[badderzboy]

I play weak NT and received this lovely 13 count!

Dealer S all NV

South
S AQJ
H Qxx
D Qxx
C Q109x

It has 13HCPs but I count it as 9 losers S-1 H-3 D-3 C-2 but do you?

Would you open 1NT always irrespective of Vul or pass?

K&R evaluates this hand as 11.00

Some expert advice on how to evaluate hands like this would be v/much appreciated.

Thanks

Steve

[Free]

What else would you bid? If you pass, you're playing a yellow system (hum) and after opening 1X you don't have a rebid... 1NT it is, and with pleasure! Btw, what point range do you use for weak NT? I usually play 11-14 (and 10-13 in 3rd and 4th), but when playing 12-14 I'd still open it. Why else do you play weak NT??

[Trpltrbl]

Free, on Jan 9 2004, 02:04 PM, said:

What else would you bid? If you pass, you're playing a yellow system (hum) and after opening 1X you don't have a rebid... 1NT it is, and with pleasure! Btw, what point range do you use for weak NT? I usually play 11-14 (and 10-13 in 3rd and 4th), but when playing 12-14 I'd still open it. Why else do you play weak NT??

So with other words y play weak NT, but only if y have many tricks ? Why even bother playing weak NT? I play myself 10-12 NV and 12-14 Vul, and I open any of them as long as they r within my range. I am not sure, but I actaully think if y play weak NT and y decide not to open it on numerous occasions, y r violating all kinds of rules. Since r pd knows and opps don't. I played a few times with a pd who played 11-14 NT, but when we opened 1 NT we alerted that if pd had 11 count he had to HAVE 2 Aces and a King. So opps know, but that took a lot away from opening 11-14 nt, since after few tricks y can see what declarer has. Not ideal when y r trying to make a shaky hand.

Mike

[hrothgar]

badderzboy, on Jan 9 2004, 11:57 AM, said:

South
S AQJ
H Qxx
D Qxx
C Q109x

I think that the K+R point count is a quite accurate form of hand evaluation.
In this case, I think that the K+R total (11 points) is much more accurate than the Work HCP measure.

This hand has a lot of minueses:

Its 4333 in shape
Its HCP at disproportionately concentrated in Quacks
It has two unsupported Queens
Over half the HCP are concentrated in a 3 card suit
The only control is in a 3 card suit.

From my perspective, the only saving grace in the hand is that you have QT9x in clubs, rather than Qxxx. [Note that the K+R point count would degrade to 10.35 if you take away the 10/9 of clubs while the Work HCP total remains unchanged]

I believe that players can and should excercise judgement.
I would have no problem if a partner chose to pass this hand rather than opening a weak HCP 1NT. [Actually, I hope that I would have the discipline to do the same]

If you beleive that Work style HCP are the best way to evaluate balanced hands AND your agreement is to open hands with 12-14 HCP then you should open this hand. If you prefer a different evaluation technique (for example, you think that the K+R adjusted point count is a better measure) then feel free to pass.

[JRG]

badderzboy, on Jan 9 2004, 10:57 AM, said:

I play weak NT and received this lovely 13 count!

Dealer S all NV

South
S AQJ
H Qxx
D Qxx
C Q109x

It has 13HCPs but I count it as 9 losers S-1 H-3 D-3 C-2 but do you?

Would you open 1NT always irrespective of Vul or pass?

K&R evaluates this hand as 11.00

Some expert advice on how to evaluate hands like this would be v/much appreciated.

Thanks

Steve

My evaluation of losers (I think this is attributable to Shep) is:

Qxx = 2-1/2 losers
Q10x (or QJx) = 2 losers

So I'd evaluate the hand as an 8-loser hand, not 9.

[Trpltrbl]

hrothgar, on Jan 9 2004, 08:52 PM, said:

badderzboy, on Jan 9 2004, 11:57 AM, said:

South
S AQJ
H Qxx
D Qxx
C Q109x

I think that the K+R point count is a quite accurate form of hand evaluation.
In this case, I think that the K+R total (11 points) is much more accurate than the Work HCP measure.

This hand has a lot of minueses:

Its 4333 in shape
Its HCP at disproportionately concentrated in Quacks
It has two unsupported Queens
Over half the HCP are concentrated in a 3 card suit
The only control is in a 3 card suit.

From my perspective, the only saving grace in the hand is that you have QT9x in clubs, rather than Qxxx. [Note that the K+R point count would degrade to 10.35 if you take away the 10/9 of clubs while the Work HCP total remains unchanged]

I believe that players can and should excercise judgement.
I would have no problem if a partner chose to pass this hand rather than opening a weak HCP 1NT. [Actually, I hope that I would have the discipline to do the same]

If you beleive that Work style HCP are the best way to evaluate balanced hands AND your agreement is to open hands with 12-14 HCP then you should open this hand. If you prefer a different evaluation technique (for example, you think that the K+R adjusted point count is a better measure) then feel free to pass.

Y can't open 1 hand with 1 NT and not another especially not without opps knowing. Same reason why y can't psych an artificial bid. It's just part of a set of rules we have to play by, like it or not that's the case. With regular 1 or 2 level openers y can adjust all y want, but not with NT, since that is based on HCP.
And y have 13 which is almost a maximum for r NT range. Maybe if r pd asks y later in auction if y have min or max y can downgrade or upgrade. So it sounds like y wanna play a variable NT based on losers and not HCP and that is brown sticker I think. So either don't do it or get director called at table all the time and have no case. Maybe weak NT just not for you

Mike

[hrothgar]

>Y can't open 1 hand with 1 NT and not another especially not
>without opps knowing. Same reason why y can't psych an
>artificial bid. It's just part of a set of rules we have to play by,
>like it or not that's the case. With regular 1 or 2 level openers
>y can adjust all y want, but not with NT, since that is based on HCP.

I would LOVE to see where these "rules" are coming from. I suspect that you have a fundamental misunderstanding regarding the regulatory structure. Based on your last sentence, I'm sure that you don't understand hand evaluation as it applies to NT.

>So it sounds like y wanna play a variable NT based on losers
>and not HCP and that is brown sticker I think

It might be useful to learn standard vocabulary such as the definition of "variable NT" and Brown Sticker Convention.

Regardless, partnerships have a right to adopt whatever set of hand evaluation techniques that they feel are most benefical. As you note, I have an obligation to accurately describe my methods to the opposing partnership, however, this does not require the use of HCPs.

Some Zonal authorities have gone so far as to enshrine the Milton Work HCP into thei regulatory structure. The "classic" example is the ACBL's ban against NT openings with less than 9 HCP. Even here, the existence of individual regulations based on HCP does not prevent me from using other hand evaluation techniques.

There is an interesting parallel discussion taking place on the Bridge Laws Mailing list entitled "Range Restrictions". It addresses some of these issues.

[luis]

There's no "evaluation" in hands like this. You get a balanced 13 count, you are playing a weak NT, you open 1NT.
I'm amazed by sighting of this as a problem and depth of analysis by some players.
You shouldn't waste analisys and your evaluation skills in this situation.

[Trpltrbl]

hrothgar, on Jan 9 2004, 10:40 PM, said:

Regardless, partnerships have a right to adopt whatever set of hand evaluation techniques that they feel are most benefical. As you note, I have an obligation to accurately describe my methods to the opposing partnership, however, this does not require the use of HCPs.

Some Zonal authorities have gone so far as to enshrine the Milton Work HCP into thei regulatory structure. The "classic" example is the ACBL's ban against NT openings with less than 9 HCP. Even here, the existence of individual regulations based on HCP does not prevent me from using other hand evaluation techniques.

So with other words if y have a 9 count that somehow, according to whatever rules y use, upgrade to let's say 12 count Y can open 1 NT, still playing a 12-14 NT ? I know y can't and if y do and y get caught Then I feel for you. According to r time y post this it looks like y are somewhere in Europe, where things are a little bit more open. But here in ACBL land they very seriously frown upon stuff like that.
And another point is why even play weak NT if y are going to open only selected hands, if y play 12-14 NT and y have a 13 count and y can't or won't open 1NT why even play it? If somebody has a 12 count and AKQJxx(x) in a suit, most likely a minor, and they open 1 NT (15-17 ). How come that is qualified as a psych ? Surely it must upgrade to a 15 count in some way or another,

Mike

[mikestar]

Passing S AQJ H Qxx D Qxx C Q109x playing a 12-14 NT is not a violation: it is bridge judgement. If a player is passing S AKx H QJ9 D xxx C QJ9x I would be willing to hear arguments about it.

If you believe the first hand isn't worth even a bad 12, you certainly are being resonable, though personally I wouldn't downgrade the hand quite that much. If someone thinks the second hand isn't worth 13, I hope to play against them some time.

Nobody questions (or at least nobody should question) opening a 15-17 NT with 14 and a good five card suit or treating 17 and a good 5 card suit as too strong. Why should this case be any different?

To my mind the correct interpertation of 12-14 is "I have at least 12 HCP or the equivalent in other values and not more than 14 HCP or the equivalent in other values." Resonable lattitude should be allowed, while distinguishing the true violations (opening 12-14 with 9 or 17 for example).

[Trpltrbl]

luis, on Jan 9 2004, 11:30 PM, said:

There's no "evaluation" in hands like this. You get a balanced 13 count, you are playing a weak NT, you open 1NT.
I'm amazed by sighting of this as a problem and depth of analysis by some players.
You shouldn't waste analisys and your evaluation skills in this situation.

Thx Luis
That was basically the point I was trying to make.

Mike

[hrothgar]

I very regularly play "weak" NT openings. However, I refuse to blindly use a 4-3-2-1 HCP system to evaluate whether or not to open 1N. Few experienced players do.

Lets chose an extreme example

Hand 1 contains 13 HCP

QJ
KJ2
QJ32
QJ32

Hand 2 contains 11 HCP

KT9
KT9
AT987
T9

Using your logic, I should be proucly opening the first hand with a 12-14 HCP NT while passing the second. I'd argue that most good players will pass the first while opening the second.

I have no problem if people want to argue over precise boundaries, however, anyone who refuses to acknowledge this basic principle has a lot to learn about the game.

For what its worth, I happen to live here in ACBL land.
I have no idea whats going on with the BBO forum clocks.

[Trpltrbl]

hrothgar, on Jan 9 2004, 03:58 PM, said:

Hand 2 contains 11 HCP

KT9
KT9
AT987
T9

Hehe I can't resist, since it looks like r counting ain't r strongest point I can see why y have to refer to other measures hehehe But if y have a very bad 12 count like y gave me I can see why maybe some wanna pass, same as why y wanna open a good 11 count in a 12-14 NT. Same as why people open 14 counts as 15-17 count. But 13 is in a 12-14 NT just as is 16 in a 15-17 NT, and it is not like having a bad 12 count or a good 12 count. Y mite be able to defend why y didn't open a 12 count, I will never see why I guess, but passing a 13 count will be too much too defend if playing wk NT's. And y r rite I am not that experienced, won only 50+ blue ribbons in just over 3 years, really sucks

Mike

[hrothgar]

Proof-reading was never my strong point, however, this mistake hand only reinforced my basic point:

KT9
KT9
AT987
T9

is a 10 count count where I would happily open 1NT playing Acol.

QJ
KJ2
QJ32
QJ32

is a 13 count that I consider an automatic pass.

For what its worth, the K+R hand evaluator rates the second hand as equivalent to 8.95 HCP while the first hand is evaluated as 12.95 HCP. This suggests a rather dramatic difference in Kaplan's evaluation of playing strength and the naive 4-3-2-1 Work count. I'll note in passing the the K+R hand evaluation algorithm was meant to replicate Edgar Kaplan's judgement regarding when different hands should be opened within the context of a weak NT system.

Congratulations on your many Blue Ribbon Qualifications.

[hrothgar]

For what its worth, here is an idea that I’ve been kicking around for a while. It would be interesting to see what people think of this. Please note: I am not suggesting that this should be implemented in the near term. Rather, I am proposing that this would be an ideal way to deal with certain problems relating to disclosure of methods.

As this thread has demonstrated, different people have very different ideas regarding hand evaluation. Furthermore, it can be extremely difficult for two individuals who are using fundamentally different evaluation criteria to accurate describe their methods to one another.

From my perspective, the “best” way to explain your methods to the opponents is to present them with a corpus of hands that conform to the bid in question. For example, suppose that The Hog and I are playing MOSCITO version 9.3.(a). The Hog opens 1NT in 1st seat. The BBO client goes to a database of hands, performs a search for all hands where the Hog made a 2nd seat 1NT opening playing this version of MOSCITO, and presents them to the opponents.

Needless to say, I don’t think that anyone is going to be able to digest 100 hands in the middle of a tournament. However, it would be relatively easy to generate a set of summary statistics [for example I could generate a probability density function describing the strength of the hand using a series of different evaluation criteria and select the one that provides the best description of the observed data]

From my own perspective, this would go a long way towards solving the whole “full disclosure” issue. Players are responsible for providing accurate descriptions of their methods and in particular describe any systemic constraints. [For example, balanced hands with 15-17 HCP and a 5 card major are opened 1M rather than 1NT]. However, the opponent’s “expert system” is responsible for summarizing the pairs bidding history.

I don’t think we’ll see this implemented any time soon. I do think that it provides an interesting hypothetical.

[luke warm]

badderzboy, on Jan 9 2004, 10:57 AM, said:

I play weak NT and received this lovely 13 count!

Dealer S all NV

South
S AQJ
H Qxx
D Qxx
C Q109x

It has 13HCPs but I count it as 9 losers S-1 H-3 D-3 C-2 but do you?

Would you open 1NT always irrespective of Vul or pass?

K&R evaluates this hand as 11.00

Some expert advice on how to evaluate hands like this would be v/much appreciated.

Thanks

Steve

i'm not an expert, but i'd open this hand 1nt every time i got it, except in 4th seat.. vul, not vul, doesn't matter to me.. even if it evaluates to 11 points, that's fine with me

[badderzboy]

Thanks all for comments :-)

The reason for the post was one to ask about how to evaluate a hand like this. Using strict point count it is 13 points but how does one differentitate between good and bad 13pt hands and for bad hands how far do you devalue them?

As a beginner / intermediate I should open 1NT as my partner will always expect me to but I also looked at the hand and thought what do we need to actually make 1NT and the answer I came up with was my partner would push me beyond 1NT with those points and so we go down anyway!

Cheers

Steve

[Trpltrbl]

badderzboy, on Jan 10 2004, 05:54 AM, said:

Thanks all for comments :-)

The reason for the post was one to ask about how to evaluate a hand like this. Using strict point count it is 13 points but how does one differentitate between good and bad 13pt hands and for bad hands how far do you devalue them?

As a beginner / intermediate I should open 1NT as my partner will always expect me to but I also looked at the hand and thought what do we need to actually make 1NT and the answer I came up with was my partner would push me beyond 1NT with those points and so we go down anyway!

Cheers

Steve

I think personally that if y have 13, y have to open 1 NT if playing 12-14, I think only time hand evaluation comes in view is when y have a 12 count and try to decide if y wanna open it 1NT. Same with a 14 count that maybe looks a lot better and y wanna treat as an 15 count, but if y start passing 13 counts, trying to figure what pd needs to be able to make 1 NT, y taking everything away from the weak NT. Weak NT is used a lot as some sort of preemptive action to make it harder for opps to find out what is going on, and also for pd to know what y have. If y open 1 NT with that hand and later on in auction pd is asking y to bid game with max and pass with minimum so can decide to downgrade the hand to a minimum. One thing about bridge is to have a pd who needs to know what y do, and opening 1 hand while not opening another is not a good way of doing that. And who was that person who said that Aces and Kings are for suit contracts and Queens and Jacks are good for NT ?

Mike

[hrothgar]

My own take on matters is the following:

The weak NT is a great tool. However, you need to decide how to integrate this in to the rest of your system. Central to this is to decide on a hand evaluation criteria that you and your partner feel comfortable with. Some people are obviously wedded to High Card Points. Personally, I think that they are far too crude a measure and prefer to allow partner significant flexibility.

Case in point: MOSCITO uses a "weak" NT opening. This bid is integral to the system. A great deal of work went into defining when to open 1N with a balanced hand containing a 4 card major versus when to open 1M. [The two ranges overlap]

The upper range for the opening bid is bounded by the strong club opening.
The lower range is bounded by the minimum strength required to open with a balanced hand.

In my system notes, I've chosen to focus on example hands that show maximum and minimum strength opening bids rather than using anything as crude as HCPs. I also provide a set of dealer scripts that seem to do a good job replicating my own judgement. I think that this is a much better way to describe our actual agreements.

[Trpltrbl]

hrothgar, on Jan 10 2004, 10:57 AM, said:

My own take on matters is the following:

The weak NT is a great tool.  However, you need to decide how to integrate this in to the rest of your system.  Central to this is to decide on a hand evaluation criteria that you and your partner feel comfortable with. You see we actually do think alike, at some level. Some people are obviously wedded to High Card Points (Wonder who he is talking about hehehe ).  Personally, I think that they are far too crude a measure and prefer to allow partner significant flexibility. Well I do trust my pd's in real life with that flexibility, it is that judgement that makes a good player, without it.............

Mike