Re: What's wrong with the Roth point count?

On May 1, 4:35 am, Stig Holmquist <stigfjor...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Forty years ago two oustanding bridge players, Alvin Roth and Jeff
> Rubens, wrote the book 'Modern Bridge Bidding Complete".
> It featured the Roth Point count Method.
>
> This method is similar to the British combination distributuin count.
> It is based on the standard Work  point count for HCP plus Goren's
> short suit count of 1,2 and 3 for ddoubletons, singletons and voids
> resp. but also adds points for suits longer than five cards.
> Specifically it counts 1 pt for each card over five for any major suit
> but counts such length points only for "good" minor suits having at
> least two  of the top three honor cards.
>
> Has any r.g.b. member ever used this method and if so, what are its
> shortcomngs? It specifically does not count quick tricks.Why is this
> method never mentioned any more?
>
> Stig Holmquist

At the risk of adding fuel to Stig's ongoing diatribe against anything
related to hand evaluation that does not include quick tricks, I will
note that Modern Bridge Bidding Complete was one of the first books I
read after 5 Weeks To Winning Bridge.  My level of bridge expertise at
that level can be demonstrated by the laughs I got at the 40/8
duplicate when I took a backwards finesse by leading the A from the AQ
in my hand towards dummy's Jxxx in a game contract where we had 36
points between us.  (We were using weak2s, but I hadn't yet learned
how to handle balanced 26 counts, so I opened 2nt and my father raised
me to 3mt with his 10 count)

I didn't understand much of MBBC at that time, but I went back to it
from time to time as I got more experience at the game.

For the most part, I found the initial evaluation techniques to be
sound, over the years.  6 card majors of any quality are worth extras
because of the greatly enhanced chance of an 8 card major suit fit,
and the length will go far to eviserating lack of strength because of
the length, so that

xx

opposite

J9xxxx

is still a likely 3 loser trump suit only.

the additional requirement of 2 of the top 3 honors for adding minor
suit length is also a good one because of the likelihood that such
hands are going to play in 3nt.  (One small correction I'd make is
that if AQxxxx = 1 extra point, then surely Axxxxxx should be worth 1
extra point as well as Kx opposite either holding gives you a chance
to run the suit).

The irony of the book is that it labels opening bids (14+ total points
plus at least 10 HCPs) hands that Roth would never in a million years
have opened, e.g.

Jxxxxx
Qxx
VOID
AKxx

10 hcps + 1 length point + 3 shortness points.

As an aside, I recommend Jon Drabble's book on hand evaluation and the
MIDMAC system.  Of all the hand evaluation things I've read, his
strikes me as being both the easiest to use and the most accurate
overall, nothwithstanding some hands which strike me as double dummy
bidding, e.g., when he manages to stay in 1nt with

Qxxx
Axx
Kxx
xxx

opposite

x
KQxx
AQxx
AQxx

on the sequence 1c 1s 1nt (showing a minimum [!] opening bid due to
the severe reduction caused by the singleton in responder's suit).

Still, his system ideas are interesting and his hand evaluation
discussion is excellent.

By the way, he substitutes controls for quick tricks.  I hope that's
not too much of a problem for you Stig, rofl.

Henrysun909