Call Next?

[jblowery]

Clubs is turned down and you're in seat 1. Are you calling next (spades) here or hearts or passing?

What will u lead?

[LeftyK]

passing but score matters.

[Tbolt65]

With out any other information as it stands, calling next and leading 10h.

Tbolt65
Edward

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Never passing when I don't block reverse Next except at 8-8 and up 9-8 (There's other scores I wonder about tho).

So I'm calling Next and leading the Right bower. When you call Next with 1 always lead it. You really need to hit your P somewhat on this one. Might as well lead it as if he has something.

The idea of always leading trump on a Next call when you only have one comes from Natty Bumppo:

Natty: "And if I call “next” with only one trump – which I do not at all infrequently – I lead it, whether it is the nine, the right bower, or anything in between, including the unguarded left bower – because my partner probably needs it and expects it, if for no other reason."

It's the 8/16/2002 post in this link:

https://members.tripod.com/~borf_books/ ... m#Notstone

The idea to always lead with one is just a hypothesis of course that needs to be put to the test in a good simulation. You're free to reject it. Same goes for my general approach of always calling Next if I don't block reverse Next. That hasn't been proven mathematically. Another good simulation is needed.

One thing I will add, when I play with Edward as my P we both bag heavily in the 3rd spot-1st Rd when we have approx 2 tricks in Next. Given our overall approach, I believe it's absolutely critical that S1 always call something in the 2nd rd veering towards Next when he doesn't block reverse Next. Not just becuz a Next call will hit his P more often than usual but also becuz bagging heavily in 3rd hinges on S1 playing strong defense, not allowing reverse Next loners. The strategy of bagging heavily in 3rd-R1 breaks down if S1 doesn't protect his team in the 2nd rd and make those super thin Next calls when necessary.

But even with an unknown P, I'm always calling something veering towards Next when I don't block reverse Next. Reverse Next loners don't happen on my watch. With a P like Me or Edward, the value of this strategy goes up significantly. Assuming we believe in you enough to execute our 3S-R1 bagging strategy.

[Tbolt65]

Never passing when I don't block reverse Next except at 8-8 and up 9-8 (There's other scores I wonder about tho).

So I'm calling Next and leading the Right bower. When you call Next with 1 always lead it. You really need to hit your P somewhat on this one. Might as well lead it as if he has something.

The idea of always leading trump on a Next call when you only have one comes from Natty Bumppo:

Natty: "And if I call “next” with only one trump – which I do not at all infrequently – I lead it, whether it is the nine, the right bower, or anything in between, including the unguarded left bower – because my partner probably needs it and expects it, if for no other reason."

It's the 8/16/2002 post in this link:

https://members.tripod.com/~borf_books/ ... m#Notstone

The idea to always lead with one is just a hypothesis of course that needs to be put to the test in a good simulation. You're free to reject it. Same goes for my general approach of always calling Next if I don't block reverse Next. That hasn't been proven mathematically. Another good simulation is needed.

One thing I will add, when I play with Edward as my P we both bag heavily in the 3rd spot-1st Rd when we have approx 2 tricks in Next. Given our overall approach, I believe it's absolutely critical that S1 always call something in the 2nd rd veering towards Next when he doesn't block reverse Next. Not just becuz a Next call will hit his P more often than usual but also becuz bagging heavily in 3rd hinges on S1 playing strong defense, not allowing reverse Next loners. The strategy of bagging heavily in 3rd-R1 breaks down if S1 doesn't protect his team in the 2nd rd and make those super thin Next calls when necessary.

But even with an unknown P, I'm always calling something veering towards Next when I don't block reverse Next. Reverse Next loners don't happen on my watch. With a P like Me or Edward, the value of this strategy goes up significantly. Assuming we believe in you enough to execute our 3S-R1 bagging strategy.

I agree with leading trump and in most cases I do and come back with the club with a similar hand as this.


However with this hand I have a doubleton heart with the king. The dealer turned down black. So with leading low heart here I'm trying to do a couple things. Promote my king of hearts as a boss suit. Potentially allow my partner to either cut the heart or take it with the ace of hearts. That would be ideal. Other scenarios is getting seat 2 to waste a trump card. Then go from there.

Each hand is unique but like wes says and the quoted author of natty bumpo leading trump is usually the way to go and I agree.


Tbolt65
Edward

[jblowery]

Yah I'm thinking lead my low heart

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Yah I'm thinking lead my low heart

One thing I will add is that no matter what you think, don't be afraid to experiment with other strategies that you disagree with. As you have the perfect tool to do that, the karman games app, or any app you choose. The beauty of playing on an app is you can get a ton of games in, in a relatively short period of time, and there's no cost to experimenting as you're obviously not playing for money. Assuming you play on Karman, I'm sure you're aware that when you reach 100 pts/5 crowns you can't go any higher. That's the perfect time to start a new account. So let's say you don't buy my "always call something veering towards Next from S1-Rd 2 except at up 9-8 or tied 8-8" strategy. That's ok. But next time you're starting a new account on Karman, fatefully go with that strategy anyways and see what happens. Do it all the way to 100/5 crowns (reset your stats beforehand). Maybe your opinion will change, maybe it won't. No matter what I'm certain you'll gain something from that experience.

Remember, as long as we don't know the math we all will suffer from confirmation bias. There is no escaping that unfortunate reality. Our minds cannot really be trusted. All we can really hope for is the systematic mistakes we are invariably making don't cost us too much. But sometimes without even knowing the math, one can escape from a confirmation bias just by experimenting with other strategies, especially one's they don't agree with. For example, I used to be in the "always lead trump when donating" camp. That's the recommended strategy on this site. Then I watched other top players play, players like Edward (tbolt) and Irishwolf and noticed they often did NOT lead trump vs a donate. This compelled me to experiment with not leading trump vs a donate even tho I didn't agree with their strategy. But lo and behold, after this experiment I soon realized that the "Always lead trump" strategy was NOT correct, in fact it is wrong quite often. I can't prove this, but now I feel strongly on this point. So my own confirmation bias had me stuck in the "always lead trump on a donate" strategy, but I was only able to break free from that systematic mistake by experimenting with an alternative strategy I initially disagreed with.

[RedDuke]

It depends on the score. This is a hand that blocks nothing except for a next loner and I've pretty much got nothing. Unless the opponents are at 8 or 9, I'm going to do the next call and lead the right. I'm basically hoping that my partner has the left and at least one other trump (and hopefully an ace or two) but that's better than having an opponent call for a red loner.

This is really a defensive play. The opponents turned down clubs so one of them probably has something strong in a red suit. I obviously don't, so either my partner does or one of the opponents does and they're more likely to. I don't want one of them to go alone in hearts or diamonds.

The reason to lead the right is that because I'm betting that the opponents are strong in red, I'm gonna try to pull whatever trumps they might have and leave my partner with the only trumps.