[mishovnbg]

http://public.aci.on...zzo-DeFalco.htm

I hope you will enjoy there friends... Misho

[joker_gib]

Tx Misho but where is the link ??

[Trpltrbl]

Think you forget to tell us where to look.

Mike

[csdenmark]

Here they are:

http://groups.msn.co...eFILES/has.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...geFILES/rm.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...precision1.msnw

http://groups.msn.co.../romanclub.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...S/blueteam.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...eFILES/pol.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...ES/germany.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...LES/norway.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...ILES/italy.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...LES/poland.msnw

http://groups.msn.co...eFILES/usa.msnw

---------------------------------

I am not sure I have corrected all the country cc's after E-cats has made changes to their site

[mishovnbg]

Sorry, added, Misho

[inquiry]

Thank you for the link to the updated web page on ZAR points. Having played with me, and me with you, I think we both realize the need to open the light hands as indicated by ZAR points, but I have not been applying this metric in making my bidding decision... mine is more on "experience" (or maybe lack thereof), for finding the opening bid. I read the entire page with great intrest, and will put what I found there to the test by comparing with some of my recent good and bad examples of bidding.

Anyone serious about bridge might want to take a look at the webpage... don't let the math confuse you, it isn't hard...but having to add to 52 points to bid game versus 25 or 26 might be viewed as twice as hard... :-)

Ben

[inquiry]

Scoring: IMP

---

East's hand from a ZAR point of view seems to be:
HCP = 12
Controls = 5
2 long suits = 9
Long minus short = 4
Total = 30 points, nearly a full level above an opening bid....

West's hand... from a zar point of view...
HCP = 8
Controls = 2
2 long suits = 9
long minus short = 3
Total = 22,

Bidding at one table...

(Pass) 1♦ (DBL) 1♥
(pass) 2♣ (pass) ??

Examine new zar points. When East open's 1♦. WEST gets to count the ♦Q as an extra point, and after the 2♣ rebid, the ♣J is worth a point. In addition, the long ♦ suggesting at least a 9 card fit is worth 3 extra points, but the [he\J is not pulling its weight... So, plus 3 for legnth, plus one for ♦Q and ♣J, minus one for [he]J... comes to a new total... 26 ZAR points. Your partner promises 26 ZAR points for his opening, so you are at the magic 52 needed for game. Still, 5♣ requires maybe an extra point or two... You need 52 ZAR points for game at the four level, so 5 of a minor will need about 5 more points, think 57 or so.

So a jump to 4♦ if that is invintational is about right. If partner is on bear 26 zar points he will pass, if he has a bit more, he will bid game. What about opener? HE already had 30 ZAR points and when his partner jumps to 4♦ he can add three point for his extra "diamond" bringing him comfortably to 33. 33+26 is more than enough for 5♦, and as you can see it needs nothing more than the ♣ hook. Not the best game in the history of bridge, but not horrible.

Not sure how well this count system will work in practice, but this is the first real world example I applied it too... from a topflight event, no one came close to bidding this game...

[mishovnbg]

Spoiler

----------------------------------------------

Hi Ben!

Quote

Not sure how well this count system will work in practice, but this is the first real world example I applied it too... from a topflight event, no one came close to bidding this game...

Spoiler

------

I don't think 5♦ was not bidded because of count, but because of major/NT orientation of systems. If you play nat 1♦ opening 5(4) you have chance to bid game, but with 3(2) cards opening - can't. Zar points are interesting in theory, but I already have my own system of count/evaluation of hands suitable from 4333 to 7-6 distribution and it works enough well for me and my friends.

Spoiler

-----------------------------------------------

Misho

[EricK]

mishovnbg, on Mar 16 2004, 07:45 AM, said:

Spoiler

----------------------------------------------

Hi Ben!

Quote

Not sure how well this count system will work in practice, but this is the first real world example I applied it too... from a topflight event, no one came close to bidding this game...

Spoiler

------

I don't think 5♦ was not bidded because of count, but because of major/NT orientation of systems. If you play nat 1♦ opening 5(4) you have chance to bid game, but with 3(2) cards opening - can't. Zar points are interesting in theory, but I already have my own system of count/evaluation of hands suitable from 4333 to 7-6 distribution and it works enough well for me and my friends.

Spoiler

-----------------------------------------------

Misho

In most natural systems when a 1♦ is doubled by the next player it has at least 4 cards a sufficiently large percentage of the time to make it a reasonable assumption.

The trouble with Zar points (if I have understood them correctlly) is that there are lots of upgrades, but they never seem to get downgraded for distribution.

So a hand like ♠AJxxx ♥KJxxx ♦xx ♣x is an opening 1♠ bid, and a similar hand ♠xx ♥x ♦AJxxx ♣KJxxx is a GF responding hand, and yet game is awful.

If you take the hand quoted, and swap the ♠A with the ♥J, then game becomes much worse (especially considering the double) but Zar points are still the same.

Eric

[joker_gib]

Hi all,

I think that Zar points are only interesting when you have a fit.

So, the problem is that if you open a 10 HCP hand and you have no fit, the contract will be NT and you won't have enough HCP weight to bring it home !!!

Don't you think so, my friends ?

Alain

[luke warm]

joker_gib, on Mar 16 2004, 11:14 AM, said:

Hi all,

I think that Zar points are only interesting when you have a fit.

So, the problem is that if you open a 10 HCP hand and you have no fit, the contract will be NT and you won't have enough HCP weight to bring it home !!!

Don't you think so, my friends ?

Alain

that's true, but as zar says "you always have a fit"... he gives the odds (if i remember correctly) as 85% of the time there's an 8 card fit and 15% of the time at least two 7 card fits

not too sure how many people are crazy bout 7 card fits, but there you go

[EricK]

luke warm, on Mar 17 2004, 12:41 AM, said:

joker_gib, on Mar 16 2004, 11:14 AM, said:

Hi all,

I think that Zar points are only interesting when you have a fit. 

So, the problem is that if you open a 10 HCP hand and you have no fit, the contract will be NT and you won't have enough HCP weight to bring it home !!!

Don't you think so, my friends ? 

Alain

that's true, but as zar says "you always have a fit"... he gives the odds (if i remember correctly) as 85% of the time there's an 8 card fit and 15% of the time at least two 7 card fits

not too sure how many people are crazy bout 7 card fits, but there you go

The fact that you always have a fit is irrelevant!

Some hands fit better than others. For every pair of hands with combined Zar points of eg 52, the best fitting ones will make maybe 12 tricks, and the worst fitting ones will make 7 or 8 tricks.

I think the main source of the difference is when there is wasted values opposite a singleton or void, and there is no adjustment for this.

eg you open 1♠ on this hand ♠AQxxx ♥Kxxx ♥Qxx ♣x (zar point 27), and partner responds 2♣. I think the value of this hand has gone down, but according to zar points there is no adjustment to be made.

Eric

[inquiry]

EricK, on Mar 16 2004, 10:09 PM, said:

The fact that you always have a fit is irrelevant!

Some hands fit better than others. For every pair of hands with combined Zar points of eg 52, the best fitting ones will make maybe 12 tricks, and the worst fitting ones will make 7 or 8 tricks.

I think the main source of the difference is when there is wasted values opposite a singleton or void, and there is no adjustment for this.

eg you open 1♠ on this hand ♠AQxxx ♥Kxxx ♥Qxx ♣x (zar point 27), and partner responds 2♣. I think the value of this hand has gone down, but according to zar points there is no adjustment to be made.

Eric

I am new to ZAR points, but somehow, I think the ability to evaluate a hand doesn't change rather you are using ZAR points, loser tricks, Goren, or whatever. I certainly add ponts to any auction for fits and side shortness, and even add more for double fits. Likewise, I softpedal hands without fits or with 4333 distribution or with miss placed honors in opponents suits.

So somehow, to pooh-pooh ZAR points on this point seem overkill. BTW, the article I read (thanks Misho), had several things that they recommend subtracting points for (like bad placement of honors in opponents suits or short suits, etc). I see reason why you can't judge for yourself how much to subtract for bad fits (I would take a fair number off myself). I remember a hand for the late 80's in the bridgeworld where opponent opens 2♠, one hand was 6-5 in reads with AK, AK in both suits, the other had AKQJ of spades and AK-"seventh" of clubs. Both hands would have like 40 ZAR points and they can't make anything. Both pairs in teh bidding contest got to slam, one to 7NT. Bad fits are bad, regardlss of system used.

[EricK]

inquiry, on Mar 17 2004, 03:20 AM, said:

EricK, on Mar 16 2004, 10:09 PM, said:

The fact that you always have a fit is irrelevant!

Some hands fit better than others.  For every pair of hands with combined Zar points of eg 52, the best fitting ones will make maybe 12 tricks, and the worst fitting ones will make 7 or 8 tricks.

I think the main source of the difference is when there is wasted values opposite a singleton or void, and there is no adjustment for this.

eg you open 1♠ on this hand ♠AQxxx ♥Kxxx ♥Qxx ♣x (zar point 27), and partner responds 2♣. I think the value of this hand has gone down, but according to zar points there is no adjustment to be made.

Eric

I am new to ZAR points, but somehow, I think the ability to evaluate a hand doesn't change rather you are using ZAR points, loser tricks, Goren, or whatever. I certainly add ponts to any auction for fits and side shortness, and even add more for double fits. Likewise, I softpedal hands without fits or with 4333 distribution or with miss placed honors in opponents suits.

So somehow, to pooh-pooh ZAR points on this point seem overkill. BTW, the article I read (thanks Misho), had several things that they recommend subtracting points for (like bad placement of honors in opponents suits or short suits, etc). I see reason why you can't judge for yourself how much to subtract for bad fits (I would take a fair number off myself). I remember a hand for the late 80's in the bridgeworld where opponent opens 2♠, one hand was 6-5 in reads with AK, AK in both suits, the other had AKQJ of spades and AK-"seventh" of clubs. Both hands would have like 40 ZAR points and they can't make anything. Both pairs in teh bidding contest got to slam, one to 7NT. Bad fits are bad, regardlss of system used.

I am not pooh-poohing Zar points because of this one point. At least I didn't mean too.

I suspect that subtracting a trick (5 points?) for a singleton opposite length would improve their accuracy.

I think the purpose of this sort of "advanced" point count system is to replace as much judgement as possible with something quantifiable. If you are going to say eg this is a good 26 zar point hand but that is a bad one, then I don't see the benefit of using zar points instead of HCP.

Eric