[inquiry]

---

First hand liberated from ZAR's slam download page. Here is how ZAR described the count.

BEST contract, actually played on double-dummy, is 7SP, Controls = 10, ControlPoints = 32
N - Zar Points (a+ + (a-d) = 13
Controls N = 3, HCP N = 7------------------------> N Zar Points = 23
S - Zar Points (a+ + (a-d) = 16
Controls S = 7, HCP S = 16------------------------> S Zar Points = 39
=============================================> NS Zar Points = 62
============================================> Zar Points + Fit= 66

Ok initial count, before you start bidding, seems almost right to me (hehehe). I agree the legth count, I agree the hcp count, I agree the control count, so start before bidding with North with 23, South 39. However, south seems to have a concentration of hcp in three suits, and has more than 15 ZAR points, isn't this worht an extra one point? I woul dhave thought so, raising South's count to 40, for NS ZAR points of 63 (one more than ZAR).

Next South opens the bidding, let's say 1♣, forcing, and north bid 1♠ (5+ suit). South's hand now gains 2 points for the ♠ honors, yes? Those would be "fit points". South also gains 4 more points for a singleton with two "extra trumps" (a superfit). Seems to me that is 6 additional points. So I calculate the ZAR fit poinst as 70, not 66. Am I wrong?

What if South opens 1♠, how does that effect the evaluation. South still has the +1 for concentration of strengh. Now north gets +1 pt for his [so]K, and he has two extra trumps and a singleton, so he gets +4 more fit. So this now totals, 69 ZAR points, and not 70,

Now, how come I calculate 69 or 70 Zar fit points and Zar gets only 66?

I have a bunch more examples, but I thought I would start with this one to see how come my numbers differ from Zar's. Any thoughts?

Ben

[flytoox]

Ben, why waste your time on it? I believe you can bid this grand with natural bidding. I jsut dont believe any sys which claim they never miss any slam or game.

hongjun

[mikestar]

Ben,

Per Zar's web page you don't count both honors in partners suit and superfit, to avoid duplication.

[inquiry]

Ah.. yes, forgot that. That explains the big difference between my count and his. Next, how about that concentration point related to honors in three suit. Would you add it for South's hand? Does singleton ACE worry you for the concentration issue?

Ben

[Zar]

*** Ben wrote: "First hand liberated from ZAR's slam download page. Here is how ZAR described the count.

BEST contract, actually played on double-dummy, is 7SP, Controls = 10, ControlPoints = 32
N - Zar Points (a+ + (a-d) = 13
Controls N = 3, HCP N = 7------------------------> N Zar Points = 23
S - Zar Points (a+ + (a-d) = 16
Controls S = 7, HCP S = 16------------------------> S Zar Points = 39
=============================================> NS Zar Points = 62
============================================> Zar Points + Fit= 66
<

Ben,

This hand is from the comparison analysis boards. This means that I count ONLY basic Zar Points OR Basic Zar Points plus fit ( simple +3 per supertrump).

Actually, it's the computer who does this, of course. This means that ALL YOUR thoughts above are corect, but the computer does no adjustments IN THIS comparison case.

The reason is "fair comparison" meaning that the OTHER methods I compare against are with a coparable SIMPLICITY. I cannot put all the adjustments for Zar Points and leave the Goren, Bergen, 5-3-1 etc. methods "bare-bones", right?

Certainly, any guy who plays Zar Points will do the adjustments like you and bid the GRAND the way you suggest.

ZAR

[Zar]

*** hongjun wrote: "Ben, why waste your time on it?
<

We just do it for fun, Hongjun :-)

>
I jsut dont believe any sys which claim they never miss any slam or game.
<

I don't either, my friend. We are in the same wagon here:

ZAR

[flytoox]

Zar, on May 22 2004, 04:03 AM, said:

*** hongjun wrote: "Ben, why waste your time on it?
<

We just do it for fun, Hongjun :-)

>
I jsut dont believe any sys which claim they never miss any slam or game.
<

I don't either, my friend. We are in the same wagon here:

ZAR

Sorry Zar, no offend intended. THanks for your tolerance.

Hongjun

[Zar]

*** hongjun wrote: "Sorry Zar, no offend intended. Thanks for your tolerance.
<

No offence taken - I understand that you take the title of the article "Never Miss a Game Again" literary, but when you follow the discussions and the comparisons, you'll see that nobody actually thinks that any method is that perfect.

In fact if there were such a method, we'll all stop playing bridge :-)

ZAR

[inquiry]

I have been examing the problem of the upgrade for concentration of hcp. Basically, when to subtract points seems obvious to me, but I have fuzzy zone on the 1 point bump up for....

One point upgrade for concentration of hcp in three suits (with 15+HCP) or in two suits (with 11-14hcp).

First question is does this apply to REAL hcp, or hcp+control points? (am I counting Aces worth 6 to climb to 15 or not).

Then there is two additional problems, what if I total the right kind of 15 or so points, in three suits, but one of the suits is a singleton ACE (I have not been counting that, as I find it hard to beleive singleton ACE is helping me set that suit up). Think... ♠AQxxx ♥AJxxx ♦A ♣xx

Next, is if I have 15 hcp in three suits, and then more points in the third, of if I ahve 14 pionts in two suits, but them more points spread throught out the other suits. would I still bump up the count (here I have been, because they do help set up the suit of course).

[Zar]

*** Ben wrote: “First question is does this apply to REAL hcp, or hcp+control points? (am I counting Aces worth 6 to climb to 15 or not).
<

No. It’s just concentration of the “pictures” so to say.

Please note, that the 15-HCP boundary is there more as a guideline rather than “splitting hairs”, meaning that when you look at your hand, based on your overall HCP power, you know if the “pictures” are spread or concentrated – it’s an Yes/No question which gives you the 1 pt.

>
Then there is two additional problems, what if I total the right kind of 15 or so points, in three suits, but one of the suits is a singleton ACE (I have not been counting that, as I find it hard to beleive singleton ACE is helping me set that suit up). Think... ♠AQxxx ♥AJxxx ♦A ♣xx
<

Again – do you think you have spread honors here or not – I think the answer yes, you get 1 pt which you wouldn’t get with the hand ♠Qxxxx ♥AJxxx ♦A ♣Ax. This takes care of the AQxxx and the AJxxxx combinations of honors (which is the goal of the entire exercise :-).

>
Next, is if I have 15 hcp in three suits, and then more points in the third, of if I have 14 points in two suits, but them more points spread throught out the other suits. would I still bump up the count (here I have been, because they do help set up the suit of course).
<

I am not sure I get it exactly what you mean, but again – it’s an Yes/No question which you can answer yourself and decide to get the 1 pt upgrade. Hope that helps, Ben:

ZAR

[Trpltrbl]

Bridge is a game of constantly adjusting and re-adjusting. It cannot be written in black or white, and lot of it is and always will be somewhat gray. What works on 1 hand might not work on the next 7.
If you are going play bridge with only black and white, you'll be losing a lot.
Hope you won't.

Mike

[DrTodd13]

You have to use some hand evaluation mechanism and we should all therefore strive to use the best one. The old 4-3-2-1 system is certainly easy to remember but all experts will bid game with significantly less than 25 if there is a double fit, for example. How much less than 25 should I have with a double fit and still bid game? I'd say that in expert circles this is accomplished more by feel (after having played 10,000+ hands) than by a strict accounting. I'd thought about doing something like ZAR for a while but never had the time. It takes into account all the things that experts upgrade or degrade a hand for and derives valuations for each such feature based on a system of equations. It is still relatively simple and I think will allow a lot of people to reach good games that they wouldn't otherwise reach. It essentially codifies much of expert wisdom.

[Zar]

*** DrTodd13 wrote: "I'd say that in expert circles this is accomplished more by feel (after having played 10,000+ hands) than by a strict accounting.
<

That's the problem - they teach you to use the 4-3-2-1 but they don't use it themselves :-)

>
I'd thought about doing something like ZAR for a while but never had the time. It takes into account all the things that experts upgrade or degrade a hand for and derives valuations for each such feature...
<

"For each such feature" is a bit too ambitious, but I believe for MOST of the IMPORTANT ones. AND it is not a CLOSED system, nither THE perfect one by any means - it's just the best there is, as I mentioned once :-)

And always trying to get better :-)

ZAR

[Zar]

Hello:

Bellow is a message CLOSELY related to the Fine Tuning not only of Zar Points, but bidding systems in general.

The Offensive Bidding numbers for Zar Points have been posted to the main Zar Points thread “Zar Points – useful or waste of energy” while the defensive bidding once are in the “Competitive Bidding” thread for Zar Points.

IF you are interested, the corresponding numbers for:

- Goren offensive;
- Goren defensive;
- Milton (HCP) offensive;
- Milton (HCP) defensive;

are also available. They would enable you to “check” the probabilities against the overloading of the bids in your system – you might be surprised by the picture.

Let me know if this wouldn’t be “too much” for the purposes of this forum:

ZAR