Thursday, May 05, 2005 3:19 PM
Hand Evaluation - HCPS ( D.S.I.P. Dbls )
PITBULLS:
It is difficult to quantify expert intuition
& judgment. D.S.I.P.
competitive double
theory is in the domain of Bridge experts because they know how
to evaluate a
hand for defensive purposes. How much defense is required for D.S.I.P.
competitive doubles ?
Eric Kokish & I discussed this in my early days experimenting with D.S.I.P. competitive doubles. Kokish’s opinion is that the competitive double should show
transferable values which he defined as HCP’s “equally
good on offense or defense” . I took it one step
further & said quick tricks
would do just nicely. This quick trick
requirement obviously changes due to the level
of bidding ,
whether it’s the overcaller/opener or responder. I think to answer the defensive
question for competitive doubles fully , we should
draw on the experience of both Marty
Bergen & Culbertson/ Lenz.
First of all we should be like Marty
Bergen & borrow his expression “points - schmoints” . HCP’s are a recipe for disaster with penalty
doubles mixed with distribution.
In competitive auctions , there is distribution & trump fits that will render softer HCP’s useless
in many cases. Defensive requirements for D.S.I.P. competitive doubles should
go back to the Culbertson/Lenz days
where quick defensive tricks were
the only requirement for an opening bid. Quick tricks for
hand evaluation purposes in general for suit
contracts, makes more sense to me
than the Goren HCP system. The early
Bridge pioneers were right on the mark
for Bridge defensive requirements , in my opinion.
That quick trick concept has
passed the test of time & is self evident. Totaling HCP’s work nicely for NT contracts ,
though.
The requirement for quick tricks for an opening bid or
any defensive bids for that matter , have been
around since the Culbertson times. The reason
for quick tricks should be obvious
to any
Bridge player. Partners make penalty doubles , make competitive decisions , game and slam decisions based on partners opening bid or overcall.
When these bids do not have the expected quick
defensive tricks , doubled contracts will make &
competitive decisions will result in you taking a penalty. Controls are a needed ingredient for slams and games for
timing , entries & trick taking. Eric Kokish
calls these controls “transferable values”
as they are useful for both defense & offense. Failing to have
those cards will throw partner off
in judging Bridge hands so bad decisions
will result. Partner builds her judgment based on quick trick expectation over the years.
Quick tricks are based on probabilities as is the game of Bridge. If
there is a 50 % chance that a card like a King or an AQ combination will take a
trick than it’s a ½ trick . Bridge was played for 25
years where this was the only requirement for an opening bid. In
the 1940’s , HCP’s were added as a requirement along with the basic quick trick criteria. Defensive requirements for an opening bid measured in quick
tricks never went away.
For judging competitive auctions for
a D.S.I.P. double , A
D.S.I.P. competitive double by the primary player ( the opener or overcaller or T/O dbl ) should have the quick tricks required to come within a ½
trick of booking their
contract. The responder just needs to be maximum for his bid but measured in quick tricks ! D.S.I.P. competitive doubles are playing with fire. Partner must rely on
your controls
( quick tricks ) so with her holding in their trump suit she is able to confidently convert for penalty or
otherwise do something intelligent. .
Do not forget in order to compete again , you do not need to make a D.S.I.P. double, you can just bid. You have plenty of distribution but lack the quick tricks to make a D.S.I.P. double. D.S.I.P. competitive doubles & quick tricks are a natural marriage. Think in quick tricks not HCP's for D.S.I.P. competitive doubles. Back to the whist , auction & early contract Bridge days where quick tricks were the main ( only ) way to evaluate a Bridge hand. The early greats Bridge judgment was via tricks rather than HCP's . Think about that !.
Breaking these rules result in needless losses. D.S.I.P. competitive theory is not at fault , the players
are. I held ♠x ♥xxxx ♦1098
♣A10987 & they
opened 1♦ & responded 1♠ . Tom bid 2♥ vul & they bid 4♠. I was guilty of picturing the ideal hand for partner. No wasted HCP’s in spades
with a long heart suit. I decided that 5♥ would be a nice
bid so I invited partner to do so with a
double. Tom held the worst hand possible for me ♠KQx
♥AKJxx ♦xx
♣QJx so he converted for penalty. Unfortunately they make the hand with two voids. I was ½ a quick trick short for my bid but the system was blamed rather than me who was the real culprit.
My partner was guilty of violating
the Quick Trick requirement for a
D.S.I.P. double ♠KQJxx
♥x ♦QJx ♣109xx . They opened 1♥ vul & partner overcalled 1♠ .
They Q bid 2♠ so I decided to give a lead director with ♠x ♥xxx ♦K109xx
♣AQJx & bid 3♣. They bid 3♥ , partner competed to 4♣
& they bid 4♥. I passed so around to him.
Partner does not have enough defense to double. He can just bid 5♣ when he wants to make a
sacrifice or pass. The double gets you –790 & -5 .IMPS. The D.S.I.P.
competitive double is not solely for offense ,
you need an escape hatch. Quick tricks
are that security blanket. There are some Bridge decisions better suited to thinking
in tricks rather than HCP's.
Doubles in all their form are one of those in the game of Bridge.
I have been developing D.S.I.P. competitive double theory since 2002
. I feel this treatment is necessary
to compete better against reckless , bad
& garbage bidders. I firmly believe that competitive doubles give your side a competitive
advantage for the “Bridge is a garbage
bidders game “ religion
. In order to play competitive doubles effectively ,
it is a pre-requisite to fully understand & identify the nature
of HCP’s in quick trick combinations. Once you have that
HCP concept mastered & you appreciate the importance of quick tricks , you are ready to take the
next step to competitive doubles.