[bglover]

Bridge is a game that's full of numbers and counting, but, thank goodness, one doesn't have to be a mathematical genius to be successful at it (I am certainly not math whiz).

In my experience, where a lot of players get hung up is on the 26 for a major/28 for a minor game. These are merely GUIDELINES for reaching a probably-successful contract.

But, as guidelines they fall a tad short. Why? Because they forget to mention that there are other factors besides points and an 9 card fit needed to bid game or slam.

As an extreme example, let's say you pick up this hand:

x
AKJ10xxxxxx
Kx
Void

Thats 11 measly high card points.... yet it will take a minimum of 10 tricks 99% of the time (only time it won't is when partner and one defender is void in hearts. Indeed, some people would open this measly 11 count 2 clubs and they would not be far wrong to do so.

This hand is an extreme example of my favorite principle in bridge (and one that a lot of experienced players never fully learn): Long suits take tricks. This may seem terribly obvious on its face, but the problem lies in that many players do not account for that extra length during the bidding process.

Lets take another example, using 2 different hands.
In both instances partner opens 1NT and it's your bid:

HAND 1

Kxx
Qjxx
Qxxx
Qx

HAND 2

Qxx
xxx
AQxxxx
x

On hand 1 most would bid 2C stayman then rebid 3n if partner either shows spades or no 4 card major, and that's fine. 3N may or may not make on hand 1 as all of responder's points are "fitting cards"-- they fill in gaps for declarer's suits. All of declarers aces kings and jacks will improve because these fitting cards will assist declarer's cards in setting up tricks.

But notice that only the King of spades is likely to be a trick on its own. Yes, a heart trick is likely as well, eventually, but the suit may have to be led 2 times before that can occur. In other words, hand 1 is full of slow tricks. Slow tricks need to be developed by leading the suit more than once.

Hand 2 is a completely different animal. In 3NT, this hand is likely to take 6 tricks on its own if opener has the king of diamonds. Even if he doesn't, but holds Jxx, the likelihood of 5 diamond tricks is extremely high.

Many players I know (not just beginners) would merely make an invitational 2NT bid with Hand 2 (a few would make a diamond transfer if they were playing 4 way transfers, but let's not go there for now).

In theory this may not seem so bad-- the hand only contains 8 high card points and we all learned to invite with 8 and bid 3N with 10. But, a 2N invitation here is WRONG. This hand's trick POTENTIAL is much higher than the hand with 10 high card points. That 1st hand has a trick potential of maybe 3 (it has other good points to it tho).

Now, I capitalized "potential" for a reason. It is entirely possible that hand 2 will take exactly 1 trick-- the D Ace. Given that partner has opened 1NT this is not likely.... but it could happen (and has happened to everyone who plays bridge). If we are unlucky enough to find partner with 2 measly diamonds (i.e., no diamond honor) for his NT opening we are going to be sorely disappointed. And our hand's value is going to drop like a lead weight. Nonetheless, given the hand's wealth of potential tricks, that should not stop responder from bidding 3N over 1.

Note that, given the right cards for his 1NT bid, even 6 diamonds would be possible (but I wouldn't suggest looking for a slam here).

Note that, despite the headline, I have talked very little about "real" integer type numbers. Successful contracts require long suits with some fitting honors OR lots of high card points between the 2 hands (the more HCPs you have, the less you need long suits, and visa versa).

Take 2 hands which each have good long suits (Akxxxx or better) and a modicum more in high card strength and you can easily bid slam on a lot less than 33 points (this does require some extra distributional values, such as a void in one of the hands).

Don't fall in love with high card points when you bid. Remember that the longer a suit is (assuming its either good enough on its own or that partner is known to have some support), the less in HCPs you need to make games.

Remember that hand with 10 cards in it.... Not that 10 baggers occur very often, but it illustrates this point nicely...

[Laird]

I'm with you on this one.... It can be fun at the bridge table to see opponents Jacks, Queens and Kings fall on a wee 2 of clubs...


kind regards
John

[JRG]

Just a comment on the first hand. Yes you expect to make game on this hand; no, I would not open it 2C. A 2C bid guarantees defensive strength (or does in any partnership I've played in).

So, my preference is NAMYATS (open the hand 4C to show a GOOD 4H bid) or, lacking that convention, I would open it 4H.

For what it's worth.

[Gerardo]

I had a hand almost like that one (with the Q in the long suit instead of the little stiff x ;D, TWICE ), in a span of 2-3 months. Long suit Spades once, Hearts the other.
Both times stopped in 5, one rightfully so, to receive the lead of the side suit A (of course), the other after receiving a faulty crodo response (partner playing for 30 years, won't play anything else, and still doesn't know how to answer with two Aces).
Some people suggested me to open 6M. Horrible. You may not make it, or 7 may be lay down.
Guess it's a good hand for Precision, with the asking bid in the side suit

[bglover]

Just so the reader understands, NAMYATS is a convention devised to handle these rare freak hands.

Opener, with a long major and 1 or no outside A or K (this all depends on partnership agreements somewhat) opens 4c to show a heart hand and 4d to show a spade hand.

Now, responder with lots of outside controls can place the contract at 4, 5, 6 or 7, as opener is showing a suit that should have 1 or no losers even facing a void in partner's hand.

It is useful when it comes up, but it doesn't come up often, so I wouldn't get too concerned for now. If, when I picked up that hand, I was playing NAMYATS it would have been useful (FY! i opened it 6 hearts because it was too hard to bid without NAMYATS and I didn't want to let the opponents exchange too much information).