Order or Hope for Loner (from Seat 2)?

Ask questions, discuss and debate your strategies, euchre polls and more
Post Reply
jblowery
Posts: 56
Joined: Tue Dec 11, 2018 10:43 am

Order or Hope for Loner (from Seat 2)?

Post by jblowery » Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm

I've had something like this happen a few times. I'm in Seat 2 and (Card_10-C) comes up. Seat 1 obviously passes. I'm holding:

(Card_J-C) (Card_J-S) (Card_A-S) (Card_10-S) (Card_Q-H)

In this scenario I used a queen as my off-suite card instead of an ace because I think that is more realistic for a loner attempt.

Typically, I'm ordering my partner when I'm very confident that I have two tricks. However, I've typically passed on this because if he passes there is only one pass between Seat 1 and my loner hand. Seat 1 would have to call Reverse Next. Usually they pass and I can go for my loner, but not always.

Wondering what others think about this situation (not necessarily holding these exact cards but the point is that I have a good chance at the loner call).



Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 243
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu May 16, 2019 5:29 pm

jblowery wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm
I've had something like this happen a few times. I'm in Seat 2 and (Card_10-C) comes up. Seat 1 obviously passes. I'm holding:

(Card_J-C) (Card_J-S) (Card_A-S) (Card_10-S) (Card_Q-H)

In this scenario I used a queen as my off-suite card instead of an ace because I think that is more realistic for a loner attempt.
Choosing the (Card_Q-H) instead of the (Card_A-H) is actually a pretty big deal. Passing a biddable hand from the 2 spot in order to go for a loner in the 2nd round is a very risky play especially when you only block 1 out of the 3 remaining suits in the 2nd round. To even consider taking this kind of risk I'd at least want my 2nd rd loner to be a near lock 4 pt sweep.

The (Card_Q-H) degrades your loner big time.
Your sweep odds plummet compared to having the (Card_A-H). No way in hell I'm even considering taking that risk with a loner hand that will end up just being a 1 point hand a lot of the time.

So as far as I'm concerned, this discussion can't even get off the ground UNLESS you give yourself the (Card_A-H)
jblowery wrote:
Thu May 16, 2019 12:13 pm
Typically, I'm ordering my partner when I'm very confident that I have two tricks. However, I've typically passed on this because if he passes there is only one pass between Seat 1 and my loner hand. Seat 1 would have to call Reverse Next. Usually they pass and I can go for my loner, but not always.

Wondering what others think about this situation (not necessarily holding these exact cards but the point is that I have a good chance at the loner call).
To echo the above, having "a good chance at [a] loner call" is not enough. I think one must have a great chance at a loner sweep to even consider this play. Assuming we have a great chance at a loner sweep, seat 1 must be a very weak player to consider running this play. If seat 1 is a smart, aggressive player, trying to go for 2nd round loners when you only block 1 out of 3 remaining suits will end up hurting your team way more than helping it. Smart aggressive players don't play by Hoyle, they play to win. Hoyle is a part of their decision matrix, but they don't religiously follow Hoyle becuz they know that will lead them to passing too much setting their team up for failure when they don't have much blocked. When they don't block 2 out of the 3 remaining suits they're gonna call something from seat 1, 2nd rd.

For me personally, I don't typically play in games where Seat 1 is THAT weak, so I wouldn't run this play unless I have all suits blocked.

An example where I would pass in the first round to go for a loner in the 2nd round can be found in my quiz, #7:

Your team is up 4-3. You're in the 2 seat and the dealer upcard is the (Card_K-H)

I have (Card_A-H) (Card_J-H) (Card_A-D) (Card_J-S) (Card_J-C)

I would pass my biddable hearts hand in the first round to go for a black loner in the 2nd.

Without reads, I do think the default strategy should be: do not try to play heroball and pass a biddable hand from the 2 spot in the first round to go for a loner in the 2nd round unless you have all suits blocked. Too often you will hurt your team more than you hope to help it.

That said, If I'm down 9-6, and Seat 1 is not an expert, and I have a hand like this in seat 2:

Dealer upcard (Card_K-H)

I have (Card_A-H) (Card_J-H) (Card_A-S) (Card_J-S) (Card_J-C)

I'd be awfully tempted to go for it and pass in the 1st round even tho I don't block all suits. Keep in mind tho that if seat 1 is an expert fuhgeddaboudit. An expert will never pass from Seat 1, 2nd round up 9-6 if they don't block all suits. An expert will never allow Seat 2 to be that hero.

That said against your standard euchre player I'd be really tempted at most scores to pass in the first round from Seat 2 to go for a loner in the 2nd round if I at least block 2 out of the 3 remaining suits AND CRUCIALLY I have a great chance at a loner sweep. This means my loner can have no losers.

So my take is, if you have a loser like the (Card_Q-H) don't even consider running this play. And if you only block 1 out of the 3 remaining suits don't even consider this play unless Seat 1 is extremely weak. If you block 2 out of 3 suits, have a great chance at a loner sweep, and seat 1 is not an expert, then yeah I can't blame you for trying.

However without rigorous math backing up the above strategy, I'm typically sticking to my guns and never running this play unless I have all suits blocked. This is another example where I wish we could simulate this spot the requisite times necessary to really find out if it's worth going for that coveted 2nd round loner when we don't have all suits blocked.

Post Reply