Weekly games 1/06

[Dlan]

https://worldofcardgames.com/#!replayer ... %3A1%7D%5D

[irishwolf]

Yes Don, it was I that led the JH on trick 2 that took your JD. If you feel badly about it the strategy was to strip the dealer of his one trump, AD if he had it and reduce the dealer's partner to just one trump if he assisted with two trumps like JD + one (but he had three). That was the in fact the case, unfortunately it took your JD. Only if my partner has two trumps and/or the right aces do we get a euchre.

Regardless had I lead the JS or 9D instead, they would have made their point. Or if you have another idea on how the hand would play suggest it?

~Irishwolf

[Dlan]

It has always been my belief that you need to give your partner a chance. Here our team had 1 trick in. My partner (and no, irishwolf, we did not partner in this hand) had the second trick (right) in their hand. Leading the right only helps the maker.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

It has always been my belief that you need to give your partner a chance. Here our team had 1 trick in. My partner (and no, irishwolf, we did not partner in this hand) had the second trick (right) in their hand. Leading the right only helps the maker.

It was Irishwolf that made this play:

https://worldofcardgames.com/#!replayer ... %3A1%7D%5D

While I agree with your belief generally speaking, I'm not convinced Irishwolf made a mistake in his particular situation. Knowing the Maker's partner is guaranteed to have a trump + a void, and knowing the Maker called from Seat 2 and thus could possibly still have just 2 trump, certainly presents a strong incentive to lead the Right in IW's spot to take out 2 of his enemy's trump with one lead, basically hoping his partner (you) have a key off Ace or 2 trump.

So I suppose the question is, if one starts out with Right + 1 in the 3rd seat vs a 2 seat 1st rd call and the 3rd seat trumps in with his non-right trump on the first lead, is leading the Right to take out two of his opponent's trump with one lead the best line for his team in the long run?

Knowing the Maker's partner is guaranteed to have 1 trump is the key to this hand. It would change everything if we were in a different situation where the Maker's partner could be void in trump.

I think Irishwolf's play is at least defensible. That is to say, his reasoning is sound, and I don't see how it's possible to prove him wrong or right. Becuz we know the maker's partner has a trump + a void, I believe Irishwolf's line is best in this spot but I'm not super confident about it.

And worth noting, even in the worst case scenario, when our Right lead takes out our partner's Left, that often will not matter. It will often be the case that if you did not send the Right, the Maker would've gotten the lead next and proceeded to lead trump, pulling out both bowers at the same time anyways.

[irishwolf]

I feel like I need to further explain Don. While in general your statement below is true. It is not always the true. You have to consider MY hand. I led the Right, it did exactly what I hoped it would do, not to mention that some players assist thin, with two. If this were the case, there is a good chance of a euchre. Without taking the dealer's Ace of trump, it would diminish the prospect of a euchre. Then I led the singleton spade, had you won that trick with the AS we now have a euchre. Now to the statistical odds, had I not led the spade what are the odds (probability) of you being able to trump it? Well, first you have to have a Void in Spades - those odds with 5 unknown is 16% and you also have to have a trump, with only one if the maker had 3 and the dealer had one (I had two) - that chance is 27%. So the statistical odds is 27% x 16% - about 4% chance. Pretty low. Now what is the chance that youy have the AS to win that trick? THE ANSWER DAN IS 27%. So compare which is the best strategy 27% (AS) ort 4%? So I have 7X the better odds leading my JD.

As it was, 2nd seat wins the trick, leads trump and both Bowers now fall! As I said, give me how you would have made it better Odds?

Further, this is not always the case. Had I had 3 cards of one suit, I will lead one and wait it out. So as they Say, IT ALL DEPENDS.

Don said, "It has always been my belief that you need to give your partner a chance. Here our team had 1 trick in."

~Irishwolf

[irishwolf]

I wasn't done. How would I know my partner had the Left, 27% chance but I know 100% the dealer has the Ace. Had the up card been 9, 10 Q, I would not have led. It has to be the King or Ace to be effective. Even if spade gets trump, you also or me, have a doubleton to catch his 5th card for a euchre. You didn't have any voids, makes the left almost useless. So you see, there are other things to consider.

~Irishwolf

[Dlan]

I may have been wrong about who was playing, as far as the play itself, I have to give that some more thought.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I may have been wrong about who was playing, as far as the play itself, I have to give that some more thought.

You were in the 1 seat, Richard in the 2 seat, Wolf in 3rd and I was the dealer. I was also curious about your first lead. You led the singleton green QC instead of your doubleton green Ace (AsKs). I was just wondering why. I prefer leading the doubleton green ace hoping it walks setting up a nice squeeze play on the 2nd lead when I then double lead the Maker with my other spade. Also, by leading the doubleton green ace, you force the Maker to trump in on the first lead if he's void in spades which makes it possible for Seat 3, our P, to overtrump. If you lead the QC, now the maker can just play off and see if his partner can take the trick. I don't know which strategy is best since none of this has been put to the test. Just saying what I would do and why. Is there any reason you prefer the QC lead over the AS here? I have no argument. Just curious.

[irishwolf]

DON, you were in 1st seat me in 3rd and Wes was on my left.

I agree with Wes, get your ace out there so they cannot slough early, allows 3rd seat to overtrump, sort his hand or slough to create a void.

"I may have been wrong about who was playing, as far as the play itself, I have to give that some more thought."

I have to correct my calculation above as I based it on 18 unknown cards when actually on 2nd trick there were only 15 unknown cards before I led the JH. Thus, the calculation that you will be void when there were 5 unknown spades is 0.7% (rounded to 1%) so you will have a spade 99% chance. Little chance to trump my spade lead. However, the chance that you have the AS is increased to 33% due to only 15 unknown cards, and deal you 4. So even more favorable to lead the JH.

[Tbolt65]

I'm catching up with all the posts. Its been busy the last couple days.

Anyways. I disagree with Irishwolf's play but not the thought process. As the saying goes. Right Church, different pugh. Let me explain. It would be more understandable if Irishwolf Had a boss card or Ace to come back. He get's rid of the Ace of hearts plus forces the maker to trump his Boss/Ace or they get euchred. Now at this point its a flip. To see what off suit is left. That's not the case and he didn't give his partner the chance to potentially cash his bare Left. Hence with what I disagree with. He therefore, pulled the bare left and now solidifying makers hand. With this hand, it really didn't matter but it could have though.

Tbolt65
Edward

[irishwolf]

So we Disagree!

You obvious did not follow what was written.

[Tbolt65]

So we Disagree!

You obvious did not follow what was written.

There is no so we disagree. I flat out disgree. I said I disagree at the start. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I can't appreciate logically what you were going for. Here is the key question when you striped the opponents ace of trump and possibly your partners only one. Where you expecting your partner to have another or off suit to secure the last trick , yourself or neither? So you take one from maker and one from the dealer. Where do you think the rest of Trump is?


Tbolt65
Edward

[irishwolf]

Looks like you are not see the probabilities as presented. 33% to 1% has the AS vs has a void in spades with a trump card! NO CONTEST for this hand.

[irishwolf]

As I laid out, I am look for my partner to have the AS or if opponent trumps, for us to catch his doubleton off suit. I am not looking for his trump! Without stripping the dealer, you have two opponents to have a void in any off suit led. So you obviously strip the dealer. You have no idea and it is a low percentage anyway, that he has the Left. I don't care about that, strategy is to get the dealer out of play.

If I were eldest, I just might have led my Left to the first trick!

[Tbolt65]

As I laid out, I am look for my partner to have the AS or if opponent trumps, for us to catch his doubleton off suit. I am not looking for his trump! Without stripping the dealer, you have two opponents to have a void in any off suit led. So you obviously strip the dealer. You have no idea and it is a low percentage anyway, that he has the Left. I don't care about that, strategy is to get the dealer out of play.

If I were eldest, I just might have led my Left to the first trick!

Having no idea where cards may be isn't a good excuse to justify a certain way to play. In my mind you have to allow a chance for your partner to take a trick or to force trump to get it possibly to a doubleton like you said. Also I think you failed to see one other possible action...……...

Did you ever consider of laying off the first trick and playing from behind the makers and see how it plays out? There are time I have done this not only on when I call but when my opponents call so I can allow my partner to take a trick or force out trump and lead to my void suit. So that point is made or a possible euchre takes place.




Tbolt65
Edward

[irishwolf]

Yes I have Ed, when and where it 'best' needs to be done. But not here, Ed!

You tossed out an idea (extremely rare that it would be of benefit) but did not show how it would have worked with this particular hand? Yes, it might work had Pone had an off suit ace, but here does NOT apply.

Follow up your suggestion HOW it would have worked better? Further, in general, exactly how is that better when you consider the maker has 3 trumps, pone 2 and dealer 1 (possibly 2 trumps)? Please explain? ONE TRUMP UNKNOWN AND YOU DO NOT KNOW THE SIZE OR WHERE IT IS? (Opponents, buried or with my partner, and it should be bigger than the dealer Ace.) I contend it only gives the opponent, in general, more opportunity to slough a singleton off suit and an advantage later in the hand. This strategy is better when the dealer has the ace or king, assisted by his partner. I used this strategy, specifically for this holding of the Ace as the upcard.

Apparently, you have not considered it! And it almost worked, my partner had the AS, and the probability that 2nd seat had a spade was a good statistical probability. Which you are obviously ignoring because Uncle Herman said, don't do it, ever, never! The situation determines how I play. And if presented again, I would do it AGAIN.

In this hand, laying off the club by Pone, the Dealer wins the trick with an off suit AC and they are in a better situation than trumping. I think you are grabbing for straws or trying to find another pew (not pugh - nothing to do with a Church) more comfortable?

Ed said, "did you ever consider of laying off the first trick and playing from behind the makers and see how it plays out? There are time I have done this not only on when I call but when my opponents call so I can allow my partner to take a trick or force out trump and lead to my void suit. So that point is made or a possible euchre takes place."

~Irishwolf

[RedDuke]

Irish/Dlan,

Your play makes sense if you assume that the maker was short on trump. Why would you think that? Dlan - you're holding the left but that's all you have. Irish has the right+1. You know that the dealer has 1. That still leaves 3 in the wild, all three of which are in the maker's hands. Thus, by leading the right, you stripped yourself and potentially your partner of trump, which is exactly what happened.

Leading a bower in that case is usually a wrong decision unless you have reason to believe that your opponent has a shortage of trump. You had no reason to believe that in this case.

In fact, second seat made trump without holding a bower. He's almost guaranteed to have three trump (this very website actually says that if someone makes trump without holding the right then he probably has 3 trump) in that situation.

irish - After taking the first trick with that queen of trump, I would have led back the jack of spades hoping that my partner could take it OR the maker would have been forced to burn a trump trying to take it. Then I'd be planning to make the right good later in the hand. In this case, dlan did have the Ace but most likely second seat would have taken it with a trump.

With that said, I do get Irish's thought process, I just think that he made a mistake in assuming that the maker only had two trump.

[irishwolf]

2ND SEAT commonly will assist with two Left + 1 + an off suit ace. But you did not read what I said, the strategy is to take the dealers only 1 high trump. Then let the chips fall where they must.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

2ND SEAT commonly will assist with two Left + 1 + an off suit ace. But you did not read what I said, the strategy is to take the dealers only 1 high trump. Then let the chips fall where they must.

Exactly. This play being correct or not is not dependent on the 2 seat having just 2 trump. It's just a nice added bonus that it's possible.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Did you ever consider of laying off the first trick and playing from behind the makers and see how it plays out? There are time I have done this not only on when I call but when my opponents call so I can allow my partner to take a trick or force out trump and lead to my void suit. So that point is made or a possible euchre takes place.

That would be a terrible idea in this spot given that the player on 3rd Seat's left, the dealer, has a higher trump than the .

[patiencepays]

It has always been my belief that you need to give your partner a chance. Here our team had 1 trick in. My partner (and no, irishwolf, we did not partner in this hand) had the second trick (right) in their hand. Leading the right only helps the maker.

In this case, yes!

[Tbolt65]

People please,

Stop coming to conclusions to whenever I offer a suggestion that it means that I must think it must be the correct way to play. Often when I make suggestions it is there to add another "possibility" in the a potential out come and to give further thought to what one may consider.

Perhaps I'm not doing a good enough job enunciating and clarifying ideas to/for people.

Perhaps some people just can't follow for what ever reason. Whether it's their own or it's my fault.

Perhaps it's a little bit of both.

I have really tried to refrain from taking the attitude of everything I do and say must be the right way to play. People can be and will be set in their ways until experience teaches them other wise. I understand that people don't share the same concepts or analytical abilities or even visualizations. People rely on what they know or perceive to know and ideas and concepts foreign to those are usually met with skepticism at best and out right rejection. It's just how it is.

All I do is try to share what I understand about the game and pass it on. I have no need to feel that I must prove myself the superior player.

This isn't me talking down at anyone. The only hint of that was in post where I say talk about using pictures to convey my ideas and that maybe I should start drawing in crayon. Anyways I hope we all can appreciate each other ideas with out it all coming across as one big pissing contest.


Tbolt65
Edward

[irishwolf]

Ed, you laid out some good thoughts for all of us to consider. I want to acknowledge that for all of us to follow that advice for future. I have to do a BUT . . . because I don't think you see it. But the problem is that you are confusing in this last post, don't give credence to logical thought processes. Here is an example. I gave you the statistical probability and where the possible euchre was and you FLATLY DISAGREE without facts. I see it as opinion that in general does apply, BUT NOT for the hand as I considered it. When you give opinion(s) without facts it sets up for disagreement(s). YOU DREW A CONCLUSION, look at what you said, "Where you expecting your partner . . . off suit." I gave you the probability of such but you don't admit or refute with FACTS that the thinking is not logical (I know it was.). I am okay that okay that we AGREE TO DISAGREE on how to play this hand. I have the right to consider differing opinions then accept or reject such. I have thick skin, I could care less about how you or anyone might differ to play this hand. I was confident at the time and still confident in my play. I would do it again as the next time instead of holding the Left it could be the 9 or 10. Of course I know the chance that my partner has another trump. Look at the hand, I said it was specific for the hand in question and where the help would come from and it was There as well. You don't show in the hand in question as to how played differently would result in a euchre. Don't move the Goal posts. You acknowledge NOTHING.

Then you go off on a tangent, (actually a condescending ONE, like Stupid have you considered....!) an unrelated ploy to offer up a suggestion that was totally unrealistic for the hand in question. That's on YOU. Just think about it.

I am okay that we AGREE TO DISAGREE on how to play this hand but you don't say for the hand how it would have been better. Had 2nd seat had a spade the euchre would have resulted and the odds were very favorable for it to occur. Better than not leading the Right. How do you overlook the Facts?

"There is no so we disagree. I flat out disagree. I said I disagree at the start. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I can't appreciate logically what you were going for. Here is the key question when you striped the opponents ace of trump and possibly your partners only one. Where you expecting your partner to have another or off suit to secure the last trick , yourself or neither? So you take one from maker and one from the dealer. Where do you think the rest of Trump is?"

"Stop coming to conclusions to whenever I offer a suggestion that it means that I must think it must be the correct way to play. Often when I make suggestions it is there to add another "possibility" in the a potential out come and to give further thought to what one may consider."
Tbolt65
Edward

So you are pretty damn guilty of what you want everyone to do STOP DRAWING CONCLUSIONS .... You can't have it both Ways.

~Irishwolf

[RedDuke]

Irish - please tell me why you thought the maker is short on trump? You're holding the Right + 1 and he doesn't have the left (although you don't know where the left is but still)! Therefore unless he's a total moron, he's probably got 3 trump. Thus by leading the right, you might be pulling four trump and thus stripping your own team of trump.

If he only had two trump, he would have passed and let the dealer call.

[irishwolf]

You need to go back and read all the posts. I NEVER said the maker was short on trump. I am trying to take the Dealer only trump the ACE. Wow!

Irish - please tell me why you thought the maker is short on trump? You're holding the Right + 1 and he doesn't have the left (although you don't know where the left is but still)! Therefore unless he's a total moron, he's probably got 3 trump. Thus by leading the right, you might be pulling four trump and thus stripping your own team of trump.

[irishwolf]

Sol RedDuke, what data do you have that supports 2nd seat ALWAYS passing with two trumps? I would estimate that a third of the calls from 2nd seat by good players only have two trumps due to the score and nothing to defend next and nothing to call on 2nd round in green. It's called "Best I got" and it can result in getting euchred but you take the chance anyway. This website also recommends it if I am not mistaken.

You said, "If he only had two trump, he would have passed and let the dealer call."

It is also likely that 2nd seat orders with 3 trumps and NO off suit aces. In that situation as well, you can strip the dealer and catch his off suit on trick 4 or 5 for a euchre.

~Irishwolf