[mike777]

For those that open 2 spades based on this hand's playing strength, what is this hands playing strength and how did you measure it?

I assume you measured it somehow and not randomly.

To rephrase my question:
1) What is this hand's playing strength in absolute terms?
2) How did you arrive at that answer?

[jdonn]

ArtK78, on Oct 20 2007, 12:14 PM, said:

jdonn, on Oct 20 2007, 10:35 AM, said:

fred, on Oct 20 2007, 10:15 AM, said:

For some players suit quality is all-important.

But other players are comfortable opening a weak-2 (even vul) if the hand's playing strength is enough to compensate for its lack of suit quality.

In fact if not vul I would open 2♠ if the spades in the example hand were changed to 765432. And I do not consider myself an aggressive preemptor.

What would you consider to be an aggressive preemptor? 3♠ on 765432?

Yes. Or 2♠ on xxxxxx Ax x QTx rather than xxxxxx Ax x QTxx (a HUGE difference to me.) Or xxxxxx Kx x xxxx. Anyway the problem was given as vul, at which the suit as given is admittedly getting near my minimum requirements (not there yet though.) Fred pretty much said it, I care a whole lot more about playing strength and interior cards in the suit than having AQJ of the suit. And also like him I'm not saying other ways are wrong, but I'm very comfortable this way.

Aggressive is in context. You probably think I'm aggressive because I'm much more aggressive than you. I think I'm not because I'm less aggressive than most people I play with/against.

[jdonn]

mike777, on Oct 20 2007, 12:56 PM, said:

I assume you measured it somehow and not randomly.

Well you shouldn't make silly assumptions Can't you tell that the Empire State Building is very very tall, even if you had no other buildings to compare to? And you knew this without measuring, yet I still wouldn't consider it to be random.

Anyway playing strength in this context mostly refers to shape. 6-4 can be very powerful.

[fred]

mike777, on Oct 20 2007, 05:56 PM, said:

For those that open 2 spades based on this hand's playing strength, what is this hands playing strength and how did you measure it?

I assume you measured it somehow and not randomly.

To repharse my question:
1) What is this hand's playing strength in absolute terms?
2) How did you arrive at that answer?

It is mostly a function of judgment and experience - there are no magic formulas (at least none that are simple enough to use at the table). If you play enough hands you start to get a sense of what works, what doesn't work, and how strong a given type of hand is in various contexts.

I would guess that few if any experts ever think about things like "the rule of 20" that attempt to quantify something into absolute terms (in this case when to open the bidding 1 of a suit) that is best left to judgment.

These tools can be useful for players who lack the necessary experience to have developed good judgment, but you have to be careful and understand what you are doing when you adopt such a "rule". The tendency for many is to use such rules as a crutch in the same way that Mollo's Walter the Walrus uses point count to replace of common sense.

In order to be successful at a high level, you will have to eventually be willing to abandon such rules and trust your judgment when it tells you that you should be violating the advice that your rules would have suggested.

It is not as mysterious as it sounds. No doubt you already know from your experience that 6421 hands tend to take more tricks than than 6322 hands and that having good spot cards makes a hand better. You don't need a rule to tell you these things - you see them every time you play. The more you play the finer your judgment gets in terms of distinguishing similar hands from one another.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[mike777]

Thank you for your kind replies. As for this whole judgement vs rule stuff, as I have mentioned often, judgement is a set of rules. It may not be wholly conscious or one that people are able to express in words.

Saying 6421 hands take more tricks in general than 6332 sounds like a rule,
saying a hand with better spot cards than one without spot cards, in general, sounds like a rule.

Granted we are not saying exactly what the rule and all of its exceptions are in full.

I just wondered what made this 6421 hand with these spot cards worth 2 spades over another example 6421 hand with same spot cards...thanks..........

btw yes jdonn when I look at the empire state building I am measuring it. My measurement may not be exact or as correct as yours but yes I am measuring it. Really tall is a measurement and not a random one.

[fred]

mike777, on Oct 20 2007, 06:24 PM, said:

Thank you for your kind replies. As for this whole judgement vs rule stuff, as I have mentioned often, judgement is a set of rules. It may not be wholly conscious or one that people are able to express in words.

Saying 6421 hands take more tricks in general than 6332 sounds like a rule,
saying a hand with better spot cards than one without spot cards, in general, sounds like a rule.

Granted we are not saying exactly what the rule and all of its exceptions are in full.

I just wondered what made this 6421 hand with these spot cards worth 2 spades over another example 6421 hand with same spot cards...thanks..........

btw yes jdonn when I look at the empire state building I am measuring it. My measurement may not be exact or as correct as yours but yes I am measuring it. Really tall is a measurement and not a random one.

The point is that judgment involves not have to explicitly think about such things.

You just know.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[skjaeran]

jdonn, on Oct 20 2007, 08:58 AM, said:

2♠ 2♠ 2♠ 2♠ 2♠ 2♠ 2♠

agree agree agree agree agree agree agree

[BillHiggin]

2♠
If I am forced to justify, then I like my queens to be in long suits. In practice, forced to justify actually means that this was not the best time for this action. So be it - will almost certainly do it again next time.