BBO Discussion Forums: Law of Total Tricks question - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Law of Total Tricks question

#1 User is offline   Shugart23 

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 604
  • Joined: 2013-July-07

Posted 2014-December-12, 08:10

DO you consider the Law of Total Tricks a Matchpoint or an IMP decision making tool ? I suppose some may answer both, but I'm not sure it has equal worth for both game types. Thank you
0

#2 User is offline   Vampyr 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,611
  • Joined: 2009-September-15
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

Posted 2014-December-12, 08:22

Much more about matchpoints, I should have said; since it is mainly (I think) applied in situations when you want to concede 100 instead of 110.
I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones -- Albert Einstein
2

#3 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2014-December-12, 09:46

IMO, at either form of scoring, we should be applying the LAW in competitive (or soon to be competitive) situations to get to our own Law level first --- and in different ways depending on strength.

After that happens, it is most often the opponents, not us, who have to concern themselves with the subtleties of MP vs. IMP odds in relation to the LAW.

So, my answer is BOTH.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#4 User is offline   TylerE 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 2,760
  • Joined: 2006-January-30

Posted 2014-December-12, 13:40

Neither. What I have seen it used most for is justification after going for -300 or more.
0

#5 User is offline   jogs 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,316
  • Joined: 2011-March-01
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:student of the game

Posted 2014-December-12, 18:42

View PostTylerE, on 2014-December-12, 13:40, said:

Neither. What I have seen it used most for is justification after going for -300 or more.


Yes, always bid 3/3 with 17 total trumps. -200, -300 and -500.
0

#6 User is offline   SteveMoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,168
  • Joined: 2012-May-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cincinnati Unit 124
  • Interests:Family, Travel, Bridge Tournaments and Writing. Youth Bridge

Posted 2014-December-12, 22:03

LoTT is a tool for estimating available tricks. As such it applies to both versions of the game. What action you choose to take with that information will depend on the form of scoring.
Be the partner you want to play with.
Trust demands integrity, balance and collaboration.
District 11
Unit 124
Steve Moese
0

#7 User is offline   akwoo 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,309
  • Joined: 2010-November-21

Posted 2014-December-13, 02:45

I don't know how good this is, but generally I think the right rule of thumb is that, in MPs, you should bid if the Law (after adjustments) guarantees one of the contracts will make, but in IMPs, you should only bid if the Law allows the possibility that both of the contracts will make.

So to bid to the 3 level over the opponents' 2 level bid, you need 16 total tricks at MPs and 17 total tricks at IMPs, and to bid 3 over 3, you need 17 total tricks at MPs and 18 at IMPs.

But - if you are seriously worried about going down 2 (especially vulnerable) opposite a part score, then the probabilities change, both at MPs and at IMPs.
0

#8 User is offline   jdeegan 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,427
  • Joined: 2005-August-12
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Economics
    Finance
    Bridge bidding theory
    Cooking
    Downhill skiing

Posted 2014-December-13, 06:06

I think LOTT can be a useful guide at any form of scoring. Lotsa trumps GOOD. Not so many trumps BAD.
0

#9 User is offline   steve2005 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,148
  • Joined: 2010-April-22
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hamilton, Canada
  • Interests:Bridge duh!

Posted 2014-December-13, 12:10

View Postakwoo, on 2014-December-13, 02:45, said:

I don't know how good this is, but generally I think the right rule of thumb is that, in MPs, you should bid if the Law (after adjustments) guarantees one of the contracts will make, but in IMPs, you should only bid if the Law allows the possibility that both of the contracts will make.

So to bid to the 3 level over the opponents' 2 level bid, you need 16 total tricks at MPs and 17 total tricks at IMPs, and to bid 3 over 3, you need 17 total tricks at MPs and 18 at IMPs.

But - if you are seriously worried about going down 2 (especially vulnerable) opposite a part score, then the probabilities change, both at MPs and at IMPs.
The law doesn't quite work so should only be a guide. You have to make the final decision. What ackwoo says sounds wise





Sarcasm is a state of mind
0

#10 User is offline   msjennifer 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,366
  • Joined: 2013-August-03
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Variable private
  • Interests:Cricket,Photography,Paediatrics and Community Medicine.

Posted 2014-December-13, 22:43

LTT is a really good one at any type of scoring,1)if your opponents are apparently weaker than you.2) if your partner is also fully conversant with LTT. Once my partner on BBO thought that the competitive bid,which I made based on LTT,was a highly invitational bid and shot to game with -800 result.My humble suggestion is " use LTT at either forms of scoring provided you know your opponents and your partner"
0

#11 User is offline   jdgalt 

  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 87
  • Joined: 2007-July-09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:northern California
  • Interests:Also a board game player (I'm "jdgalt" on BoardGameGeek, too).

Posted 2014-December-14, 17:28

I see it as one of a whole array of ways to evaluate a hand -- raw points, Goren points, Quick Tricks (or Honor Tricks), Losing Trick Count, etc.

If I have time, I apply all of them to a hand. If most of them tell me to do the same thing, it's probably right.

Any one of them by itself will often be wrong.
0

#12 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,562
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2014-December-16, 16:59

View Postmsjennifer, on 2014-December-13, 22:43, said:

LTT is a really good one at any type of scoring,1)if your opponents are apparently weaker than you.2) if your partner is also fully conversant with LTT. Once my partner on BBO thought that the competitive bid,which I made based on LTT,was a highly invitational bid and shot to game with -800 result.My humble suggestion is " use LTT at either forms of scoring provided you know your opponents and your partner"

That's not a LTC problem, it's a partnership agreement/understanding problem.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

#13 User is offline   aguahombre 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 12,029
  • Joined: 2009-February-21
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:St. George, UT

Posted 2014-December-16, 18:15

View Postblackshoe, on 2014-December-16, 16:59, said:

That's not a LTC problem, it's a partnership agreement/understanding problem.

He was using "LTT", a bastardization of LOTT...LTC is not the issue.
"Bidding Spades to show spades can work well." (Kenberg)
0

#14 User is offline   blackshoe 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 17,562
  • Joined: 2006-April-17
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Rochester, NY

Posted 2014-December-17, 21:00

View Postaguahombre, on 2014-December-16, 18:15, said:

He was using "LTT", a bastardization of LOTT...LTC is not the issue.

I mistyped. It's not a LOTT problem either.
--------------------
As for tv, screw it. You aren't missing anything. -- Ken Berg
I have come to realise it is futile to expect or hope a regular club game will be run in accordance with the laws. -- Jillybean
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users