Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Losing-Trick Count
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
{{short description|Method of hand evaluation in contract bridge}} In the [[card game]] [[contract bridge]], the '''Losing-Trick Count''' (LTC) is a method of [[hand evaluation]] that is generally only considered suitable to be used in situations where a [[Suit (cards)#Trumps|trump suit]] has been established and when shape and fit are more significant than high card points (HCP) in determining the optimum level of the contract. The method is generally not considered suitable for no trump or misfit hands;<ref name = Klinger>{{cite book |last = Klinger |first = Ron |author-link = Ron Klinger |title = The Modern Losing Trick Count |edition = 2nd |publisher = Modern Bridge Publications |location = Sydney, Australia |page = 13 |year = 2011 |isbn = 978-0-9587016-5-5}}</ref> also, the trump suit is generally considered to require at least eight cards in length with no partner holding fewer than three.<ref name = Crow>{{cite book |last1 = Crowhurst |first1 = Eric |last2 = Kambites |first2 = Andrew |title = Understanding Acol, The Good Bidding Guide |publisher = Victor Gollancz Ltd, in association with Peter Crawley |location = London |pages = 62–66 |year = 1992 |isbn = 0-575-05253-8}}</ref> However, the LTC method of hand evaluation has been used successfully to evaluate unbalanced and balanced opening hands, and overcalls, since 1938 (combined with ‘quick trick’ evaluation and defined biddable suits),<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Australian One Club System|last=Noall|first=William|publisher=Angus and Robertson|year=1959|location=Sydney, Australia|pages=vii}}</ref> and by itself since 2017, before a fit and trump suit have been established based on the premise that a fit could usually be found later.<ref name = Lynch >{{Cite book|title=IMPERSPICUITY A Losing Trick Count Bridge Bidding System|last=Lynch|first=Sean|publisher=Amazon|year=2017|location=Kindle book|pages=17}}</ref> Based on a set of empirical rules, the number of "losing tricks" held in each of the partnership's hands is estimated and their sum deducted from either 24 (the result is the number of tricks the partnership can expect to take when playing in their established suit, assuming normal suit distributions and assuming required finesses work about half the time) <ref name=Klinger/> or 18 (the result is the bidding level the partnership can expect to make their contract when playing in their established suit, assuming normal suit distributions and assuming required finesses work about half the time). F. Dudley Courtenay originally referred to the latter option as the “Rule of 18”.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Losing Trick Count - A book of card technique|last=Courtenay|first=Dudley F.|year=1935|isbn=9781447486480|pages=Chapter IV "The rule of 18"}}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)