Wednesday, November 06, 2002 4:18 PM

Hand Evaluation

 

PITBULLS:

 

            A guy by the name of Milton Work invented the HCP system used in Bridge . He did this by studying thousands of hands where a game makes and came up with the guidelines of an Ace = 4  , K = 3 , Q = 2 and J =1  and a 26 HCP total for a game . These guidelines are reasonably accurate but in practice the evaluation is slightly off . Aces and Kings are actually worth more than his scale indicates and queens and jacks less.

 

            Aces and Kings are also called controls and control asking bids , Blackwood and Q bidding attempt to identify them in bidding . These cards are very important for timing in slams and games, entries for squeezes and suit establishment etc . If your hand is “rich in controls” in other words a clear absence of queens and jacks your hand is far more valuable for slam or game purposes . You give your hand some additional “virtual” HCP and overbid with it . Most of the time positive results occur.

 

            O.K. Lorna gave us a hand from Banff .

 

xxx KQxx AKx Axx       The hand is opened 1NT and partner bids 2 . You

 

bid 3 which in your system shows a maximum with 4 . Partner makes a slam try of 3 spades and you play along by bidding 4♣ and partner is “all in” and bids 4 . Now what ?  Partner is “Captain of the ship” when you open 1NT and she has just signed off in 4 . You have already jumped to show your extra and Q bid when asked to do so . You have a 4-3-3-3 distribution which is not a good feature of the hand .

 

            When partner has launched a slam try she has relinquished her captaincy and allows the 1NT to bid again . Your hand is all controls whereas you could have had a number of sub standard queens and jacks and bid the same way . The only queen in your hand is the trump queen which is also valuable . Your AK of diamonds might be the cards that stopped partner from bidding again . I think your hand is just too rich in controls not to make one last try . I would bid 5 and see what that does .

 

            Partners hand is A Jxxxx xx KQJ10x and there is a strong case for that hand to make one more try also rather than bid 4 . Suggested bids would be 4 ( second round control ) or 5♣ ( second round control ) . However the 4H bid should not have ended this auction . The Bartons would have had a field day with their control asking system and the NT bidder would have answered 6 controls which is two above the average of 4 controls for a 1NT opener . Blackwood would have found 3 Aces and the queen of trump – all positives for slam bidding .

 

 

            Another hand from Banff where apparently noise could be heard all through southern Alberta . Peter Jones and Gordon Campbell had a bidding mix up with new minor forcing .

 

AQxxxx KJ Kxx xx            Gordon opened 1 and Mr. Jones responded one

 

spade . Mr. Campbell bid 2♣ and Mr. Jones bid 2 . So far so good . Gordon now bid 2NT and Mr. Jones showed his 6 card suit by bidding 3 . Mr. Campbell now bid 4♣ and here is where the wheels fell off . Did the 6 card spade suit cause this bid and partner now loves his Kx of spades or is partner just showing extra which he has not had a chance to show yet ?  Mr. Jones assumed spade support and Mr. Campbell was just showing extra . This caused a dangerous decibel reading in Banff which may have stampeded some Elk .

 

            In my opinion , the problem is with the 4th suit forcing understanding that 2NT is ambiguous anywhere from 12 to 19 HCP . As I said in a previous E-mails , this ambiguity causes more experts to screw up then any other bid. There is no room for such a wide range in one bid . I recommended in a previous E-mail that a jump to 3NT (15-17)  should get the bid off your chest and you have immediately showed your extra. You do not have to go into contortions later to convey that message to partner . 3NT would have ended this auction rather quickly . With no spade support from partner , Peter would have passed quietly J