[helene_t]

This is in the BI forum because I think it's not relevant to advanced players who have more subtle ways of evaluating their hands. Maybe it is slightly relevant to ZAR points as well, I wouldn't know.

Anyway, if opener largely uses HCP as a criterion for opening (as long as no fit is found you're evaluating with 3N in mind), a minimum 1♠ opener could be
Axxxx-Axx-Axx-xx
or
Qxxxx-QJx-QJx-KQ

Now if p makes a GF raise, using LTC, you will now be happier holding the first hand (6.5* LT) than the second one (8.5* LT).

This makes me wonder if it's a good idea to make GF raises on the basis of LTC. LTC may be more accurate than HCP, but since there are only four aces and four jacks in a deck, by using HCP you will tend to over-valuate when opener has "undervaluated" (because he wasn't aware of the fit) and vice versa.

OTOH, when responder makes a constructive 2♠ raise, LTC should be fine since opener can now switch to LTC.

In practice I think I unconsciously use some compromise between the two evaluation methods (plus maybe some more) and in both of my IRL partnerships we have reached an understanding of each other's opening styles and raise styles so that we usually make adequate decisions as to openings, raises, invites and accepts. But I recall when I was a beginner, I very often found myself in ridiculously over- or underbid contracts, not always to blame on lack of partnership understanding but more often some kind of judgment issue that I found difficult to pinpoint at that time.

Now I'm unsure how to deal with this issue when teaching hand evaluation to beginners. Before they develop sufficient judgment to do without the formulas they will need some formal evaluation method, I suppose. Should they stick to HCP? Or to LTC? Or should they use some third method, such as "adjusted HCPs"? Should they use LTC for single raises but something else for GF raises? No GF raises at all but bid a new suit first to get a picture of opener's hand? Or should formal evaluation have a low priority, emphasizing the "picturing" of partner's hand instead?

*People using different LTC formulas than mine may get different results, but that's not what I want to discuss.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

regarding Beginners, should they stick to HCP: Yes.

HCP may not be best, but it certainly is not bad, and
it works for auctions with a trump suit and without
a trump suit.

What I regular see is, that people are confused and
regular mixing up different evaluation methods.
They should have a firm understanding of one method
before they add others.

With kind regards
Marlowe

PS: LTC can help you deciding, if your HCPs are good
or bad, HCPs coming from Queens and Jacks are considered
bad, and this gets reflected by the LTC.
LTC over estimates the playing strength of freaks, HCP
underestimates the playing strength.
If this is right, HCP will lead more often to contracts beginner
can make, because the contracts they reach do not rrequire, that
declarer uses every availbale chance.

Someone said here on BBF, that the LTC is more or less
equivalent to the 6-4-2-1 evaluation method.

[hrothgar]

Here's what I used to do when teaching beginners (its been a while now)

I use the standard Work HCP scale. The beginners need to learn Work points for NT bidding and to communicate with the rest of the world so it makes sense to introduce this to them at the beginning.

However, I typically mention that work points are most accurate for NT bidding. If they hold a hand that suggests that they will be declaring a suit contract, they need to remember that

1. Aces and Kings pull a bit more weight that HCPs suggest
2. Queens and Jacks are worth a bit less

They might consider fudging their strength slightly. In a similar manner, if they have extra length, this is often a good thing.

I normally leave things at this, unless folks start asking followup questions.

[ralph23]

helene_t, on Oct 5 2007, 06:37 AM, said:

Or should they use some third method, such as "adjusted HCPs"?

Yes. At least this is how Root taught beginners. Use the Work formula and then start teaching adjustments (almost right away), such as the ones Richard suggests. Also:

Aceless hands get adjusted down a bit.
All four Aces get adjusted up quite a bit. Three Ace hands = some.
They Learn to appreciate:
Combined honors in a hand (e.g. QJT)
Value of good intermediates, esp if they are combined and you have a lot of them
etc.

[Fluffy]

helene_t, on Oct 5 2007, 10:37 AM, said:

In practice I think I unconsciously use some compromise between the two evaluation methods (plus maybe some more)

Everyone does that. Some more than others, but experience won't let you use plain HCP (unless you have no experience)

[Mbodell]

I've used LTC when playing with beginners who don't know it and generally things turn out ok. The times that it went wrong (as compared to HCP) for me were less than the times it went right (as compared to HCP).