| Many people have asked for my reaction to the
Mike Lawrence (& Anders Wirgren) book called "I Fought the
LAW." This book was written some 12 years after I wrote To
Bid or Not to Bid (the 1992 bestseller on the LAW of Total Tricks).
Although the "LAW" became very popular in the 1990's and
remains popular today, these authors decided to  fight
it. I've read their book and these are my conclusions:
1) They think the LAW works on many deals, but not all. (We already
knew that).
2) They suggest a (complicated) formula to fine-tune the LAW. It has
to do mainly with counting distribution in suits that have losers. This
will be confusing for most readers, but the point they try to make is
that depending on how your short suits are distributed in the
partnership, the "Total Tricks" will change. I agree with
this. It is really just another (more complicated) form of
"Adjusting" which is in Chapter 9 of To
Bid or Not to Bid.
3) They were unfairly critical (I thought it uncalled for) in some of
their claims. They made some factual errors regarding data in my book.
Why let facts get in the way of a good story? (Some of the statistical
claims are sloppy and inaccurate). I would have preferred their tone to
be : "The LAW is a nice breakthrough that helped many players, but
we think we can improve upon it." Instead, their tone was
"Larry is telling half-truths and we want to show you why you
shouldn't believe in the LAW."
 The way I see
it, To Bid or Not to Bid is a book for
the masses. Players apply the LAW (advanced students using
"adjustments") and do quite well. People are tougher
competitive bidders when using the LAW. I teach throughout the world and
see how the LAW (in its simplest form) is so helpful to so many
(especially those of intermediate ability). The Lawrence/Wirgren
book gets too complex. The authors might be onto a slight
adjustment/improvement/upgrade, but it is impractical for most players
to apply it.
"Fight the LAW?" Any music fan knows how the song
ends."..And the LAW won!"
|
