For What It’s Worth – Hand Evaluation at Bridge

Prepared by Jon Gustafson (June 2, 2007)

GUIDING PRINCIPLE: Accurate evaluation of “playing strength” depends upon the valuation of your (high) card and distributional strength, adjusted by the degree of fit and mesh of high cards with your partner’s hand, and adjustments due to the relative position of the opponent’s cards.

The playing strength of a bridge hand is only as good as your fit with partner’s hand. But there are many different aspects of “fit.” Here’s some examples:

Example 1.  You hold QJ1075 3 QJ1042 K6.

Partner opens 1 and you respond 1.  Now if partner raises to 2, Lawrence says "This is a good hand and you would go to four spades." But if partner rebids 2, this same hand has "little of sure value to offer partner...You could procede [sic] with two diamonds, but gingerly."  Interesting, isn't it? In one auction your nine-HCP hand is worth a jump to game. In a different auction, it is almost not worth taking a second call.

Example 2.  Consider this 13-HCP hand: A62 A853 J54 A86 and compare it with this 17-HCP monster: K7 KQJ95 KQ10 K97.  Which hand would you rather have? Right, it's a trick question! Opposite partner's vulnerable 3 opening bid, Lawrence argues that the first hand is an easy 3NT response. The aces represent both fast tricks and control, and the ace of clubs should solidify partner's suit. Nine tricks should be easy unless the opponents lead diamonds and have 5 fast diamond tricks. But the second hand opposite partner's vulnerable 3 opening bid could be a disaster. Assume that the AQJxxx of spades is behind you and that RHO has both red aces. A red suit lead followed by a spade switch followed by the second red ace means 8 tricks for the opponents, which means down 4 for us.

From The Complete Book on Hand Evaluation in Contract Bridge, by Mike Lawrence, published by Devyn Press, 1983 (excerpts from a review by Henry Sun, Fifthchair.org).

Example 3. “I only had 5 points” (from Improve your Play, by Larry Matheny, published on NorthernColoradoBridge.com, 2007)

Hand #21
Dlr	W
Vul	N/S

	KQ1072
	AJ10752
	Q
	4

	AJ3
	983
	A752
	AQ3

	85
	64
	KJ10986
	KJ2

	964
	KQ
	43
	1098765

West	North	East	South
1NT	DBL*	RDBL	2
Pass	2	Pass	2
Pass	3	Pass	4
All Pass

*shows majors or minors

HAND EVALUTAION MEASURES: Provide a dynamic estimate of your playing strength, when combined with information from your partner (and your opponents), allow the partnership to determine the strain and level of the final contract.

There are many different measures in use by bridge players. Some examples:

Early historical methods for assessing overall hand strength:

§ counting tricks, assessing both winners and losers (simple but sometimes overlooked)

§ honor count based upon quick tricks from the Culbertson era (1930’s)

Widely used and refined methods for assessing individual and combined hand strength:

§ the 4-3-2-1 honor count with distributional adjustments (credited to Milton Work and popularized by Charles Goren, 1953)

§ Sheinwold Point Count (Kaplan & Sheinwold, 1958)

§ Roth Point Count (Alvin Roth, 1968)

Methods primarily designed to assist in fit valuation:

§ Losing Trick Count (Courtenay 1937, Klinger 1989)

§ The Law of Total Tricks (Cohen 1993, Lawrence & Wirgren 1998)

Additional adjustments and guidelines:

§ Bergen’s adjustments (Bergen, 1995)

- 4333 and 5332 are bad shapes, 5431, 55xx, 64xx are good shapes

- the rule of 20 (or perhaps 19): if the sum of the lengths of your two longest suits + high cards in those suits is at least 20 (19) then open

The Sheinwold Point Count system:

Initial Hand Valuation
high cards	A=4, K=3, Q=2, J=1
shortness	doubleton=1, singleton=2, void=3
aceless	-1
3 or 4 aces	worth more
Q or J	only worth full value when accompanied by an ace or king
singleton K or doubleton Q or J	not worth full value
Declarer’s Hand Valuation
5^th card in trump suit	+1
6^th card in trump suit	+3
7^th card in trump suit	+5
Dummy’s Hand Valuation
4+ trumps and a doubleton	+1
4+ trumps and a singleton	+3
4+ trumps and a void	+5

Points required for important contracts:

Contract	Points Required
3NT	25
4 of Major	26
5 of Minor	29
Small slam	33
Grand slam	37

It is essential that you and your partners have a firm, precise understanding of the range of strength shown by every bid. It will not be very useful to have an accurate estimation of your hand’s playing strength and not be able to communicate this information. The combined strength of the two hands determines what level you can reach and bids must be well defined in order to assess the combined strength.

As we saw in the examples above that your evaluation of playing strength will evolve from the time you pick up your hand until the last pass. You are successful if there are no last minute adjustments to your estimate AFTER the opening lead.

Example 4. Evaluation in action. (from Daytime Duplicate Bridge Club, Monday, May 21, 2007)

Brd #7
Dlr	S
Vul	Both

	AJ75
	AQ83
	J
	A953

	K96
	1095
	Q652
	J87

	32
	J76
	AK1087
	Q64

	Q1084
	K42
	943
	K102

West	North	East	South
			Pass
Pass	1	1	1
Pass	3	Pass	4
All Pass

Discussion points:

§ North bids 1 – 15 high + 2 distribution, the stiff J counts for 0

§ East overcalls 1 – 10 high + 1 distribution, good diamond suit probably worth mentioning

§ South bids 1 – 8 high + 0 distribution, bid shows 6-9 points

§ North bids 3 – 15 high + 3 distribution, the bid shows 16-18 points exactly, 3 aces is a plus, but not enough to upgrade to 19 points

§ South bids 4 – is at the top of his 6-9, worst case 8+16=24 combined but all his cards are working

§ If west were to carelessly lead a club NS might make six, so east’s diamond bid was important

§ NS easily makes 5 spades losing only a diamond and a club

Example 5. A sign of life – finding a fit is everything. (from Daytime Duplicate Bridge Club, Monday, May 21, 2007)