(Courtesy of Bob Crosby)
Ely Culbertson had it right when Bridge was in its infancy. He said that an opening bid should have around 2½ quick tricks. This standard, he said could be a benchmark for judging defensive capabilities of openers and general trick taking potential for competing, games and slams. In my opinion, quick tricks should be more than just a requirement for an opening bid. You should evaluate your hand regarding quick tricks for penalty doubles, forcing pass theory, takeout doubles, overcalling and balancing also. Learn to act on the quick tricks, you are dealt. All HCP’s are not created equal. Learn to hone in on your quick tricks for your Bridge decisions and not the "soft values" of your hand. Point’s Schmoints as Bergen is fond of saying for opening bids. Do not be a slave to counting up your HCP’s like beads on an abacus. Learn to evaluate your hand by looking at your quick trick combinations A, KQ, AQ, AK and Kx. Advise partner of the quality of your HCP’s through your choice of bids not just how many HCP’s.
13 HCP’s was chosen by Goren as a standard for opening bids because the odds favored two or more quick tricks being present with that many HCP’s. When your HCP’s are not aligned correctly in quick trick combinations, it is a "game time" decision whether even to open.
14 HCP’s is a must opener regardless of quick tricks as it is mathematically impossible not to have a quick trick and 99% of the time you will have at least two. Culbertson said game should be bid when your side has a combined 5 quick tricks. Goren translated that realization into HCP’s.
13 HCP’s with 2½ quick tricks opposite 13 HCP with 2½ quick tricks made game more often than not. Goren was in effect saying the same 5 quick trick message as Culbertson, but in a different way expressed in HCP’s.
Milton Work invented the HCP scheme and gave quick tricks the highest rating of 4 and 3 for Aces and Kings. These prime cards allowed the timing and control to make game. When you are in game with the opponents holding these cards, they have the timing and control and your game usually fails. Learn to appreciate "quick trick" combinations as queens grow up and take on their full value. AQx in a NT contract takes two tricks 66% of the time. When partner has the king, dummy has the king and fails to take 2 tricks only when declarer has the King behind you. KQx is one certain trick and will be two when partner or the dummy has the Ace. Kx is a certain trick with partner or dummy holding the Ace. The "potential" of your hand increases holding HCP's in these card combinations and your hand is more useful to the point of becoming an opening bid.
Bridge is a trick taking game not a HCP taking game. HCP’s do not necessarily equate to tricks unless they are aligned in quick trick combinations or you have good fortune. HCP’s which are soft or “unsupported” have a lower percentage chance of becoming tricks. This is why an opening bid is defined as at least 13 HCP’s with 2½ quick tricks. Partner knows that you have actual trick potential for either defense or offense. Quick trick combinations bring in the oldest concept in Bridge, the finesse. Finesses are defined is part by quick trick combinations of AQ, KQ and Kx. It is easy to see why garbage openers contradict the idea behind opening bids. They offer no trick taking potential for either offense or defense. For opening bid purposes HCP’s should be evaluated not just totaled. Garbage opening bids con poor partner as the dreaded semi-psyche.
Let’s take the decision whether to balance. If you balance with "soft values", you introduce the danger of balancing them into game. They bid again but this time they leap to game. Indignant that they were in a partial, partner doubles and that adds insult to injury as they make it. The culprit is that the balancer did not have defensive tricks (quick tricks) for her balance. Soft values are just that, soft for defense.
The opponents are vulnerable and so are you. They open a mini 2 bid which shows an opener with a 4-4-4-1 with an unspecified singleton or void. Responder bids 2 non forcing so around to you. You hold QJx Jx Axx QJ10xx so do you balance? This hand is mostly soft values with only one defensive trick. Keep the same total of HCP’s, but change the values to defensive tricks so it is an automatic balance. Change the spades to the Ace and the clubs to a king and you still have the same 11 HCP and same hand pattern Axx xx Axx Kxxxx but with defensive as well as offensive potential transferable values as Kokish calls quick tricks. This is now a double. The first hand I would just pass as I lacked the defense to balance. A pass shows the lack of quick tricks to take action.
Balancing doubles should show quick tricks also as they get converted by partner expecting defense for the double. Lack of quick tricks will be a disappointment for partner and a 2nd chance for the opponents. We use quick tricks as a measuring stick for openers, takeout doubles, balancing doubles and overcalls. I am a great believer that a double announces defense or else you would have chosen to overcall or bid a suit. My decision whether to overcall or make a takeout double is based on quick tricks mainly. If I have quick tricks, I double rather than overcall. Why? Because it allows the option of converting for penalty or doubling the opponents for penalty later in the auction. I am informing partner of the nature of my HCP’s. If I have more distributional and softer values, I overcall which of course takes the penalty conversion element out of the equation. Advise partner of the quality of your HCP’s via the defensive orientated double.
By the way, on the hand that you balanced with a double with the soft values. They leap to game and make 6! Your one defensive trick prevents a grand slam from being made their way. Think in quick tricks when you make a takeout double rather than HCP’s. Being a slave to HCP’s is more than just opening bids. When evaluating your hand, think quick tricks not just HCP’s. All HCP’s are not created equal.
Responding to overcalls and your choice of bids should be based on defense measured in quick tricks. KJ10xx QJxx Qx Qx with everybody vulnerable your LHO opens 1, your partner overcalls 1. They double to your right so what is your choice of bids and why? The redouble is your last choice as with your unsupported queens and soft values you have only ½ a defensive trick. They may be cold for slam for all you know. Next in line is a cuebid showing limit raise or better. Is this hand a limit raise? I think not as you have all soft values. You have too many HCP’s for a 4 pre-empt so I would settle for a 3 bid. In your system this shows 4 hearts with simple raise values. Your partner competes to 4, so they bid 5 which gets passed out. You win 13 IMPS as your partners got to 6 for +1370.
Competitive double theory (D.S.I.P.) was based on quick tricks for making decisions rather than HCP’s. This "quick trick" thinking should be more than just for D.S.I.P. theory. If you have defense, choose to double or redouble as opposed to cue bidding or bidding a suit. You do not rescue opponents that way and you give partner many more options. Think quick tricks and controls for all your Bridge decisions. Quick tricks vs soft values is a simple but effective hand evaluation skill.
Balancing or bidding at any level uses quick tricks as the standard. With quick tricks, you tend to double. Without quick tricks you tend to bid. This is the defensive hand vs offensive hand type of thinking. You paint a picture of your hand better by making a takeout double with quick tricks.
Vulnerability and quick tricks of course, affects your forcing pass strategy. With both opponents vulnerable, you open 1 with Kxxxx Axx void AKJxx, partner bids 2. Your vulnerable RHO bids 3 so you show your playing strength with 4. They subsequently bid 5 so what do you do? Partner has heard you bid 4 and has heard the bidding. Your forcing pass decision on this vulnerability is very clear. You pass 5 saying that you would like to bid 5 very badly and simultaneously showing partner your diamond shortness and defensive quick tricks. Partner hears all this but doubles 5 anyway. Now what do you do? You have an excellent playing hand with a lot of defense (3½ quick tricks). They are vulnerable so with diamond wastage and with only 15 HCP opposite a 2 bid you have no guarantee of making 5. The pass and pull part of forcing pass theory is a slam try. You do not want to be near slam after partner just has a 2 bid with diamond duplication of value. You pass, 5 doubled has 5 quick losers, a 4-nothing beak to worry about and 3 spades to ruff with only 3 trump on the board. Partner will probably rectify that at her first opportunity. They go for 1100 to 1400, 5 goes two down vulnerable. Play the vulnerability, acknowledge your quick tricks along with forcing pass theory. A good player holding this hand rescued the opponents and bid 5 going two down for a phenomenal swing. I can only hazard a guess that she is not trained herself to notice quick tricks in her hand! Translate your quick tricks into 200, 500, 800 for your opponents before you take offensive action. Quick trick myopia I believe is the diagnosis for this lack of Bridge judgment.
I opened a weak 2 vulnerable tonight playing with a Tormentee who held Axx Axx Axx KQxx she bid 2NT and I bid 3 as a step response. She decided with a flat hand to go for all the matchpoints and bid 3NT. This contract made exactly 3 and 4 makes +680. Again looking at the nature of her HCP’s is the key to the decision making process. She is all quick tricks (4) which are better for suit contracts. Soft values are better for NT contracts. With nothing else to guide you, let the nature of your HCP’s make the decision for you.
My advice to improve your hand evaluation skills is look at your HCP’s through "quick trick" coloured glasses. You will see the game differently and your Bridge judgment will improve. Hand evaluation skills are far superior to just bidding for the sake of bidding so as to make the opponent’s guess. The late Mike Chomyn tongue in cheek used to say "I’d rather be lucky than good". Luck evens out in the long run, so being good wins the race. As a nice side effect, partner does not become the 3rd opponent that way.
Playing the vulnerability should be a clear Bridge strategy. You make different bids depending on the vulnerability. It's not quite that simple. Quick tricks must enter in your decision also. You are a disciplined pre-empter on 3 of the 4 vulnerabilities. Not so on the terrorist vulnerability.
You hold xxx Qxx KJ109xx x, you are on the terrorist vulnerability with very little defense measured in quick tricks. You do not have a weak 2 available, so you pre-empt 3. Tell partner and the opponents you had a heart mixed in with your diamonds. You are non-vulnerable vs vulnerable, in addition, partner is a passed hand. RHO opens 1, you have x KJ98xx A10xx xx. On the terrorist vulnerability, partner will give you enough leeway so you can overcall 2. You do this to setup non-vulnerable sacrifices against vulnerable opponents or otherwise make a nuisance of yourself in their auction. You have 1½ quick tricks, so a 2 overcall is preferred to a pre-empt as partner will be able to make a better decision later.
You hold KQx KQJ109 AQx Kx, you are on the terrorist vulnerability. Your RHO surprises you by opening a vulnerable 2 against a non-vulnerable opponent. On the 3 other vulnerabilities, you double and leap to 3NT. You do not want to be talked out of your game and partner should not have the strength to balance. On this vulnerability, who cares if partner does not have enough to balance! A game your way is only 400 anyway and they are heading for 4 or 5 down vulnerable! If partner does have enough to balance with a double, you are looking a huge plus. You have nothing to lose by passing on this one vulnerability and a lot to gain. You are all quick tricks with a horrible trump stack for them.
You hold KQJx J10x Q1098 AQ, they are vulnerable and you are not. Partner opens 1, they overcall 1. On the other 3 vulnerabilities, passing is silly as 1 doubled is not going to compensate for your very probable game. Playing negative doubles, partner will bend over backwards to re-open with a double if she has the quick tricks to do so. Partner has xxxx AK Axx Jxxx so with 3 defensive tricks and diamond shortness will always protect your pass with a re-opening double with that much defense measured in quick tricks. If they are vulnerable, go for the home run as that will double your game value. Do not look at your HCP's for re-opening doubles, but pay more attention to your quick tricks.
Penalty doubles follow the same reasoning of course. Vulnerability and quick tricks will determine if you leave in partner's penalty double but more care is needed. You open 1 with x KQJx Axx Axxxx, they make a takeout double. Partner makes a punitive redouble most likely not showing a fit for your clubs. They bid a spade so with your full opening bid and 3 quick tricks you pass the bid around to partner. Partner doubles 1 so what do you do? You have more than partner can reasonably expect on the auction (3 quick tricks) and partner is not asking if you have spades so you leave it in on 3 vulnerabilities. On the one vulnerability of vulnerable vs non-vulnerable opponents, you can consider pulling the double to 1NT. Why 1NT? You are making the most constructive bid towards game and describing your defense. Do not pull to 2 as partner will think you have a distributional playing hand without the defense you actually hold. You are not wrong siding the NT bid as the spades are with the takeout doubler and not RHO. You must be careful though as partner knows you are vulnerable and they are not and she still doubled 1. One level sets can be telephone numbers quite often.
Quick tricks are a huge part of hand evaluation in every facet of the game of Bridge. Make it a habit to notice them. Think quick tricks for proper hand evaluation for opening bids and almost every other aspect of Bridge bidding. Points Schmoints.
Quick Tricks:
The requirement for quick tricks for an opening bid 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 partner's opening bid. If the opening bids do not have quick defensive tricks, doubled contracts will make, games and slams will fail and competitive decisions will result in you taking a penalty. Controls are a needed ingredient for slams and games. Failing to have those cards will throw partner off in judging Bridge hands and bad decisions will result. Quick tricks are based on probabilities. If there is a 50% chance that a card like a King or an AQ combination will take a trick than it's ½ a 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.
Open ALL hands with 14 or more high-card points. Open a hand with 11 or 12, 13 pts. (or even 10 pts.) if our hand and the conditions meet at least two or three of the following requirements:
Stretch to open any hand with at least 2½ quick tricks. Avoid opening hands with less than 2 quick tricks.
A1043 1096 AK92 43 -- Open 1. This is "only" 11 pts., but it has three prime quick tricks.
Q106 AQ1073 KJ76 4-- Open 1. Just two quick tricks, but good playing strength.
QJ6 K72 Q43 A753-- Pass. This is a "soft" hand with only 1½ quick tricks.
KQJ103 86 A1042 32-- Open 1.
J8643 KQ A8 Q632 -- Pass.
103 KQJ85 65 AJ93 -- Open 1. You plan to rebid 2 if partner doesn't raise hearts.
1032 3 KQJ1065 AJ9 -- Open 1. You plan to rebid 2 over any response from partner.
This gives you an easy rebid and makes it more likely that you'll play in a trump contract instead of 3NT.
K1072 AJ93 4 K954-- Open 1. If partner responds 1, you can bid 1. If he instead bids 1 or 1, you'll raise to 2.
4 K43 AJ93 K9543 -- Pass. You'll have an awkward rebid if partner responds 1.
It may be safer to open a vulnerable 1-bid than to overcall later, especially if you have a fairly weak suit.
7 K98754 A102 KJ3 -- Open 1. You'd hate to have to overcall 2 if your opponent opens 1.void KJ10543 A102 J843 -- Pass. This hand is too weak for a 1-bid and too strong for a 3-bid. You can describe it better by overcalling later. I do not like a weak two either with the void and a 6-4.
To complete your part score, it's often important to show your values early in the auction. A light opener is fairly safe in this situation because partner will usually keep the bidding low.
If you decide your hand is worth an opening bid, stay with the courage of your conviction. Don't "lie" later just to make up for your thin high-card points. Treat your hand as a "real" opener, especially if you find a trump fit.
Be more anxious to open light. You should stretch to open even a 10-11 pt or less hand if: You have a strong suit-- one you want partner to lead if you defend.
KQ1093 43 A75 987 -- Open 1. You can safely pass any suit partner responds.
K93 1087 J98 AK32 -- Open 1 and pass partner's response.
- Karen Walker
In order to intelligently discuss the weather, you need a standard or reference point like the freezing point of water. Whether this standard is expressed in Fahrenheit or Celsius does not matter as long as you have a standard reference point. Bridge bidding needs a standard for a minimum opening bid. Totaling HCP's to 13 HCP is a standard because 26 HCPs make game and two hands with 13 opposite 13 should theoretical make game. Before HCP's came into vogue (Goren's time), quick tricks in a trick taking game of Bridge were the standard. 2½ quick tricks was the minimum requirement for an opening bid. For suit contracts, I believe this is a better more workable standard than totaling HCP's. For NT contracts, HCP's will do just nicely. Goren felt that both standards should be merged so he defined an opening bid as 13 HCP's with 2½ quick tricks. He thought he could have the best of both worlds that way as if the HCPs were too soft without quick tricks (garbage), it was best that these hands were not opened. This standard has passed the test of time for most Bridge experts since 1927 to the present.
Quick tricks in Bridge are very cashable. They provided entries (timing) for communication both on defense and offense. Quick tricks provided more potential for taking tricks than totaling HCPs. The object of the game of Bridge is to take as many tricks as possible. Quick tricks are also potential "king makers". What do I mean by that? In hockey, a super star makes the players around him play better. They feed off his immense hockey talents. In Bridge, quick tricks held by opener makes softer cards in responder's hand become tricks.
Take this hand for example. Axx Axx Axx Axxx. Partner's kings are immediately promoted to tricks and entries for suit establishment, squeezes and end-plays. Give responder QJ10 QJ10 QJ10 QJ109 and this "soft" hand could be promoted to all 13 tricks via the finesses route! Other quick trick combinations like AK promote queens to tricks, KQ promote jacks to tricks and AQ promote Kings to produce 3 tricks. The quick tricks announce the trick taking potential of the hand.
A modern garbage advocate (HCP counter) said he would open Kx J10x KQx QJxxx but not open AKx Axx Jxxx xxx. This is totally backwards! The 2nd hand has trick taking potential as the QJxx of spades in responder's hand gets promoted to 4 tricks and the QJ10 of hearts could be promoted to 3 tricks. This is in addition to the three guaranteed tricks held by the opening bid. The first hand has pathetic trick taking potential (both offensive and defense) similar to just a response. The first hand only offers 1½ tricks on its own merit. The hand's HCPs needs quick tricks in partner's hand to become tricks! A Bridge opening bid is not a cry for help like garbage openers but a definite statement saying I have a hand with trick taking potential for defense and offense. An opening bid is a Bridge obligation to adhere to a trick taking standard. A pass is a Bridge call defined to mean my HCP’s are not in trick taking combinations worthy of an opening bid or I do not have 13+ HCP’s. Partner now bases their Bridge judgment on that standard. Good results now follow for disciplined established partnerships.
The worst form of debating logic is based on the advertising propaganda of testimonials. Just because a hockey star says that this brand of soup is good that makes it so. Same testimonial lack of logic with Bridge pros who might open garbage on occasion unless they have a reputation for such single handed tactics. The situation could be taken out of context as they may be down 60 IMPS at the half so anti-percentage tactics are a way to swing. They may be playing with a client or having the client in at the other table. Garbage openers may "psyche out" an opponent (also partner) because she thinks you have an opening bid. "Making them guess" is the only justification for opening garbage, in my opinion. However, I have not bought into the destructive philosophy of playing Bridge at the expense of partner guessing wrong. We do not get any satisfaction for deliberately causing partner to go wrong with their decision in a partnership game like Bridge. Since my living does not depend on making the opponents guess wrong (partner the 3rd opponent), we follow a simple Bridge rule. We do not make any bid (intentionally) that could cause partner to make a wrong decision. It is called Bridge discipline. Opening bids start the ball rolling for partnership discipline. The terrorist vulnerability is an exception for some established partnerships. A systemic lack of discipline if you will, where partner is given leeway.
The following is a quote from Eric Kokish in this month's bulletin. Another reason to open sound hands and not the modern garbage? Reviewing the Bridge World accounts of Bermuda Bowls, NABC team games over 25 years starting from 1975, it is easy to spot the era where modern garbage bidding began to take place. In the 1970's and 1980's the pros more or less behaved. In the 1990's, they went off the deep end. Meckwell due to their club system deemed that everything that was not opened 1 forcing did not have to be an opening bid. Marty Bergen went off the deep end with weak twos and pre-empts and disregarding vulnerability. They even wrote books describing their modern garbage bidding style. They got good results and horrible results. Good results because unsuspecting opponents went wrong. This was in part because they could not believe they would do such outrageous things in the name of competing that have been taboo in Bridge since it was invented. Over time, opponents have become more wary so their good results (surprise attack) have taken a turn for the worse except in weak fields.
Bridge pros by the nature of their occupation must play singled handed. Their clients drop the ball with partnership concepts such as forcing passes, captaincy, bidding your hand again, disciplined openers and pre-empts. The clients simply could not defend. The best way to win is to make the opponents go wrong with swing tactics. As results make or break their livelihood, this is the destructive style in which they resorted. They built a religion based on playing the hand and competing rather than defending with their clients. This style was panned incessantly by the Bridge World in the 1990's, but to no avail. They were not about to change as they got results with unprepared opponents and all teams seemed to have a client on it. To them, it was a way to bypass the ACBL rule against frequent psyches. A semi-psyche might confuse the folks also with no messy director calls. Partner, of course, is collateral damage.
A bad side effect is what I see in club games, Sectionals and Regionals today. The average players taking a page from the pro's books, think that this is the right way to play Bridge. Horrible garbage openers, horrible pre-empts, horrible 2 level overcalls and undisciplined single handed style. Bidding and partnership Bridge has virtually become a joke. Bridge has been downgraded to VLT status. You spin the wheels so whatever happens, happens.
In the 2000's, good teams like the Italians, Poles, Dutch and Scandinavians decided to stop this nonsense. The Italians play good disciplined Bridge. This is one reason I was cheering for them in Bermuda Bowls against the swingy Americans led by Meckwell. Kokish and others have become more vocal in the Bridge World magazine and elsewhere complaining about modern garbage bidding. The novelty of the garbage opening fad to make the opponents guess is wearing off.
I watched the Italian team on vuegraph from the recent Beijing event. They proved to me once again that destructive modern garbage bidding is not the way to play this game. Here is a comment from a commentator on Vuegraph during the late stages of an Italian match.
" I mentioned in the previous set that it is in the constructive bidding that the Italians are so excellent. They do not make any particular effort in obstructive bidding, unlike... some other teams"
Jeff Meckstroth of all people said after a loss to a Dutch team, They played Bridge the way it was meant to be played. What do you think he meant by that? Read between the lines to get your answer.
Here is a hand that was a disaster in the final match with a Canadian team trying to qualify in the mixed teams. You are first seat vulnerable Qxx K AQ10x Jxxxx with 1½ quick tricks with your suits being the minors. I would not open this hand in a million years as I am just setting partner up for failure. This hand was opened and the final contract was 3NT doubled by the opponents making for an over trick and a terrible start to a key match. The match went down hill from there. These types of hands are psychologically devastating for a team. Why do you want to do that? They feel passing with 12 HCP's with a singleton king and little defense is a modern garbage. Time after time I watched teams in the Beijing Olympiad who did this sort of thing get poor results. Most bad results can be traced to a poor start by opening a hand that is nowhere near an opening bid. This modern garbage style of opening is a disease that needs to wiped out and left in the hand of pros playing with clients. Shooting dice and partnership Bridge are a poor mix.
Locally we have some modern garbage bidders. Maurice and Klimo subscribe to modern garbage bidding philosophy as does Osama, Willard, Chris Buchanan, Ray Grace and anybody as a partner to name a few. In order to play against them effectively, you need to know your forcing pass theory, pre-empt understandings and be very disciplined with your openers and overcalls yourself. You do not fight fire with fire. D.S.I.P. Competitive doubles assist as an antidote against modern garbage bidding tactics. Modern garbage bidders are essentially Bridge terrorists who eventually implode and bring the team down with them. They play a single handed style and partner is only needed to put down a dummy for them. Tom Gandolfo was kibitzing the Meckwell match recently at the Houston Vanderbilt and noted that Greco and Hampson played D.S.I.P. competitive doubles. Meckwell went for -800 and a few other numbers against this competitive bidding tool. Meckwell was -90 IMPS behind going into the 4th quarter and that was too much for even them to overcome so they lost the match.
Recently in a bulletin there was a debate between Larry Cohen and Frank Stewart. Cohen opened a weak 2 with a side 4 card suit. It was not an exceptional hand just a weak 2 that happened to be a 6-4. The opponents bid and partner passed but Cohen violated captaincy by competing in his 4 card suit. Frank Stewart complained that partner was the captain of this auction and rightly so. He felt that Cohen took a single handed chance by bidding again. Cohen replied with the now standard excuse for bad bidding that he was competing. There is nothing wrong with Cohen bidding that way when his partner tolerates that sort of single handedness. What I object to is when inexperienced players (brain washed) now glorify Cohen's silly bid in the name of competing and say Frank Stewart was wrong! You can rationalize any wrong, single handed bid by saying you were competing!
In the long run, singlehanded Bridge cannot work in a partnership game. Luck has a way of evening out so the poor decisions made due to single handed actions result in devastating losses. Here is an auction a while back. Lorna opened 1, I overcalled 1 so Peter Jones bid 4. My partner bid 4, passed around to Peter who bid 5 doubled by my partner. This auction is not allowed in partnership Bridge. Once Peter has pre-empted to 4, captaincy reverts to the opener. This is modern bidding at its worst as Peter had exactly what he announced to partner previously. You insult partner's decision of willing to defend by bidding your hand again because you decided it was right. Modern bidding violates captaincy quite often because bridge is a garbage bidders game. You just bid single handed without a purpose and call it modern bidding. VLT? anybody?
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 and jacks and adding for Aces and 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. Partner's 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) and the pass and 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." Bergen seems to gloss over the subject. He discusses quick tricks in a around about way in that he subtracts for too many queens and jacks or frozen honors. He also adds for Aces (quick tricks) and says to upgrade for Aces and 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 and 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.
One of the most important facets of hand evaluation is determining whether you have an opening bid. Again controls should be the deciding factor whether a hand should be opened not totaling HCP's. The club series defines an opening bid as 13 HCP with 2½ defensive tricks. Defensive tricks are controls or combinations that can become tricks 50% of the time. KQ or AQ combinations bring in the concept of ½ defensive tricks as they depend on the location of outstanding honors. With lots of distribution or a nice suit, you can deviate from the strict standard of 2½ defensive tricks as there is a tactical advantage of firing the first shot and opening. However, keep defensive tricks in mind, even with those distributional hands. AKxxx Kxxxx xx x is an opener and QJxxx QJxxx Ax x is not an opener due to a lack of defensive tricks.
Opening 11, 12 or 13 HCP without defensive tricks is very poor Bridge. You deceive partner who has geared her Bridge judgment to the expectation that an opening bid holds the minimum requirement of controls. Game bidding, competing, slam bidding and penalty doubles are all thrown off when you make these garbage semi-psyches as I call them. For an opening bid, you are not just a mere Abacus and count your beads so if they come to 11,12 or 13 it's an opening bid. You must evaluate your hand and if it holds the requisite number of controls, it becomes an opening bid.
Location, location and location are the 3 most important factors in real estate. Also, opening bids follow the same location guidelines.:
This thinking is opening bid hand evaluation. KJ QJ QJxx QJxxx, this hand is 13 HCP but is nowhere close to an opening bid. ½ a quick trick, values in short suits and overall barely a response, let alone an opening bid. A well known vocal local player (garbage opener advocate) once told me that BJ Trelford passed 13 HCP playing with him. He was incredulous! I can only construct approx 250,000 13 HCP hands that I would not open. Yet, I would open some 10 HCP hands in a flash. HCP's are only one of many hand evaluation indicators for an opening bid, not the only one. Do not be a slave to the HCP system for your opening bids. Use time tested Bridge logic.
Playing with a tormentee we got into trouble because of a non opening bid in 1st seat. Contrast these two 11 HCP hands xx xxx Axx AKxxx and Qx xxx KJx AJxxx. One of these 11 HCP hands is an opening bid and the other one is not even close. Why? One has controls with 3 defensive tricks but the other has only 1½ defensive tricks with an unsupported queen. There is no advantage to opening the 2nd hand. If there is game, you will get to it as a passed hand. Otherwise by opening, you are deceiving partner and will probably cause her to make a wrong competitive decision. Yes, you may confuse weak opponents but there is more to the game of Bridge than that.
Anyway a tormentee did open that hand above 1 in first seat, we got a 1 overcall. I bid 1NT with a flat 4-3-3-3 10 HCP AJx QJxx Q109 10xx, Judy Chapman bid 2. Around to me again. Well partner opened the bidding, I cannot sell out at the two level with 10 HCP so I double. Now back to the non-opening semi psyche. To leave in the double, you must evaluate your hand again. Do I have what partner reasonably expects for my opening bid? I am one defensive trick short for my opening bid, I only have 11 HCP with only 2 trump and partner showing only two or three trump with the 1NT bid and double. Do you convert the double? This is not a close decision, so you pull to 2NT or 3 in a micro second. Anyway the Tormentee left in the double so +470 resulted as the two spade bidder only held Kxxxxx AK xx Kxx, a far superior opener to that of the Tormentee and her partner who had overcalled. Of course 2 was a silly bid as 1NT should be doubled but her partner had made an overcall on xx xxxx Axxxx Qx, the magical 6 count was all she needed to make her doubled part score. Bridge anarchy runs rampant with none of the players having what they announced.
Opening non opening bids is a terrible lack of discipline which drives partners crazy. If you analyze disasters in a round, I would hazard a guess that the majority stem from a non opening bid in the first instance. Evaluate your hand paying attention to your defensive tricks before you open. A wise Bridge player once said anybody can bray like a jackass and open. An expert Bridge player has what she announces when she opens the bidding. Discipline in Bridge means having your opening bids (quick tricks) and not making the dreaded garbage semi-psyche to fool partner.
Playing with one of my Thursday night partners of old, I pickup AQ109 xx xxx KQx and partner opens 1, RHO bids 2 (Michaels) vulnerable so I double saying let me at them partner. They bid 2 so around to me so I double which ends the auction. Partner dutifully leads his trump so with the help of ruffing finesses in hearts for declarer we come to 1 heart trick, 4 trump tricks for 470 so an obvious disaster. At the end of the hand, partner questions my double and said something is wrong with this auction? I scratch my head as I have played Bridge for 40 years and when I have held hands like this +800 seemed to be the average in these types of auctions.
What went wrong? A difference in philosophy for opening bids was the main culprit. Partner had 11 HCP with only one quick trick for his opening bid. I was expecting him to contribute to the defense of this hand as he opened the bidding which shows defense measured in quick tricks. Partner says no not true, partner must have the contract beat pretty well beat in my own hand as his opening bids do not promise quick tricks in the modern game. He went on to say that modern Bridge is a bidder’s game and defensive tricks are no longer a requirement for opening bids.
Let’s examine the repercussions of what he is saying. In my mind, this style destroys the partnership aspect of the game of Bridge. You must make Bridge decisions almost entirely on your own hand playing this way. When you have the controls for a game you bid it. If you have the controls for a slam you bid it. If you have them set in your own hand you double. This is preposterous. Bridge is a partnership game. If the combined assets of the partnership dictate it, the opponents get doubled or you bid a game or a slam or compete again. Defense measured in quick tricks have been a requirement for an opening bid since the game was invented.
What if partner did hold 2 or 3 defensive tricks for his opening bid? By not doubling 2, I have just thrown away a +800 gift. The opponents can bid with impunity around us. I have a rubber bridge background where I have had years of experience dealing with psyches. If partner has psyched, he pulls the double. Partner did not hesitate on this auction to even consider pulling the double with his one defensive trick. He had his 11 HCP with one defensive trick so he has an opening bid in accordance with his methods. In his methods, he cannot pull the double as I might have 2 doubled beat in my own hand and as he was not asked to contribute to the defense he passes. He of course, never pulls penalty doubles no matter what his hand is I guess.
Opening bids are the cornerstone of bidding. All further bidding evolves from that initial decision. If you open the Bidding without the required defensive tricks, you are making the dreaded semi-psyche? After a while partner will become be gun shy and not trust the openers for penalty doubles, competitive decisions, slam and game bidding. It is another variable thrown into the equation of bidding. Does partner have an opening bid this time? You have invited ambiguity into your auctions.
I was playing with Peter Jones and in 3rd seat he psyched 1NT vulnerable against not. We went for -100 and lost 13 IMPS. Tom Gandolfo our team mate joked that we should play 2 as Drury asking did you psyche partner and opener responds in steps depending on the severity of the set we are going for. Openers with no or little defensive quick tricks are the same thing. You need a check back system to determine if you have an opener or not. Too tough for me. Make them guess is the war cry of modern bidders but when "them" includes partner, count me out.
This hand came up which drew Tom Gandolfo's ire when discussing the merits of whether the hand qualified for an opening bid Qxxxxxx x QJx Ax. The people at the table contended that this hand was an opening bid of 1. Tom and I disagree very strongly that this is anything near an opening bid. Why, because it is a semi-psyche that erodes partnership discipline due to its lack of defense. An opening bid by definition shows defense. If you open 1 on this hand and 1 on a real opener how is partner to know the difference? It just like defining a word in the English language to mean something, then use the word to mean something else in another conversation. Instant confusion and ambiguity. An opening bid is a control showing bid via quick tricks for defense. Why? Because quick tricks must have a control (Ace or King) associated with it. Kx, Ax, KQx, AK, AQ all have a control combination. This is why QJx QJxx QJx QJx is not an opening bid despite having 12 HCP's. HCP's are not the sole criteria for an opening bid. Keep the same HCP's for the hand above but arrange them in quick trick combinations and you do have a 9 HCP opening bid. This transformation was due to controls and suit length KQxxxxx x xxx Ax .
You are vulnerable and hold Kx J10x xxx AK109x so is this an opening bid with your 11 HCP? Of course it is, as you have a 5 card suit with 2½ quick tricks. Give yourself one more HCP with the same distribution Kx J10x KQx QJxxx, is this an opener? Of course not, it pales in comparison with the 11 HCP hand and is almost useless if partner doubles a contract. You may only contribute one trick to the defense. If I doubled the opponents into game with my 5 defensive tricks and they made it because you opened that collection, find another partner. To where do you pull the penalty double with this hand? You are between a rock and a hard place. You go for -800 if you pull or they make the doubled contract if you do not. To make matters worse, both the above hands are described with a 1NT rebid. How is partner to field the difference. Make them guess indeed.
When Bridge was first invented, it was thought that 2½ defensive tricks was a basic requirement for an opening bid. This requirement is etched into standard bidding and passed the test of time. This concept originated in the Culbertson system but was carried over when Goren popularized HCP. Game tries, slam tries, penalty doubles and all situations where judgment is required in competitive auctions rely on this simple basic requirement for an opening bid. You may not consciously know that this is ingrained into your Bridge judgment, but believe me, it is there. If partner does not have the required controls for an opening bid this is another variable that has to be considered in Bridge judgment. Is partner opening with only 1 control (hand above)? This lack of discipline throws the partnership off in penalty double situations, game tries, slam tries and overall Bridge judgment. You reduce the effectiveness of bidding as a tool to make the correct decision in the game of Bridge. Simple as that. It has the same effect on a partnership as a blatant psyche does. Trust gets eroded so partnership discipline evaporates. 4NT Blackwood is a control asking bid. When you try this bid, you assume partner has a minimum of two for her opening bid. If not, there will be a lot of aborted slam tries going down at the 5 level! Anarchy reigns supreme.
The notion of defensive tricks as a requirement for an opening bid is as old as the game of Bridge itself. It is not an archaic idea as most present day Bridge theorists still make it a basic requirement for an opening bid. In the 1940's another requirement was added to the quick trick requirement for an opening bid. This is the notion of HCP's. In addition to the quick tricks, 13 HCP's was the stated norm for an opening bid. Over the years this requirement was lowered if distribution was present. However, the idea of having defensive tricks never went away. Charles Goren who popularized the new HCP notion always taught that points only augment the quick trick requirement for an opening bid. There is no Bridge literature on the face of the earth that drums up the notion that defensive tricks are no longer needed for an opening bid. In recent years, there have been rules of 20 or 24 that if your HCP's and long suits add up to those numbers you have an opening bid. This is fine in theory as long as you have your defensive tricks. There is an article in this month's Bridge bulletin saying that the rule does not have merit if they do not emphasize the quick trick requirement. Axxxx QJ10xx QJ x is not an opener but AKxxx K109xx xx x is even though they both have 10 HCP's. Openers are not just moving your beads on an abacus so if they reach a certain number, it is an opener. People who do that just do not understand the costs to the partnership by doing so. They are out to con the opponents and take partner with them. It is that simple.
If you have a choice between opening or not, the criteria of HCP's is the last thing I look at. I look for controls so if they are present, I now consider an opening bid. I now look to see if these controls are in quick trick combinations. Next criteria is patterns. If I have a flat hand, I need the HCP's. If I have distribution with the defensive tricks, I look at suit quality or whether my meager HCP's are located in the suits or not. A good suit with defensive tricks is an opening bid no matter how low the HCP's. Kxx x xxx AK109xx is a club opener. KJxx AJxx Jx Qxx is not an opening bid unless on the terrorist vulnerability. Why because you only have 1½ defensive tricks! Your club suit cannot stand an opening lead and you do not have an offensive distribution. Yes you do have 12 HCP's with 4-4 in the majors but so what? I would hazard a guess that 90% of the club players would open this hand. I would also say 90% of the club players are wrong! Change the hand to the same HCP's, same distribution but controls and I would open Axxx AKJx xx xxx . (1 though but not 1)
There is a tactical advantage to opening non openers in club games, sectionals and even regionals. Weak players have trouble getting to their correct spot because you are confusing them. Sometimes you make it difficult for them to enter the auction. However, like Steve Willard etc partner can not trust your openers so partnership discipline is a thing of the past. If opening non opening bids was a criteria, Steve Willard, Osama and Ray Grace would win every event they played in. Instead it is boom or bust with them as they are swinging with their opening bids. Good players take advantage of these bad openers. Huge sets are frequent and they assist greatly in playing hands your way. You get free information not received at the other tables. Since the partnership do not trust each other, they must rely on the opponents bidding to judge further competition. If you throw them a curve ball, they can end up +200 for 3 making 5!
In single handed bidding, who cares if you have an opening bid as partner is not invited to the party anyway! However, in partnership Bridge, a lack of an opening bid is also considered a lack of respect. Leave non openers to those players with that style or for the terrorist vulnerability. Guessing whether partner really has an opener when she opened is too tough on me. Opening non openers by rationalizing that Bridge is a bidders game or make them (including partner) guess is downright drivel. My partner's and I bid very much thank you, but we bid a lot as a passed hand also! Partner does not get conned that way.