[Caitlynne]

It is not okay to open with 7 to 10 HCP in a hand featuring a 5 card suit if you are playing Standard American or most "normal" bidding systems.

Your big mistake here is assuming that you are at fault. But, in this case, it is your partner who is fouling up the works.

[mycroft]

My standard advice to newer players (and I'm a newer player, even after 20 years and 1300 MPs) is "find one, or possibly two, people who are clearly very good, and whose game you feel comfortable with. Ask them for advice and clarification when people are telling you conflicting things, and listen to them. Ignore everybody else."

"Sorry, I still have trouble with my system as it stands, I can't add anything else today" and "Neat idea. I'll ask my mentor about it" are good lines to have in your pack.

Part of it is that bridge players are bad in general, especially newer players (Bob Hamman's quote, back in the day: "I'm a bad bridge player. It's just that everyone else is worse"); but a large part of it is that systems hang together, and the right advice for one pair may be hopeless for another. You want to open light? Great - there are definite advantages. But if your partner is going to treat any 12 as a GF, you're in trouble. You want to open sound? Great - there are definite advantages. But the light opener players will steal you blind with their "thrice armed those who get their blow in fust". On the other hand, partner won't be sitting there with a 4432 12 count wondering if this is enough for game *this time*.

And this goes more than double for conventions. I have seen newer pairs who play everything that any of their partners told them was a good idea - and had four ways to bid one kind of hand, and zero for others. And they couldn't tell you why you would do one over the other.

[rmnka447]

mgoetze, on 2016-March-10, 20:53, said:

Interesting, rmnka447, you quoted what I wrote but I don't feel that you replied to it at all. In fact if you moved my quote to below your message, rather than above it, it would make more sense entirely.

I presented 2 hands which satisfy the rule of 20. One is a reasonable opener and one isn't. A new player is unlikely to know the difference between the two hands. So just giving this newer person the rule of 20 as a handy dandy tool to use for openers is a disservice. Without some idea about when or how to use it, the newer player is likely to get into bad bidding habits using it. Then, it's harder to unlearn those habits in order to improve.

Certainly, we've all seen hands posted on the BBO forums that were defended vigorously as rule of 20 openers, but in reality weren't close to being openers. The proponents of opening these hands were so imbued with the rule of 20 that getting them to see why they shouldn't open those hands was impossible. Sad to say, but many of these were likely to become and remain part of the group of players defined as hopeless.

IMO, it's more important to impart some sound bidding habits to start. As players get to understand how to bid and develop bidding judgment, then adding a supplementary tool like the rule of 20 becomes a good addition to round out their bidding repertoire.

[rmnka447]

GrahamJson, on 2016-March-11, 04:07, said:

"I am a beginner trying to improve my game by playing in BBO free tournaments and watching other players bid and play."

Stop there. I'm afraid that you will not learn how to play well by doing this. The great majority of players on BBO are of very low standard. You will be much better off by reading some decent books on bidding and play. Start with basic texts and work your way up. Also, don't get carried away with conventions. BBO is full of players who know Cappelletti but can't count to thirteen. Don't forget that most conventions are only useful in a regular partnership in which you have discussed details such as follow up bids. So initially just keep to Stayman, transfers, Blackwood, etc, and avoid more complex stuff such as Drury.

My general observation from watching BBO is that players are generally too busy in the bidding, often making pointless (sometimes literally) bids. Usually their oppo let them get away with it because they are just as bad, but that wouldn't be the case against strong players. I think that this applies to your original question. 12 points is a reasonable expectation for an opening bid, but this may go down a point or two if the distribution is good and the points are in the long suits.

You might also consider subscribing to Bridge Magazine, which is now available on line only.

In short, read, read and read some more. And I mean books, not internet sites.

Amen!!

If you want to become a really good bridge player, you've got to continually read about and study the game.

Even if you're a newer player who just hopes to play solid bridge, there's some study necessary to learn the fundamentals of the game. That study should be combined with playing the game, so you can learn when and how to use them.

Our district newsletter posted an article by Larry Cohen that essentially said that newer players are better served and improve faster by thoroughly learning the fundamentals of the game than trying to add a lot of gadgets. If I recall correctly, the example he used was the Stayman convention. He asserted that learning the meaning of the various Stayman bidding sequences and understanding when and how to use them would result in a far larger improvement than adding a lot of gimmicks.

Recently, there was unit business meeting/buffet between sessions of a sectional tournament. My local partner and I were joined by two women players, one a newer player, and the other a good more experienced player trying to help the newer player improve. She asked what advice I had for the newer player. My answer was to first and foremost learn the fundamentals of bidding and play well so they became almost second nature to execute. Then, you would be a player that would be difficult to play against and start becoming a winner.

[hrothgar]

rmnka447, on 2016-March-11, 13:46, said:

Our district newsletter posted an article by Larry Cohen that essentially said that newer players are better served and improve faster by thoroughly learning the fundamentals of the game than trying to add a lot of gadgets. If I recall correctly, the example he used was the Stayman convention. He asserted that learning the meaning of the various Stayman bidding sequences and understanding when and how to use them would result in a far larger improvement than adding a lot of gimmicks.

What makes this comment truly bizarre is that Stayman is a gimmick...

[mgoetze]

rmnka447, on 2016-March-11, 12:56, said:

I presented 2 hands which satisfy the rule of 20. One is a reasonable opener and one isn't. A new player is unlikely to know the difference between the two hands. So just giving this newer person the rule of 20 as a handy dandy tool to use for openers is a disservice.

So what are you going to do instead? Tell them to stop playing bridge and study hand evaluation for a couple of months instead? That would be a disservice.

[nullve]

Zelandakh, on 2016-March-10, 11:19, said:

There is nonetheless a major difference in strength between ♠QJ ♥QJ ♦QJ32 ♣QJ432 and ♠AKT98 ♥KQT9 ♦T98 ♣T

Yes.

Zelandakh, on 2016-March-10, 11:19, said:

both are Rule of 21 hands with the same number of hcp.

That depends on what we mean by 'hcp'. When Goren was popularising Milton Work's 4-3-2-1 method, he also taught players to make adjustments based on honour location and possession or lack of intermediates. So your first example hand would only be worth 10 hcp (at most!) after subtracting 1 hcp for each QJ doubleton, while your second example hand would be upgraded to 13 hcp (at least!) because of well-placed honours and the abundance of intermediates. So if hcp's are counted the way Goren intended, neither of these hands are Rule of 21 hands, and only the latter satisfies the Rule of 20.

But if it's ok at the novice/beginner level to count hcp's without making the sort of adjustments Goren recommended, then it's presumably also ok to use the Rule of 20 without making those same adjustments.

[woodych]

WOW,THANK YOU FOR SO MANY GREAT REPLIES i WAS NEVER EXPECTING THAT MANY.

I think I will for now stick with 11+ face card points as a possible start and I will read some books.

I appreciate the time you have all taken to reply thank you:)

[woodych]

PS. Apologies for cap lock.

[rmnka447]

mgoetze, on 2016-March-11, 14:48, said:

So what are you going to do instead? Tell them to stop playing bridge and study hand evaluation for a couple of months instead? That would be a disservice.

Nope, but some good guidance in hand evaluation doesn't hurt. Suggesting months of study is a gross exaggeration AND a disservice. I suggest "Hand Evaluation" by Marty Bergen, 64 pages, readable in a couple hours at most. It's excellent. It even includes a couple of comments about the Rule of 20 of which Marty has been a huge proponent.

[Mbodell]

rmnka447, on 2016-March-10, 19:37, said:

The problem with the rule of 20 is that it is one of the most misused devices there is. For example, if we make a minor change to one of billw55's example hands, you'll have a hand that meets the rule of 20 -- ♠ Kx ♥ Qxxx ♦ QJxxx ♣ Kx. It has 11 HCP and 9 cards in the longest two suits, but I'm confident that virtually none of the top notch players that I regularly play against would open that hand.

I'd wager at least a third, and probably more than half, of top players open that hand. It is a bidders game, you have a good rebid, meets the rule of 20.

More over, for beginners having a rule is a good idea. A good rule is always open 12 hcp hands, and also always open rule of 20 hands. Is that going to be perfect or what all experts do? No. But it will be pretty good, and I bet there are a dozen or more other things to worry about before worrying about refining this.

[rmnka447]

Mbodell, on 2016-March-16, 04:22, said:

I'd wager at least a third, and probably more than half, of top players open that hand.

Bring'em on. I could use the opportunity to pad my results.

[neilkaz]

rmnka447, on 2016-March-16, 13:52, said:

Bring'em on. I could use the opportunity to pad my results.

We agree. I pass this out. Also what good rebid do you have after opening? 11 quacky aceless HCP seems light for a NT rebid.

One reason to strive to open in 2nd seat is that you can pass this out confident that you're making a clear percentage decision. By strive I mean don't find excuses to not open.

[Mbodell]

Over 1H you raise to 2, over 1S you bid 1nt, over 1nt you pass, over 2C you bid 2D. Pretty comfortable overall.

[neilkaz]

Mbodell, on 2016-March-16, 19:19, said:

Over 1H you raise to 2, over 1S you bid 1nt, over 1nt you pass, over 2C you bid 2D. Pretty comfortable overall.

So you're happy rebidding 1NT with an 11 count or rebidding 2♦ over 2♣ with this suit and an 11 count?

I like bidding more than many here, but I clearly think that the odds favor passing this hand out.

If you play a lightish opening system where this hand can be opened in 2nd seat and where a weak 2♠ can be stretched(since it really is preemptive!) then you have to ask yourself where are the ♠ and where are the missing HCP?

[1eyedjack]

With a balanced 11 count in 1st or 2nd seat I am more comfortable opening a weak 1N than I am opening 1-suit in a strong 1N system.

[bridgepali]

You don't seem convinced by the negative results you have experienced that opening a hand under trump play with a five card strain and less than 13 pts. is a losing proposition. Reading your narrative "Opening with very little" I get the sense that the Rule of 20 is be being taken out of context. The Rule of 20 is a guideline for opening marginal hands and reads, "When the hcpts.(face cards) plus the number of cards in the two longest strains adds to twenty or more, open the bidding.". In other words, a hand that has xxxxx, xxxx, xx, xx, or xxxxx, xxxx, xxx, x, or xxxxx, xxxx, xxxx, <> and 11 hcpts or more can be opened.

The Rule of 20 is an adaptation from the point count method developed and institutionalized by Goren and associates. They valued a doubleton at one point, a singleton at two points and a void at three points. When applied to the hand examples in the previous paragraph, each one is worth more than 13 pts., the amount of points universally recommended for opening a hand. The Rule of 20 supplements the arsenal for those players who do not use shortness points, as purported by the ACBL, for opening hands to expedite games.

Outside of face cards there are very few point valued altering affects to add to or subtract from hcpts. leaving it to a player's experience to determine a hand's point value. For some its a challenge. For others its discouraging and in my opinion the leading cause for not becoming a devotee to the game.


One point can make a difference between making and not making a contract. I am in the process of perfecting a point count method in which point altering affects are numerically standardized. If a computer can do it, so can a human. Here's a tip: reduce a response hand's point value by 3 pts. for a singleton king, queen or doubleton queen except when it is with it's ace. It will help control overbidding.

If you would like to know more about the approach I am taking to numerically standardizing point counting send an e-mail to bridgepal@comcast.net and I will reply with a listing of verified point value altering affects for trump and no=trump play.

[Zelandakh]

bridgepali, on 2016-April-01, 14:32, said:

Here's a tip: reduce a response hand's point value by 3 pts. for a singleton king, queen or doubleton queen except when it is with it's ace.

An interesting idea for a singleton queen to be worth less than a singleton 2 and for QT to be worth less than 32 - is this really what you meant?

[bridgepali]

Zelandakh, on 2016-April-01, 16:45, said:

An interesting idea for a singleton queen to be worth less than a singleton 2 and for QT to be worth less than 32 - is this really what you meant?

[bridgepali]

Yes.