BBO Discussion Forums: Zar points, useful or waste of energy - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

  • 19 Pages +
  • « First
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Zar points, useful or waste of energy New to the concept, does it help...

#121 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2004-June-29, 11:03

Zar, on Jun 29 2004, 07:27 PM, said:

Hm ...

The tables columns get screwdup ... Tell me if you can copy-paste them in a document and get the numbers lined-up.

I'll also try to post all these on the website when I get the time (hopefully this weekend).

Cheers:

ZAR

The forums are based on HTML and don't like whitespace

I BELIEVE that Tabular data needs to use HTML table functions.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#122 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2004-June-29, 17:18

inquiry, on Jun 29 2004, 12:02 PM, said:

Zar, on Jun 29 2004, 12:27 PM, said:

Hi, guys:

Here are the offensive bidding numbers, AFTER partner HAS OPENED,

There were several parallel runs by different people and the numbers below are the direct results of the runs made by John Gallucci (thanx, John!).

The corresponding numbers for the DEFENSIVE bidding are published in the Zar Points defensive bidding thread.



======== ZAR POINTS DISTRIBUTIONS ==========

Total hands with 26 Zar Points or more =  468043 or 46.8043%
Total hands with 25 Zar Points or less =  531957 or 53.1957%


1,000,000 Total Hands



HCP    26    31    36    41    46    51    56    Total  Percent
---    --    --    --    --    --    --    --    -----  -------
  2      0      0      0      0      0      0      0        0        0
  3      1      0      0      0      0      0      0        1        0
  4    17      0      0      0      0      0      0      17        0
  5    126      0      0      0      0      0      0      126        0
  6    567      0      0      0      0      0      0      567      0.1
  7  3224      2      0      0      0      0      0    3226      0.7
  8  10042    43      0      0      0      0      0    10085      2.2
  9  22368    265      0      0      0      0      0    22633      4.8
  10  39225  1131      1      0      0      0      0    40357      8.6
  11  53707  5721    43      0      0      0      0    59471    12.7
  12  57037  11149    213      0      0      0      0    68399    14.6
  13  45935  18435    594      1      0      0      0    64965    13.9
  14  29820  24890  1682      6      0      0      0    56398    12.0
  15  11336  27565  5204    58      0      0      0    44163      9.4
  16  3649  21338  7683    173      0      0      0    32843      7.0
  17    845  13418  8980    494      1      0      0    23738      5.1
  18    76  6591  8559    946      7      0      0    16179      3.5
  19      1  2251  6941  1282      9      0      0    10484      2.2
  20      0    537  4297  1557    39      0      0    6430      1.4
  21      0    71  2101  1481    81      1      0    3735      0.8
  22      0      0    816  1252    117      0      0    2185      0.5
  23      0      0    172    748    112      2      0    1034      0.2
  24      0      0    34    370    141      2      0      547      0.1
  25      0      0      5    176    102      2      0      285      0.1
  26      0      0      0    36    71      4      0      111        0
  27      0      0      0      7    26      3      0      36        0
  28      0      0      0      1    12      8      0      21        0
  29      0      0      0      0      3      3      0        6        0
  30      0      0      0      0      0      0      0        0        0
        --    --    --    --    --    --    --    -----

    277976 133407  47325  8588    721    26      0  468043


      59.4  28.5  10.1    1.8    0.2    0.0    0.0 % using base of 468043
      27.8  13.3    4.7    0.9    0.1    0.0    0.0 % using base of 1000000


  RAW COUNT        ------------- Responder's Range -------------
  Opener's Range    10-    11-15  16-20  21-25  26-30    31+
  --------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
    26 - 30        1221  18075  60273  81550  38047  20371
    31 - 35        894  12476  36132  40612  15422    6174
    36 - 40        458    5999  15069  14574    4355    1305
    41 - 45        116    1573    3145    2375    583    120
    46 - 50          21    174    297    160      31      3
    51 - 55          0      13      10      2      1      0

  PERCENTAGE'S    ------------- Responder's Range -------------
  Opener's Range    10-    11-15  16-20  21-25  26-30    31+
  --------------  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----  -----
    26 - 30      0.12    1.81    6.03    8.16    3.80    2.04
    31 - 35      0.09    1.25    3.61    4.06    1.54    0.62
    36 - 40      0.05    0.60    1.51    1.46    0.44    0.13
    41 - 45      0.01    0.16    0.31    0.24    0.06    0.01
    46 - 50      0.00    0.02    0.03    0.02    0.00    0.00
    51 - 55      0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00
    56 - 60      0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00



Table below shows the spread of probability of 8 to 57 Zar Points

            0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9
          ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---
  0 >      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0    493    973
  10 >  2376  4491  7642  10674  15948  19875  26738  32751  39695  45235
  20 >  51738  55273  59379  60652  62067  35957  82255  56361  51201  46710
  30 >  41449  35847  30814  26166  22115  18465  14934  11738  9171  6683
  40 >  4799  3253  2237  1502    969    627    334    201    114    41
  50 >    31    13      6      6      1      0      0      0      0      0
  60 >      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0      0




Table below shows the spread of probability PERCENTAGES of 8 to 57 Zar Points

            0      1      2      3      4      5      6      7      8      9
          ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---    ---
  0 >    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.1
  10 >    0.2    0.4    0.8    1.1    1.6    2.0    2.7    3.3    4.0    4.5
  20 >    5.2    5.5    5.9    6.1    6.2    3.6    8.2    5.6    5.1    4.7
  30 >    4.1    3.6    3.1    2.6    2.2    1.8    1.5    1.2    0.9    0.7
  40 >    0.5    0.3    0.2    0.2    0.1    0.1    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0
  50 >    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0
  60 >    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0    0.0



  Opener's Range      Game 52+    Small Slam 62+    Grand Slam 67+
  --------------    ----------    --------------    --------------
    26 - 30      74825  7.48    7200  0.720      1369  0.137
    31 - 35      66540  6.65    7624  0.762      2202  0.220
    36 - 40      28791  2.88    6914  0.691      2094  0.209
    41 - 45        3920  0.39    2807  0.281      1137  0.114
    46 - 50        150  0.02      284  0.028      252  0.025
    51 - 55          0  0.00        9  0.001        17  0.002
                    ----------      ------------      ------------
                  174226  17.42    24838  2.48      7071  0.7  = 20.6 %




Compared to the case when OPPONENTS open, the numbers for Game + Slam + Grand were only 16.5% (see the research on the cases when we are in DEFENSIVE bidding).

Defensive bidding numbers are posted in the defensive bidding thread.

Cheers:

ZAR


OK Ben - thanx.

Hope that will work.

Thanx to Hrothgar too - I'll try the html if this doesn't work.

Cheers:

ZAR
0

#123 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2004-June-29, 17:20

There is a bit of improvement - I guess I'll try the HTML if you cannot read this.

Make it a great day:

ZAR
0

#124 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2005-July-19, 20:12

Hi, guys:

I just posted the Zar Points Bidding Backbone, including the research on The Law of Total Tricks.

Here is the direct link - just select the FIRST item on the list:

http://www.zarpoints...heDownloads.htm


Please let me know if you have any questions / suggestions.

It will take some time to read it through since there is lot's of data. Take your time.
I also posted on another thread the Zar Count Machine - read it there to avoid
cross-posting.

The new site is

WWW.ZarPoints.COM

Make it a great day:

ZAR
0

#125 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2005-August-14, 10:26

ADDITIONS by popular demand:

In many emails I was asked to ADD the reserach for The Law from the view point of BOTH pairs.

I just put the new version at:

http://www.zarpoints...heDownloads.htm


It contains:

- The Law of Total Tricks (both pairs perspective):

- The Law of Total Double-Fit Tricks:

- The Law of Total A Priory Tricks:


You'll find the additions useful, I guess.

Cheers:

ZAR
0

#126 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2005-August-29, 11:15

Hi again, guys:

The Match of 105,000 boards between:

- Goren;
- Lawrence;
- Bergen;
- LTC Classic;
- LTC Modern;
- Zar;
- WTC

is posted at:

http://www.zarpoints...heDownloads.htm

Download the FIRST item “Zar Points Backbone” and see the last Chapter “Performance Considerations.

The match includes:

- 37,691 Part-scores, Level 3 (9 tricks in Spades);
- 56,019 Games, Level 4 and 5 (10 or 11 tricks in Spades);
- 8,750 Slams, Level 6 (12 tricks in Spades);
- 3,075 GRANDS, Level 7 (13 tricks in Spades);.

These are all Spades contracts above level 2 which are found in the first 1,000,000 boards in the database – it means that the above numbers also present you with the probability to have to corresponding games – for example you should expect 5.6% of the time to have a Game in Spades (since the number of boards in the 1,000,000-bord DB is 56,000). And another 5.6% a Game in hearts etc.

Certainly any feedback is more than welcome.

Cheers:

ZAR
0

#127 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-August-29, 11:27

this thread is so old...
0

#128 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,566
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-29, 11:36

Jlall, on Aug 29 2005, 01:27 PM, said:

this thread is so old...

Zar has actually put an incredible amount of new work into ZAR fit counts, that is well worth the new read.
--Ben--

#129 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-August-29, 13:14

im not saying he didnt put work into it or that he shouldn't post. sorry let me clarify.

It's unusual to see a thread this old come back to life :)
0

#130 User is offline   dogsbreath 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 281
  • Joined: 2003-March-28
  • Location:Belfast,N.Ireland
  • Interests:bridge,golf,cricket,baseball, ironing (?)

Posted 2005-August-29, 13:43

hi Zar ..
..sorry if i've missed something ..but ... the examples I've seen seem to me to suggest that one should never open a weak 2-bid holding a hand with 2 Aces as such hands are often closer to a Zar opening bid. This is in line with my own instincts .. i detest 'weak' openings with 2 aces ... are there any stats to back this up, or disprove it ??
Rgds Dog
ManoVerboard
0

#131 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2005-August-29, 14:40

inquiry, on Aug 29 2005, 08:36 PM, said:

Zar has actually put an incredible amount of new work into ZAR fit counts, that is well worth the new read.

Zar's may have invested enormous amounts of additional work, however, his analysis suffers from the same flaws as always: Zar doesn't seem to have any real background in statistics or information theory both of which are very helpful for any kind of serious work in this field.

Case in point: Look at the following quote from page 16

"The first comparison is something that we have already done - the STRONG opening bids in the Strong 2, the Strong 1, and Zar Point Bidding

- Strong 2: the Span of the normal opening bids spreads across 4 levels (since Goren Levels are 3 HCP strong)
- Strong 1: the Span of the normal opening bid spreads across 2 levels (since Goren Levels are 3 HCP strong)
- Zar points: the Span of the normal opening bid spreads across 1 level (since the Zar Point level are 5-points strong)"

I understand what he's trying to say, however, he is creating his own volcabulary while ignoring standard statistical methods. He is then using this vocabulary to make straw man comparisons about other bidding systems. Furthermore, I admit that I've only skimmed his work, however, I've never been able to find some very basic pieces of data such as frequency distribution showing what percentage of hands have 10/11/12/13 etc. Zar points

Equally significant, the bidding system that he derives runs count to an awful lot of established work. For simplicity, lets "just" consider the structure of opening bids:

1 = 36+ Zar points, any distribution
1 = 31-35 Zar points, any distribution or 26-30 with a 6 card minor
1 = 26-30 Zar point, 4+
1 = 26-30 Zar points, 4+ Spades
1N = 26 - 30 Zar points, no 6+ card suit, no 4 card major, no 5-5 in minors
2 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 6+
2 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 6+
2 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5 and 6+ minor
2 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5 and 6+ minor
2N = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5+/5+
3 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Clubs
3 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Diamonds
3 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Hearts
3 = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Spades

I hardly know where to begin:

1. There are a number of existing bidding systems that use 2 tiers of strong/artifical/forcing openings. Most of the ones that I am familiar with use 1 to show the "intermediate" strength hands and 1 to show the strong openings. The Swedes are VERY good at system design. I'd like to see a good reason why Zar has inverted the "traditional" treatments.

2. Zar is devoting enormous amounts of bidding space to hands with 26-30 Zar points. As far as I can figure this describes (roughly) 28% of all hands. In order to accomplish this, he is forced to open with nebulous 1/1 openings on close to 18.5% of all hands and pass with 53%. Personally, I don't like those odds. I'm also not fond of the fact that he's shoved hands with 6 card minors into the 1 openings. It seems like a kludge.

3. The 1NT opening could be made on anything from a 3=3=3=4 to a 1=3=5=4 hand. I can't understand how responder is expected to understand what to do... I'm fond of offshape NT openings that clarify strength, but not when they clarify a range equal to 28% of all hands. (Its worth noting that Zar's 1M openings don't have any kind of NT ladder to clarify range with balanced hand patterns)

4. I'm not even going to start on the 2M openings... I can't image that they'd come up more than once in a Blue Moon.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#132 User is offline   inquiry 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 14,566
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amelia Island, FL
  • Interests:Bridge, what else?

Posted 2005-August-29, 15:00

Dont worry about his bidding structure, that is for others to decide. It wouldn't be for you and it is not for me either, I like mine just fine.. But I am referring here to his FIT adjustments. That is new and worthy of taking a look and considering.
--Ben--

#133 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2005-August-29, 15:49

>
hi Zar ..
..sorry if i've missed something ..but ... the examples I've seen seem to me to suggest that one should never open a weak 2-bid holding a hand with 2 Aces as such hands are often closer to a Zar opening bid.
<

“Close” doesn’t cut it.

It’s either an opening bid or it isn’t.

Zar Points present the absolute legal minimum of an opening hand according the WBF. There are 2 rules of the WBF that judge that:

1) The rule of 18 which Zar Points “just qualify”;
2) The rule of “A Queen worth above the average hand” where Zar Points also “just qualify” with the average hand having 10 HCP, 3 CTRL, and 11 Distributional Zar points for a total of 24. The opening hand must have 26, which is a Queen-worth above that (2 points).

>
This is in line with my own instincts .. i detest 'weak' openings with 2 aces ... are there any stats to back this up, or disprove it ??
Rgds Dog
<

I can run any stats you would like since I have a database of 5 Million normally-distributed hands (from statistical point of view), all played in both directions in DD – NS and EW. But I am not sure what you suggest me running.

A hand with 2 Aces may or may not be an opener. A hand with 6-card suit and 2 a
Aces though usually qualifies simply because it has 12 points from the 2 Aces and at least 13 from distribution (9 + 4). So even with 6322 and 2 Aces you have 25 Zar Points – very close to opening and ACTUALLY an opening of the 6-card suit is Spades.

If you clarify what needs to be run I’d actually run it and let you know the answer.

Cheers:

ZAR
0

#134 User is offline   Zar 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 153
  • Joined: 2004-April-03

Posted 2005-August-29, 16:24

>
Zar's may have invested enormous amounts of additional work, however, his analysis suffers from the same flaws as always: Zar doesn't seem to have any real background in statistics or information theory both of which are very helpful for any kind of serious work in this field.
<

My PhD is actually in Mathematical Modeling and statistics. Information theory ... let’s not even get there :-)

>
Case in point: Look at the following quote from page 16
"The first comparison is something that we have already done - the STRONG opening bids in the Strong 2♣, the Strong 1♣, and Zar Point Bidding

- Strong 2♣: the Span of the normal opening bids spreads across 4 levels (since Goren Levels are 3 HCP strong)
- Strong 1♣: the Span of the normal opening bid spreads across 2 levels (since Goren Levels are 3 HCP strong)
- Zar points: the Span of the normal opening bid spreads across 1 level (since the Zar Point level are 5-points strong)"

I understand what he's trying to say, however, he is creating his own volcabulary while ignoring standard statistical methods.
<

We are talking just 2+2=4 here rather than statistics actually...

In Strong 2C the hand can spread within an interval of 12 HCP while in Strong 1C – within an interval of 6 HCP. Divide by 3 and you will see the phenomenal result :-)

>
He is then using this vocabulary to make straw man comparisons about other bidding systems. Furthermore, I admit that I've only skimmed his work,
<

You may enjoy it – try reading it. I’ll never ask for your credit-card info :-)

>
however, I've never been able to find some very basic pieces of data such as frequency distribution showing what percentage of hands have 10/11/12/13 etc. Zar points.
<

That just confirms you have never read it. I’d never discuss something I haven’t read – be it in a positive or negative way, but especially in a negative way. That’s just beneath me ... sorry. I encourage you to open it and read it first.

>
Equally significant, the bidding system that he derives runs count to an awful lot of established work.
<

Who has ever denied that?

I assume that’s your way of joking :-)

>
For simplicity, lets "just" consider the structure of opening bids:
1♣ = 36+ Zar points, any distribution
1♦ = 31-35 Zar points, any distribution or 26-30 with a 6 card minor
1♥ = 26-30 Zar point, 4+ ♥
1♠ = 26-30 Zar points, 4+ Spades
1N = 26 - 30 Zar points, no 6+ card suit, no 4 card major, no 5-5 in minors
2♣ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 6+ ♥
2♦ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 6+ ♠
2♥ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5♥ and 6+ minor
2♠ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5♠ and 6+ minor
2N = 26 - 30 Zar points, 5+♣/5+ ♦
3♣ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Clubs
3♦ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Diamonds
3♥ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Hearts
3♠ = 26 - 30 Zar points, 7+ Spades

I hardly know where to begin:
<

A good starting point would be reading the book actually.

We can leave it right here though, if it is tough for you :-)

>
1. There are a number of existing bidding systems that use 2 tiers of strong/artifical/forcing openings. Most of the ones that I am familiar with use 1♣ to show the "intermediate" strength hands and 1♦ to show the strong openings. The Swedes are VERY good at system design. I'd like to see a good reason why Zar has inverted the "traditional" treatments.
<

I am afraid we are running an different stadiums ...

Nobody has ever denied the existence of the 2-tier strong openings. There are even systems with tiers as low as 0 HCP !

>
2. Zar is devoting enormous amounts of bidding space to hands with 26-30 Zar points.
<

Difference is that the book explains WHY that is.

It is not because “I think so because I am wiser than you”.

>
As far as I can figure this describes (roughly) 28% of all hands.
<

No need to figure it out – it’s in the book.

>
In order to accomplish this, he is forced to open with nebulous 1♣/1♦ openings on close to 18.5% of all hands and pass with 53%. Personally, I don't like those odds.
<

Who cares what you or I like?

It’s a matter of NUMBERS? Was that you who said “Zar doesn't seem to have any real background in statistics or information theory”? Boy, oh boy ...

>
I'm also not fond of the fact that he's shoved hands with 6 card minors into the 1♦ openings. It seems like a kludge.
<

Ever thought about the reason? Just kidding :-) I know you haven’t :-)

>
3. The 1NT opening could be made on anything from a 3=3=3=4 to a 1=3=5=4 hand. I can't understand how responder is expected to understand what to do...
<

It’s getting grotesque so I’ll just stop here ...

>
I'm fond of offshape NT openings that clarify strength, but not when they clarify a range equal to 28% of all hands. (Its worth noting that Zar's 1M openings don't have any kind of NT ladder to clarify range with balanced hand patterns)
<

Hm ... OK ... I said I’ll stop here :-)

>
4. I'm not even going to start on the 2M openings... I can't image that they'd come up more than once in a Blue Moon.
<

No need to imagine – just read.

Hm ... OK ... I said I’ll stop here :-)

Actually this posting was not AT ALL about ANY system.

It was about the last section regarding the Match of 105,000 boards, remember?

ZAR
0

#135 Guest_Jlall_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 2005-August-29, 16:33

woah, a ZAR smackdown. it's like WWF (I guess it's WWE now)...ok sorry showing my age.
0

#136 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2005-August-29, 16:48

Zar, on Aug 30 2005, 01:24 AM, said:

We can leave it right here though, if it is tough for you :-)

Maybe my problem is that I haven't been able to see this wonderous system in action...
If its as good as you say, I'm sure I'll rush right over to adopt it.

I'd be happy to arrange a match some time. I'll play MOSCITO with Free or The_Hog. You can this use this thing.

As I noted, I think the structure is badly flawed. I expect that you'll have large losses on your Pass/1/1/1N openings. You're gonna need to score amazingly well with the rest of your structure, especially given that those openings occur slightly more than 25% of the time... However, I've been wrong before. I might be wrong this time around.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#137 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 15,372
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2005-August-29, 17:22

Zar, on Aug 30 2005, 01:24 AM, said:

>3. The 1NT opening could be made on anything from a
>3=3=3=4 to a 1=3=5=4 hand. I can't understand how >responder is expected to understand what to do...

It’s getting grotesque so I’ll just stop here ...

The issue is NOT whether there is a response structure over the 1NT opening, but rather, whether responder is well positioned to make an intelligent decision.

Here, we have a case where

1. Opener is either balanced or unbalanced
2. Opener has between 26 and 31 Zar points (please note: this is the same range width as the rest of your constructive openings - this is a fairly wide range, especially compared to the tradional 3 HCP ranges for natural NT openings. I understand that your 1NT opening is an artifical bid, buts its an artifical bid that doesn't preclude balanced hand patterns
3. You're already at 1NT, so you have precious little bidding space to decide whether this is a reasonable contract

Once again, its difficult for me to understand how responder can make an intelligent decision
Alderaan delenda est
0

#138 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2005-August-29, 17:34

This heated discussion inspired me to read part of the Zar book again (I've read older versions of the book in the past, but there's much more in it now). I think that it is a very interesting read, but you have to be very very careful in accepting the conclusions that Zar draws from his calculations.

For instance, here is an interesting quote from the Zar book, page 117:

"So in favorable vulnerability your opponents' chances to have a succesful sacrifice against a game are a good 70%!"

This is a very dangerous quote that should not be taken seriously imo. For this conclusion to hold, all of the following must be satisfied:

1) We are playing in our best strain.

2) We have exactly 10 tricks in this strain.

3) Our best sacrifice is at the 4 level.

So basically, it is only a useful guide when they know that their best fit is spades and we are playing in their best fit, namely hearts. Furthermore, they have to know that we can make 4H but not 5H. If they know all of this, surely they have a good idea already of how many tricks they can take in 4S.

If you are a gullible reader then you might be better of not reading this book. However, if you are willing to think carefully about what Zar says, then this book can give you plenty new information.

That's my book review based only on the section on the law of total tricks :unsure:. I was never interested in the bidding system (sorry Zar) so I didn't read that part. I'm very sceptical about the idea that good statistical ideas alone will lead to a good bidding system. I don't know anything about Zar the bridge player (so please take no offense), but I think that good bidding systems are made by good bridge players.
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#139 User is offline   han 

  • Under bidder
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 11,797
  • Joined: 2004-July-25
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Amsterdam, the Netherlands

Posted 2005-August-29, 17:51

hrothgar, on Aug 29 2005, 06:22 PM, said:

Zar, on Aug 30 2005, 01:24 AM, said:

>3. The 1NT opening could be made on anything from a
>3=3=3=4 to a 1=3=5=4 hand. I can't understand how >responder is expected to understand what to do...

It’s getting grotesque so I’ll just stop here ...

The issue is NOT whether there is a response structure over the 1NT opening, but rather, whether responder is well positioned to make an intelligent decision.

Here, we have a case where

1. Opener is either balanced or unbalanced
2. Opener has between 26 and 31 Zar points (please note: this is the same range width as the rest of your constructive openings - this is a fairly wide range, especially compared to the tradional 3 HCP ranges for natural NT openings. I understand that your 1NT opening is an artifical bid, buts its an artifical bid that doesn't preclude balanced hand patterns
3. You're already at 1NT, so you have precious little bidding space to decide whether this is a reasonable contract

Once again, its difficult for me to understand how responder can make an intelligent decision

1) Is the variety of hands really so much greater than in standard? For instance, opener can have 1, 2 or 3 cards in each major, while in standard you can have 2, 3, 4 or 5 cards, wider by 1 level. You might say that 5 is quite rare, but 1 is also quite rare for Zar. In a minor you have 2-5 cards as in standard, but there is only one possible distribution for 2 (3-3-5-2 for clubs), compared to 3 in standard. So the number of cards in each suit is better known at Zar-1NT than in standard.

2) The 6-Zar point range is not much wider than the 3-HCP range. Remember that an ace or king gets more Zar points than HCP's, and Zar gives extra points for distributional values. I'd estimate that 6 Zar points is about the same size as the 14+-17 range often used by 2/1 players, if they evaluate their hands properly.

3) If (1) and (2) don't hold then this should also not be a problem, right?
Please note: I am interested in boring, bog standard, 2/1.

- hrothgar
0

#140 User is offline   pbleighton 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 3,153
  • Joined: 2003-February-28

Posted 2005-August-29, 18:06

"woah, a ZAR smackdown. it's like WWF (I guess it's WWE now)...ok sorry showing my age."

For the very first time! :unsure:

Peter
0

  • 19 Pages +
  • « First
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

5 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users