[Flame]

Let assume the law of total trick is accurate, lets also simplify thev law by one rule "bid to your number of trumps level" I believe (this isnt my idea, i think Richard believe it too) that always bidding to the right level suggested by the law demage more then help.
Lets assume partner opened 2S weak usually 6 cards. i have 4 cards support and cheking the law say i should compete to the 4 level. Imo doing this is totally wrong,
I was in a great position, i knew the exact number of trumps we had, i was in control, i knew till where we sould compete and with one bid i gave all this information to my opponents which now know everything i do and also see their hands. Premptive fit my thory easy, partner bid and put me in chanrge, no resson to give him back information, he isnt suppose to make more decisions.But i believe not only prempts fit here. Lets assume partner opened or overcalled 1S , and i have 4/5 card fit, my math is poor but i bet the chances of partner having more then 5 card suit are not bigger then 10%, so again i know in about 90% where we belong, opponents dont, i can always bid to the level which might help partner to keep compete if he got better then just 5 cards but that just 10%, on the other 90% i just helped my opponents.
Now offcourse this is too simplified, but thats the idea. and no i dont suggest never bidding to the right level, i suggest (like Richard) to sometime do and sometime dont, so opponents cant relay on my bid.
What do you think.

[Echognome]

1) I'm assuming you mean the Law as stated by Larry Cohen, and not Verne.
2) I'm not willing to assume the LAW (by Cohen) is correct when it seems to be off over half the time.
3) I don't think any evaluation method where you ignore the rest of your hand and vulnerability is anything I'm interested in. (4 card support can be in the form of 4333 or of 4072!)
4) Perhaps this last point is what Richard is suggestioning when saying "sometimes do and sometimes do not", but then we should be involving judgment.

[Winstonm]

It shouldn't be LOTT but GOTT: Guideline of Total Tricks. As such it should be only one of many factors taken into consideration before choosing a bid. To follow LOTT/GOTT slavelike is to play "cliche'" bridge - third hand high, lead through strength and up to weakness, etc. - easier than thinking but far less satisfying.

Winston

Bonus points: Decipher this: "Gort. Klaatu barada nikto."

[hrothgar]

Echognome, on Sep 9 2005, 03:12 PM, said:

4) Perhaps this last point is what Richard is suggestioning when saying "sometimes do and sometimes do not", but then we should be involving judgment.

Nope...

I believe that being predictable is a bad thing...
Its too easy for the opponents to optimize arround what you're doing.

Accordingly, there are lots of bidding examples where I prefer to adopt mixed strategies.

[1eyedjack]

I expect that there are better examples to illustrate your point, Flame, because
2H-4H raise could be on
(1) 4 card support and a bust (advance sacrifice) , or
(2) 2 card support and a 16 count (to make).

Oppo may have a fair stab at guessing you have type 1 if he has a strong hand with short Hearts, perhaps, but it will not always be clear.

[coyot]

I don't think you should worry about being too predictable. As far as I know, in most cases benefits from
1) reaching the right contract
or
2) giving partner the appropriate information
are usually worth MORE than
1) giving the same information to opps.

In other words, if you know LOTT and know exactly how to use it, how to make adjustments to it etc., you'll be long-term better off than without it, despite telling ops.
(The beauty of LOTT is that it usually works and yields good results.)
(In fact, your ability to adjust the amount of tricks by other factors than the length of fit will assure that your information is not 100% reliable and usable by opps.)

Noone thinks bidding 1NT is bad because it tells opps what your hand looks like - because telling partner AND taking the 1NT spot is more important. The same applies to LOTT.

[Double !]

Winstonm, on Sep 9 2005, 08:24 AM, said:

Winston

Bonus points: Decipher this: "Gott. Klatu barada nicto."

unable to decipher because all of the electricity in the area just shut down and some stranger just told a lot of people that we are being watched!

[Flame]

coyot, on Sep 9 2005, 05:56 PM, said:

I don't think you should worry about being too predictable. As far as I know, in most cases benefits from
1) reaching the right contract
or
2) giving partner the appropriate information
are usually worth MORE than
1) giving the same information to opps.

In other words, if you know LOTT and know exactly how to use it, how to make adjustments to it etc., you'll be long-term better off than without it, despite telling ops.
(The beauty of LOTT is that it usually works and yields good results.)
(In fact, your ability to adjust the amount of tricks by other factors than the length of fit will assure that your information is not 100% reliable and usable by opps.)

Noone thinks bidding 1NT is bad because it tells opps what your hand looks like - because telling partner AND taking the 1NT spot is more important. The same applies to LOTT.

What you said about the ability to adjust is wrong, you are giving your opponents exact information, they know that you have "law X leve"l and thats exactly what they need to make their right call.
About other points, i dont say you should never give your partner information, but you should know that not all situations are the same.
Its well known that when we open the bidding we are in contructive mode, we are looking for games and slams and trying to send as accurate information as possible about our strengh and shape to partner, therefore 1nt is the ultimate bid.
But in other situations we lose that need for accurenly , for example when they open 1D i bid 1S with 7-18 hcp, and when they open a strong 1C it can even be weaker and bad 4 cards. Now lets say partner open weak 2S, and i have level 3 by the law, what benefit will come from givving my partner the information about it ? he has prempt he isnt suppose to bid again. Im not saying bidding 3S doenst have a point, many time its the bid that will help preventing the opponents from reaching their 4H, but there is no need to bid it for givving partner the information, he doesnt need it.

[the hog]

Please guys, its not Gott, but Gort. If you don't get it right the earth really will stand still.
This, together with "Forbidden Planet" and "Dune" are amongst the best sf films made imho. Who remembers the Krell?

[mike777]

The_Hog, on Sep 10 2005, 04:00 AM, said:

Please guys, its not Gott, but Gort. If you don't get it right the earth really will stand still.
This, together with "Forbidden Planet" and "Dune" are amongst the best sf films made imho. Who remembers the Krell?

Dune=terrible movie..but great books. have reread often...//Gort=cool

As for "do not be predictable"= is this really winning bridge at top levels...maybe I am too ancient..but I want p to rely on me. ..See worm...see the son......

[Chamaco]

A friend of mine has followed the classes held by Giampaolo Rinaldi, the coach of the JR National Italian Team, and he told me that Rinaldi teaches:

"When you make a preemptive raise, always support with 3-4 card fit, but beware of raising with a 5+ fit.
Most times *good* opps are able to reevaluate to slam because of that"

[the hog]

Very sensible views Mauro. It often pays to raise only to the 3 level with a 5 card fit, even when playing 5 card Ms.

[pbleighton]

Ron -

Which Dune movie - the 1984 version (I liked it a lot, though it didn't really *get* the book, which is my favorite sf book), or the made-for-tv miniseries of a few years ago, which didn't have the production values, but which was truer to the book?

Peter

[mike777]

Chamaco, on Sep 10 2005, 05:23 AM, said:

A friend of mine has followed the classes held by Giampaolo Rinaldi, the coach of the JR National Italian Team, and he told me that Rinaldi teaches:

"When you make a preemptive raise, always support with 3-4 card fit, but beware of raising with a 5+ fit.
Most times *good* opps are able to reevaluate to slam because of that"

Well keep in mind we have "FTL" fought the law now, so we can evaluate our hands and the opp hands and bid to FTL levels. BTW FTL can help improve ones judgement on normal constructive hands as well as preemptive ones for those who are seeking to improve.

[P_Marlowe]

Hi,

one important point is missing,
if you follow the LAW like a "slave",
you tell the opponents something,
but you also put them under maximal pressure
with regard to space at a reasonable
safty level.
And to a certain degree "cliche" bridge helps
to safe stamina in a long match.

If this arguments are enough to counter the
negative points is up to you to decide.

With kind regards
Marlowe

[SoTired]

Everyone remembers that "Klaatu barada nikto" is the phrase to save the world.
The Bruce Campbell movie, "Army of Darkness," also used "Klaatu barada nikto" as the magic phrase (which he forgot).