An Analysis of the Law of Total Tricks Matt Ginsberg,Eugene,OR In a recent"Bridge World"article(1996年9月号，On the Law of Total Tricks,Matt Ginsberg),I discussed the possibility of creating a computer bridge player based on the development of a fast double-dummy solver.Such a tool would have significant impact on bidding theory as well.Do you want to know if the Law of Total Tricks is valid when the two sides have 21 trumps between them?Generate 1,000 deals fitting that description,analyze them using the double-dummy solver,and you'‖know. This note gives the results of such an analysis.The Law says that the two sides,when playing in their longest suits,can take between them as many tricks as they have trumps.Thus if N/S have a nine-card fit and E/W have a ten-card fit,the two sides can take a total of 19 tricks in the two suits.Is this really a law,or just a vague rule of thumb Here is the answer, where we have selected randomly among trump suits of equal length but always assume that the contract is played from declarer's best side.An Analysis of the Law of Total Tricks Matt Ginsberg, Eugene, OR In a recent “Bridge World” article(1996 年 9 月号, On the Law of Total Tricks, Matt Ginsberg), I discussed the possibility of creating a computer bridge player based on the development of a fast double-dummy solver. Such a tool would have significant impact on bidding theory as well. Do you want to know if the Law of Total Tricks is valid when the two sides have 21 trumps between them? Generate 1,000 deals fitting that description, analyze them using the double-dummy solver, and you'll know. This note gives the results of such an analysis. The Law says that the two sides, when playing in their longest suits, can take between them as many tricks as they have trumps. Thus if N/S have a nine-card fit and E/W have a ten-card fit, the two sides can take a total of 19 tricks in the two suits. Is this really a law, or just a vague rule of thumb ? Here is the answer, where we have selected randomly among trump suits of equal length but always assume that the contract is played from declarer's best side