Monday, October 23, 2006 12:27 PM
Hand Evaluation – Partnership ( Danger Signals )
PITBULLS:
One
of the basics of hand
evaluation in partnership Bridge is to know the standard “danger” signals. Shortness in partners suit is a danger signal. This shortness
signals duplication of value
& the dreaded misfit.
Another danger signal is HCP’s
in the opponents suit so again the hand does not fit well. Another danger signal is length in the
opponent’s suit which again signals a misfit.
Another danger signal is a lack of quality in your own suit. Bridge is a game of suits so if your suit is anemic
, danger is lurking. Still another danger signal is the vulnerability. You are vulnerable or equal
not is a danger signal as Bridge scoring for doubled contracts are quite punitive on this vulnerability. Another
danger signal is a lack of quick tricks when you
open the bidding. You are practicing deception as your hand
does not have the defensive or offensive potential it
should have. Not recognizing standard hand
evaluation concepts is poor
bidding judgment. Underbidding or overbidding
is the common result.
A
local couple had some hands where every possible danger signal (
hand evaluation skills ) was ignored. You hold ♠void ♥Kxxxx ♦AKxx ♣Jxxx , partner opponents 1♠ hitting your void.
You overbid to 2♥ , partner bids 3♥ so now what ? Danger
signal #1 is you have a void in partners suit. Danger signal #2 is that your heart suit is anemic with no spots at all
& you have your HCP’s located
in a different suit. With two strikes against me , I
would not encourage partner even with a courtesy
Q bid. You know something that partner does not, so I would “fast arrival” this contract to 4♥. If you do Q bid, unsuspecting partner
drives the hand to a hopeless 6♥ & you play it
well for two down but –12 IMPS.
Same
local couple , you hold ♠Q ♥xxxxx ♦J109x ♣KQx , your vulnerable partner bids 1♠. The
opponents bid 2NT for the minors. You now make a systemic bid which shows your
heart suit. Let’s use hand evaluation
concepts to count the danger signals .
1) you are vulnerable
, 2) you have a stiff in partners suit
3) you have length in the opponents
suits 4) you have your HCP’s located
in the opponents suit 5) the suit you
are announcing is anemic. Partner ends up playing 3♠ doubled for 800
against air so you lose another 12 IMPS.
Same
local couple as above,
at the other table. Chris Buchanan tells this story of how he won
8 IMPS due to poor hand evaluation at their
table. They do not understand the trick taking potential
of quick tricks and its correlation with opening bids. Chris was vul in 4th
seat & he held 14 HCP’s . Not just any 14 but the
worst hand you could imagine holding 14 HCP’s. One quick trick ♠QJx ♥QJx ♦KQx ♣QJxx , with the softest &
slowest cards imaginable. Chris said he stared at this collection & could
not believe it totaled 14 HCP’s. After long thought knowing partner was a passed hand , Chris decided to pass & threw
the hand in. At the other table , the player who has been known to brag “they do not need quick tricks to open” upgraded this
hand & opened 1NT ( 15 -17 ) ! His partner had a nice 9 HCP
, so she bid 3NT. They went 3 down vulnerable because the remaining
opponent’s HCP’s
naturally were quick tricks .
Since declarer had the “soft value HCP market cornered so to speak “ coupled
with the opponents suit length , declarer lacked the timing
to get his soft tricks established . The opponents won the race due to the quick nature of their HCP’s &
established their long suits , so -300 . Culbertson & Oswald Jacoby would not approve as they knew controls provide timing for declarer or defender especially in NT contracts. Trick taking concepts tied to the opening bid , now there is a thought ! Chris &
team won the match J
Partner
opens 1♠ vul vrs
NV opponents who
overcall 2♦. Do you make a negative double with ♠x ♥xxxx ♦Qx ♣KJxxxx ? Certainly you have
10 cards in the two unbid suits but are there danger
signs lurking ? Use your hand evaluation skills
! Yes you are vul
vrs not (1) , Qx
in opponents suit (2) , only 4 HCP in your two suits with 6 HCP overall
& a stiff in partners opening
bid suit. Do not encourage partner
to bid vul
with this hand. On the terrorist vulnerability , I
would double as you are taking terrorist action.
The rest of the vulnerabilities , the green card will
do nicely.
When
partner Q bids , she wants you to use your hand evaluation
skills. She is asking a question of do you have a decent hand ? Did my Q bid improve things ? Your job is to either encourage partner or place a wet blanket over the
proceedings. You do not just Q bid for the sake of bidding. Some players have
the annoying habit of plowing to slam or game rather than use hand evaluation to
identify the danger signals. Use your hand
evaluation skills.
Another danger signal is partner reverting to NT to show soft values
& to discourage further
bidding. I opened 1NT & they bid 2♦ for the majors . My partner held ♠xx
♥void
♦J109xx
♣AQJ109x so despite have only 8 HCP if partner has the magical
hand with not too much in hearts or
the majors , slam
is possible. My partner decided to improvise so instead of bidding
4NT for the minors , he bid 3♥ which pretty well
describes his void in hearts & his slam intentions. Partner puts the brakes on
with 3NT but they bid 4♥ vul . Partner makes a
forcing pass so around to the NT opener who now bids 4NT . This is the 2nd
time the brakes were applied on this auction as partner could bid a minor to co-operate. Doubling should show defense
measured in controls as they
should have their trump suit all but wrapped up . 4NT
should show soft values so let’s
get our 10 tricks fast & should also discourage further bidding. You get the
message & sign off in 5♣ which makes. Partner either is cooperating or not so it is best to listen.
The terrorist vulnerability is a danger
signal as partner can be very light for her opening bid. Leeway
is therefore required. Partner opens 1♦ nv vrs vul & you hold ♠Q109 ♥AKxx ♦void ♣AJxxxx
& bid
2♣. Partner bids 2NT which is not an
encouraging response. You bid 3♥ which expresses
interest in bigger & better things. Partner puts on the breaks with the death
response of 3NT. Lets count danger signals. You have a void in partners suit, you have heard two death responses of NT & partner is
on the terrorist vulnerability.
Despite all this ,
you make still another slam try of 4♣. Partner after making two
discouraging responses bids 4♠. You are all in with
your slam tries with your previous bidding , so you
bid 5♣ which makes . Responder ignored the danger signals & bid 6♣
anyway for -12 IMPS.
A beginner had this hand against
Bob Frender & I recently ♠Kxxxxx ♥KQx ♦x ♣KQx . Everybody vul I opened 1♣ & she overcalled 1♠ which
was passed around to me. I re-opened with a double so what do you bid ? The danger signals should be obvious
, poor suit , HCP’s in my suit but the main danger signal is spade
distribution. Both her partner’s pass & my double should show shortness. So where is the
spade length ? Behind her ,
as she found out when she bid 2♠. Bob Frender
doubled with his 6 card spade suit & -1100 was the result. Applying
patterns quite often reveal danger signals.
Ignoring
danger signals is another form of terrorism ,
single handedness & very poor hand
evaluation skills. Terrorists have no fear
as they are not concerned whether they blow
up themselves or their team. Bridge terrorists just bid for the sake of bidding. They follow the religion
of the 1990’s led by Osama Bin Bergen . He preaches ignore danger signals
of standard hand evaluation like
opening without the quick trick requirement ,
ignore bad suits for pre-empts ,
overcalls , and weak twos. His main dogma is to ignore the danger of adverse
vulnerability ( colour is
for kids ) . Live by the sword & die by
the sword. I think true followers of his religion are starting to
get killed off so he has not played on any serious team in the 2000’s. I do not miss him or his religion as he was
taking the game of Bridge in a backwards
direction L.