BBO Discussion Forums: Hand evaluation - BBO Discussion Forums

Partner has 15 to a bad 19 balanced with 4 or 5 diamonds, which of these hands would you prefer ?





I had an argument with partner about the evaluation of this and would be interested in hearing opinions.

I'll take the ace.

Along the lines of Jeff Rubens "In and Out Valuation", an Ace is surely more valuable than a lone Q in a side suit, and less valuable in partner's long suit (our trump suit). Similarly Queens in partner's long suit are more likely to be working than Queens in side suits. The two hands appear close, but I think the first is 0.5 tricks more than the second. Not a really big margin to me. We could argue that 2-3 ♠ ruffs are more likely with intermediate trumps, but that assumes partner has K108+ to draw trumps at some point.

Change the second hand to ♠10 ♥A752 ♦Q94 ♣J9742 and we'd have the best of the 3.

What prompted the discussion was that the hand opposite was AQJx, K10, Kxxx, Axx and the hand with the quacks was a hell of a lot more use than the one with the ace (or the one SteveMoe gives).

I felt that QJ together was at least full value 3 points, partner felt he had a "useless collection of quacks", wasn't sure if I was just resulting, the only slightly freakishly fitting card was 10♥.

 Cyberyeti, on 2012-September-19, 05:40, said:

I prefer the first one, quacks are more useful in No Trumps, which is where we're headed. I like the supporting honours in partner's suit, and the ♥J supporting the Queen is good too.

The first one is more useful if we play in notrumps, because the diamonds will provide entries, and the hearts are more likely to be a source of tricks.

If we're playing in diamonds, I prefer the second, because I can take two ruffs without wasting any of my honours.

I prefer the 1st because it is now less likely that I have to worry about inviting vs that kind of absurdly large range of hands.