98,Q3 when the auction goes 1D (2c)?
"Stretching" is being at the bottom end of the overcall ranges.
Sometimes folks forget this fact. This might not be the last time you get in the auction. Perhaps if you lay quiet now, you know you'll belong in the auction after the opponents have settled in a low level fit aution. Now you can balance and tell partner volumes about your hand due to the delayed entry
Hope this helps.
Monday, August 16, 2010
Maximal Doubles-A Discussion
Hi all,
Doubles, man their multi-facited purposes never quit, do they? We have doubles
that in some sequences actually mean "penalty" you're not making this --or at least not with overtricks :). Some doubles are "take out" meaning "opponents are attempting to land in a suit, or have landed in a suit fit, perhaps we can find our fit this way". There are those doubles that are lead direct and control showing.
However, there is one double that my advanced partnerships use routinely having a meaning different from all of the above--this double (maximal) means "game try, are you at the max or min of your limited bid?"
These maximal double sequences are mostly used over major suit raises when the opponents have taken away a level of bidding under your suit so that natural suit-asking game tries are not possible.
For example. You bid 1S on AKxxx,A,QJTxx,xx. Lefty bids 2H and partner raises, 2S. Rho bids 3H and now what. Wouldn't you like to make a 3D game try? Well, if you try that you're going to get a director call. 3D is below 3H so instead of using the double for penalty in this sequence, we use the double as an "all purpose game try".
I play these sequences with most of my established partnerships but usually I have brief discussion about whether maximal doubles are on if the opponents have not bid and raised their suit. For example, has the auction gone 1S 2S (3H)? or 1S (2H) 2S (3H)? Some of my partnerships play maximal doubles in the latter situation and not the first. Be on the same page, discuss. If not, get ready for -730 at imps. Don't ask me how I know :-).
If you agree to play maximal doubles, remember they are usually "on" in overcall situations also i.e. 1D (1H) 2D (2H), 3D. Now X is not penalty of diamonds but an all purpose game try in hearts. Make sense?
Hope this is helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Doubles, man their multi-facited purposes never quit, do they? We have doubles
that in some sequences actually mean "penalty" you're not making this --or at least not with overtricks :). Some doubles are "take out" meaning "opponents are attempting to land in a suit, or have landed in a suit fit, perhaps we can find our fit this way". There are those doubles that are lead direct and control showing.
However, there is one double that my advanced partnerships use routinely having a meaning different from all of the above--this double (maximal) means "game try, are you at the max or min of your limited bid?"
These maximal double sequences are mostly used over major suit raises when the opponents have taken away a level of bidding under your suit so that natural suit-asking game tries are not possible.
For example. You bid 1S on AKxxx,A,QJTxx,xx. Lefty bids 2H and partner raises, 2S. Rho bids 3H and now what. Wouldn't you like to make a 3D game try? Well, if you try that you're going to get a director call. 3D is below 3H so instead of using the double for penalty in this sequence, we use the double as an "all purpose game try".
I play these sequences with most of my established partnerships but usually I have brief discussion about whether maximal doubles are on if the opponents have not bid and raised their suit. For example, has the auction gone 1S 2S (3H)? or 1S (2H) 2S (3H)? Some of my partnerships play maximal doubles in the latter situation and not the first. Be on the same page, discuss. If not, get ready for -730 at imps. Don't ask me how I know :-).
If you agree to play maximal doubles, remember they are usually "on" in overcall situations also i.e. 1D (1H) 2D (2H), 3D. Now X is not penalty of diamonds but an all purpose game try in hearts. Make sense?
Hope this is helpful, please ask if you have further questions.
Friday, July 30, 2010
A Ruse is Sometimes Very Effective
Have you ever heard the phrase. "Let the opponents make the last guess". It is usually uttered when one side has a contract option with power, and the other side has a save option. You are to continue preempting to the level where you don't know if their contract is making or not. Hey, if you don't know, perhaps they don't know either.
I fielded an interesting hand at the Eastside bridge club the other day where I wanted to invoke this practice. NV vs Vul (MP) my left hand opponent started the bidding with 1D. My partner jumped right in there with 3S (preemptive) and right hand opponent bid 4C freely. Holding xxx,Jxxxxx,QJ,xx it didn't take a trip to A land to figure out that the opponents were on for slam. If I were to make the opponents truly have the last guess, I would bid 6S, knowing full well that 6m is makable but not being sure whether 7m is. The "last guess" theory is.........if I don't know, maybe the opponents don't know either.
When I approached my mentors with this hand, they, as usual had a lot of other thoughts to share as well.
In this kind of situation, "last guess theory" is not nearly as important as your attempt to take away their machinery. You may know 6m is on, but if you take away their opportunity to find even that and they land in 5m -- look how happy you will be. Remember, offensively your spade tricks are limited and even a 5S save may go for more than 5m.
Here are their options! pick your favorite.
1) Bid 4S -- hides the degree of your fit and lack of defensive potential. Somebody will bid 5m and they can languash there. Also takes a way a 4S Q bid often use as a power raise.
2) X. Who knows, they may play 4CX when they're on for six. (Look at the score cards, you just got a top). If they XX -- "correct" to 4S and see what happens.
3) Bid 4N. This takes away the opponent's aces asking bid. You can always land safely in 5S no matter what the response of your partner is to this seemingly blackwood auction, and the opponents are now thinking you're stopping short of slam based on some values.
4) Bid 5S. You might buy it there X'd when they're on for six or seven.
It is very important to know who your opponents are when you try to guage the liklihood of success of each of these options. The more sophisticated the partnership, the more a Q bid will mean, the more a 4N bid will mean, the more forcing passes will have meaning. And trust me, the real pros won't get fooled by your X at all! That's the way they are!!
Hope this has been helpful!
I fielded an interesting hand at the Eastside bridge club the other day where I wanted to invoke this practice. NV vs Vul (MP) my left hand opponent started the bidding with 1D. My partner jumped right in there with 3S (preemptive) and right hand opponent bid 4C freely. Holding xxx,Jxxxxx,QJ,xx it didn't take a trip to A land to figure out that the opponents were on for slam. If I were to make the opponents truly have the last guess, I would bid 6S, knowing full well that 6m is makable but not being sure whether 7m is. The "last guess" theory is.........if I don't know, maybe the opponents don't know either.
When I approached my mentors with this hand, they, as usual had a lot of other thoughts to share as well.
In this kind of situation, "last guess theory" is not nearly as important as your attempt to take away their machinery. You may know 6m is on, but if you take away their opportunity to find even that and they land in 5m -- look how happy you will be. Remember, offensively your spade tricks are limited and even a 5S save may go for more than 5m.
Here are their options! pick your favorite.
1) Bid 4S -- hides the degree of your fit and lack of defensive potential. Somebody will bid 5m and they can languash there. Also takes a way a 4S Q bid often use as a power raise.
2) X. Who knows, they may play 4CX when they're on for six. (Look at the score cards, you just got a top). If they XX -- "correct" to 4S and see what happens.
3) Bid 4N. This takes away the opponent's aces asking bid. You can always land safely in 5S no matter what the response of your partner is to this seemingly blackwood auction, and the opponents are now thinking you're stopping short of slam based on some values.
4) Bid 5S. You might buy it there X'd when they're on for six or seven.
It is very important to know who your opponents are when you try to guage the liklihood of success of each of these options. The more sophisticated the partnership, the more a Q bid will mean, the more a 4N bid will mean, the more forcing passes will have meaning. And trust me, the real pros won't get fooled by your X at all! That's the way they are!!
Hope this has been helpful!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Quantitative Bids...the ins and outs
Cool, one of the first things one learns in beginning bridge days is that there is this neat convention where 4N “asks for aces”. Pretty nifty!! That way you can figure out whether you can take 12/13 tricks or less than that.
However, the plot thickens quickly when someone informs you that over nt, this bid is meant as “quantitative”. Quantitative means it's an inquiry about how much you have in overall values, as opposed to an inquiry about something specific, like number of key cards. So, confusion often arises as to when a 4N bid is “quantitative" or “ace asking”.
Here’s my slant on the subject.
When opener denotes a balanced hand that has a range, we use 4N as an asking bid for slam, thus quantitative. There are lots of auctions where opener denotes a balanced NT hand of some sort with specific ranges:
Examples:
1N (15-17) usually
1C 1D, 1N (12-14) usually
2N (20-21) usually
2C 2D, 2N (22-24) usually
4N over these types of auctions asks opener to accept a slam invite with a max or pass the invite for a 4N contract.
The auction after a quantitative bid are not relegatedto NT contracts, however. Often folks will play them “Baron” style which means one will accept the slam invitation by bidding a four card minor at the five level. The hand may fit better in a 4/4 minor fit for 12 tricks rather than NT. Thus: 1N 4N, 5C.
One can also accept the slam invitation by bidding six of a minor. This denotes a five card suit or better and request responder to agree to the minor suit slam, or correct back to NT. Thus 1N 4N, 6C.
In order to ask for aces, we use 4C Gerber replacing the traditional 4N bid. This serves the purpose of keeping many nt auctions lower and the ability to bail at 4N when that seems right.
Quantitative bids are also often used in minor suit auctions once the contract has settled in 3N. Now 4N is a “slam ask” for strength.
Example:
1S 2C, 3C 3N, 4N.
Since it’s usually wrong to take 3N out to 4m, 4m in this auction now says “I’m interested in slam, but not NT yet. Please start Q bidding if you accept, bid 4N sign off if you don’t. In these type auctions, 4N is showing as much as asking--i.e., it says "I have substantially more than I have shown from my prior actions, but not enough to drive to slam, so act accordingly
In order to divine whether 4N is ace asking or quantitative one might ask what a 4m bid would mean at the same point of the auction. If this bid is ace asking or a suggestion to start Q bidding, then 4N is probably quantitative. That is a round about way of going at it, but it might help to think that way when you’re dead tired in the finals of the Spingold and about 100 different notions are taxing your brain –mostly how to win the thing!
However, the plot thickens quickly when someone informs you that over nt, this bid is meant as “quantitative”. Quantitative means it's an inquiry about how much you have in overall values, as opposed to an inquiry about something specific, like number of key cards. So, confusion often arises as to when a 4N bid is “quantitative" or “ace asking”.
Here’s my slant on the subject.
When opener denotes a balanced hand that has a range, we use 4N as an asking bid for slam, thus quantitative. There are lots of auctions where opener denotes a balanced NT hand of some sort with specific ranges:
Examples:
1N (15-17) usually
1C 1D, 1N (12-14) usually
2N (20-21) usually
2C 2D, 2N (22-24) usually
4N over these types of auctions asks opener to accept a slam invite with a max or pass the invite for a 4N contract.
The auction after a quantitative bid are not relegatedto NT contracts, however. Often folks will play them “Baron” style which means one will accept the slam invitation by bidding a four card minor at the five level. The hand may fit better in a 4/4 minor fit for 12 tricks rather than NT. Thus: 1N 4N, 5C.
One can also accept the slam invitation by bidding six of a minor. This denotes a five card suit or better and request responder to agree to the minor suit slam, or correct back to NT. Thus 1N 4N, 6C.
In order to ask for aces, we use 4C Gerber replacing the traditional 4N bid. This serves the purpose of keeping many nt auctions lower and the ability to bail at 4N when that seems right.
Quantitative bids are also often used in minor suit auctions once the contract has settled in 3N. Now 4N is a “slam ask” for strength.
Example:
1S 2C, 3C 3N, 4N.
Since it’s usually wrong to take 3N out to 4m, 4m in this auction now says “I’m interested in slam, but not NT yet. Please start Q bidding if you accept, bid 4N sign off if you don’t. In these type auctions, 4N is showing as much as asking--i.e., it says "I have substantially more than I have shown from my prior actions, but not enough to drive to slam, so act accordingly
In order to divine whether 4N is ace asking or quantitative one might ask what a 4m bid would mean at the same point of the auction. If this bid is ace asking or a suggestion to start Q bidding, then 4N is probably quantitative. That is a round about way of going at it, but it might help to think that way when you’re dead tired in the finals of the Spingold and about 100 different notions are taxing your brain –mostly how to win the thing!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
