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

On May 3, 9:43=A0pm, Chris <chriswigg...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On May 1, 7:35=A0am, 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 =A0point 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 =A0of 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 =A0
>
> I have used the Roth Point count for several years. =A0As time has gone
> on, I've added other valuation methods to supplement it: the losing
> trick count, cover cards from Rosenkranz, and Lawrence-Wirgen's short
> suit total and working points. =A0I will also try hand visualization:
> generating two or three hands based on what you know about partner's
> hands.
>
> I heartily agree with the comment below that hand valuation techniques
> must be simple enough to use at the table. =A0As with all other human
> activities, a range of capabilities exist. =A0Some persons can use very
> complex techniques with fractional valuations. =A0Most can't.
>
> Also, "judgment" seems to be the refuge of lazy persons. =A0Many times
> I've heard persons say they are using "judgment" when what they were
> really saying was that they hadn't used quantitative valuations and
> guides, many of which would indicate that their judgment was off.
>
> I would add the following corrections to the others already mentioned.
>
> Insofar that the Roth Point count encourages opening light, shapely
> hands, that would seem to be a direct antecedent of "Rule of 20"
> openings which are standard in my neck of the woods.
>
> The footnote on page 13 does not say that 10 HCP assures 2 quick
> tricks. =A0It says "Experience has shown that 10 HCP will usually
> produce at least two defensive tricks."
>
> Roth Rubens tell you that the Roth Point count is not sacrosance. =A0In
> the chapter titled "When Not to Count Roth Points," they say "[I]t is
> only fitting that we conclude this book with a discussion of when not
> to count your Roth Points. =A0 There are certain times when you can
> decide the proper action simply on the basis of logical inference, and
> counting your points will confuse the issue."
>
> In short, if someone is going to use only one (simple) valuation
> technique, I've felt comfortable teaching them the Roth Point count.
> Encouraging light openings with shape and requiring opener and
> responder to adjust the value of their hands as the auction develops
> are good things from my point of view.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

It an interesting thing to recall that in the 1958 edition of 'Bridge
is a Partner****p Game,' there are so-called Roth-Stone-isms (around a
couple dozen, if I remember it right) where in the R-S experience
point count did not apply.  One of them that I remember went along the
lines, if you have a 5-5 two suiter and partner has 4 cards in one of
your 5-baggers, you should assume he has at most a doubleton in your
second suit.

I never ran a simulation on this, but my experience is that for the
most part, Roth and Stone were right on the money on this, aside from
the occasional 4333 opp 5521 shapes that we all run into from time to
time.

I remember having a copy of those few pages some years ago but then
losing them in the mists of time.

If someone has them, it might be worthwhile just to post the 'isms'
without any expanding text or examples (that way, Matt Granovetter
won't be able to go after someone for copyright infringement rofl).

Henrysun909