Rule of 20

Tuesday, November 05, 2002 12:43 PM

Hand Evaluation – Openers ( Rule of 20 )

PITBULLS:

Most experts in the modern game open light with distributional hands . Marty Bergen writes an article on his method of determining whether a hand is worth opening or not . He calls it the “rule of 20” . I follow the same principles when deciding if I open or not , however I factor in quick tricks into his rule . Under evaluating queens & jacks & adding for Aces & Kings and taking into account 6-4 or 5-5 distributions is a habit I have had for decades . Here is a hand from the Vanderbilt ♠QJ10xx ♥2 ♦QJ ♣KQJxx where they “opened” with only 1 defensive trick. Using the Bergen rule of 20 it evaluates to 22. Partners hand was ♠Axx ♥KQJ10x ♦Axx ♣Ax so let partner out at the 5 level. Unfortunately they got a diamond lead and the king was offside as was the trump king. One down so it cost them the Vanderbilt. Opening bids still need controls – rule of 20 or no rule of 20. Bad openers ( lack of quick tricks ) throw partner off in competing ( scared to push them to game ) , penalty doubles , game bidding and slam bidding . I would have bid 6♠ with the above hand opposite an opening bid for two down. I do not give partner leeway for holding only one trick when they opened the bidding. Bridge bidding is difficult enough as it is. Would it be nice to have an opening bid standard like Culbertson suggests in his writings. Have the requirement for controls built into your opening bid structure as a standard ???

Bergen had a lot to do with the “modern openers” ( which I despise ) in his writings , however I do agree with him if his light openers contain “quick tricks”. He divides opening bidders into two classes – Modernists ( himself ) & the pass & guess contingent ( the rest of us non modernists ) . His last line of his article below shows that attitude. “The Rule of 20 can enjoy triumphs that are sometimes missed by the pass-and-guess contingent.” Strange , all the hands that he says he would open below , I would open also because they do have quick tricks. Bergen seems to gloss over the subject. He discusses quick tricks in a around about way in that he subtracts for too many queens & jacks or frozen honours. He also adds for Aces ( quick tricks ) & says to upgrade for Aces & Kings .

“ I hope that you got the message. Regardless of your experience and ability, speaking as soon as possible is invariably more successful and makes this game easier than passing and guessing.” This statement by Bergen is just a half truth. Opening light does have tactical advantages , that is a given. However , when you are just replacing one guess with another by opening without quick tricks , you are worse off than the “pass & guess” contingent as Bergen calls them. Bergen’s cure is worse than the original ailment of not opening. My partners have no guess , Marty. They know when I pass , it is because I do not have the defensive tricks required to open the bidding as Bridge has been played for 65 + years . I just do not buy into your doctrine without the quick trick requirement.

THE RETURN OF THE RULE OF 20

By Marty Bergen

Rule of 20 Refinements — “Subtractions”

Subtract one point for each of the following short-suit honor combinations:

Singleton king, queen, or jack (all but the ace).

Subtract one point for each of the following dubious doubletons:

King-queen; king-jack; queen-jack (again, note that the ace is not involved).

Rule of 20 Refinements — “Additions”

Add one point for the following:

Two tens, especially when they are in combination with higher honors in suits that are three or more cards in length.

Rule of 20 Refinements

Rating Honor Cards

Aces and kings are underrated, be prepared to upgrade.

Queens and jacks are overrated — hands with a lot of these cards should be downgraded.

When in doubt, open!

As I said earlier, do not allow your new knowledge to complicate your life. Bridge is difficult enough, without my adding to it. I always want readers to enjoy The Rule of 20 for its simplicity and accuracy.

Okay, enough chatter from me. Here are some examples you can use to practice The Rule of 20.

ª A1085 10 HCP

¨ Q10954 4 spades

§ 4 +1 for the two tens

20 — Open 1¨. This is my kind of hand

ª QJ 12 HCP

¨ KJ6 3 diamonds

§ Q87 -1 for the doubleton QJ

19 — Pass. Ugly.

ª Q432 12 HCP

¨ QJ7 4 hearts

§ A4 -1 for too many queens and jacks

19 — Pass.

ª A953 12 HCP

¨ A63 3 hearts

§ A84 +1 for the aces

20 — Open 1§.

ª K742 12 HCP

¨ QJ93 4 diamonds

§ K784 -1 for the singleton king

19 — Pass.

ª 64 9 HCP

¨ A1086 4 diamonds

§ 3 +1 for the helpful tens

20 — Open 1©, not 2©

I love this hand. It has great offense and adequate defense. Too many people open 2© and wonder what went wrong when they miss a game. Would your partner consider inviting to game after you opened 2© and he held either of the following hands:

ª A953 © K7 ¨ KJ52 § J62

ª AK92 © 97 ¨ K9 § 98752

Obviously not.

************

DO EXPERTS APPLY THE RULE OF 20?

Only sometimes. How do they fare when they rely on their expert judgment to solve subsequent dilemmas? Sometimes well, but other times not so well. Here are two examples from top-level tournament play in 1999.

ª 9 © A1082 ¨ A10 § Q108542

A world champion from the Women’s Team Trials held this hand as dealer with both sides vulnerable. She passed, which seems very wrong to me. Not only does this hand satisfy The Rule of 20, but those lovely tens bring the total to 21. I will also remind readers of the power of six-four distribution.

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Our Heroine

Pass! 1¨ 1ª Pass

2§ 2ª 3§ 4ª

5§ Pass Pass Dbl

All Pass

Do I agree with the eventual 5§ bid? No. One of my theories is that many players, even experts, sacrifice too often in five of a minor. As The LAW indicates, unless you have 11 trumps or a once-in-a-lifetime distribution, on most hands, the five level belongs to the opponents.

Why did our heroine bid 5§? Se realized how good her hand was, especially once a fit had been established. I doubt she expected to make 5§ after partner’s modest single raise, but she hoped to lose less than the opponents would score in 4ª.

How did she do? She went down two doubled, for a loss of 500 points. That would have been less expensive than making, a duplicate score of 620. Unfortunately, the opponents had no chance to make 4ª. Her decision to bid on was therefore quite expensive.

What happened when the opposing team played this deal? The sensible player who held these cards opened 1§ and was subsequently able to rebid that suit. Once she had given her partner a good description of her hand, she no longer had to guess at a high level.

I hope that you got the message. Regardless of your experience and ability, speaking as soon as possible is invariably more successful and makes this game easier than passing and guessing.

My second example is taken from the semifinals of the Spingold Master Knockout Teams, the premier event of the Summer Nationals. This time the perpetrator was in second position following an opponent’s pass. Only the opponents were vulnerable. If you admired West’s distribution in our first example, this one will knock your socks off.

Twelve cards in two suits — I have not held too many of those. The Rule of 20 resolves all doubts: nine HCP plus seven diamonds and five clubs plus one (for the two relevant tens) totals 22, so I would have opened 1¨.

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Pass

Pass! 1¨ 1ª 2©

3§ 3© Pass 4©

All Pass

If you believe that West’s one sign of life did justice to the cards he held, “you ain’t seen nothing yet”. Take a gander at the auction produced by the world champion at another table.

WEST NORTH EAST SOUTH

Pass

Pass! 1¨ 1ª 2©

Pass!!! All Pass

Wow! The expert sat there and passed throughout. This spectacular display of nonbidding is exactly what he would have done holding:

Maybe I’m crazy, but treating his hand in the identical manner as the Yarborough above leaves me speechless.

How did it work out? About as well as it deserved — 4© was laydown for 11 tricks, a score of 650. Meanwhile, ¨5 doubled would be down only one for a loss of 100. What a surprise! The hand with seven-five distribution played better on offense than defense.

Do experts and world champions have great confidence in their ability to figure out what to do at any given moment? I will answer by saying that they do not suffer from a lack of ego. On most hands they do just fine. There is no way that the average player can even hope to emulate that success. However, those players who appreciate The Rule of 20 can enjoy triumphs that are sometimes missed by the pass-and-guess contingent.