Richardb02 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:00 pm
Great! I have to leave it to you to report back Wes. I am taking a Series 65 Financial exam and have to devote the next 6 weeks to the task. I'm confident, that your results will reflect my success with crossing the river, with similar hands, and that the EV is positive. If not, I welcome your report. Facts are facts.
Good luck on your exam. Hopefully you stay away from addicting euchre apps for the next 6 weeks! Unfortunately I don't think my results will ever reach "fact" status. This spot is so rare it's probably next to impossible to reach a statistically significant sample size. The best I'll be able to do will only reach the level of anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence is one of the poorer forms of evidence, but it's still evidence. If that's all one has, it's still something to go off of that will be better than nothing on average. Of course we do have slightly more than just my anecdotes. Your point system is also a form of evidence. The fact that it says one way is slightly better than another way is something to work with. Without that mythical euchre simulator we'll never know for sure, but it's nice that we at least have something to work with even if we don't have the real data to give us strong confidence.
Richardb02 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:00 pmI also want to suggest a second type of hand for you to analyze. If you have 2 off aces and are weak in trump (2 non-bower trump), where is your line?
If I'm the dealer and I have a hand like this (say spades is trump):
I'm calling spades. I don't pass two trump + two off aces when I don't block all suits.
Here's an interesting next call example with 2 non-bower trump that some would consider dicey based on the score:
http://members.tripod.com/~Borf_Books/ecolum31.htm#nexting
It's 8-8 and the dealer turns down the
You're in Seat 1 with:
I'm also calling in that spot if I have:
Here's another example of a good marginal call (diamonds are trump) as the dealer up 9-7:
http://members.tripod.com/~Borf_Books/ecolum91.htm#leadvol2
Again, I'd also make that call with:
Also, if you're in the 2 seat up 8-5 or say 9-6, this hand becomes a must call:
Dealer upcard:
You have
Notice your team is already at 8 so you don't have to worry about blocking your partner's loner, and if you get euchred it's no big deal as your team is still the favorite to win the game. And also notice that you block no suits. If your partner passes your team could be in big trouble. And this marginal hand has a decent chance of scoring a point. All the pieces are in place to make this a MUST call.
Richardb02 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:00 pmLet's touch on Eric Salas post about his "Point System." He say, "The Z-Score takes five factors into consideration when measuring the strength of your hand: bowers = 3 points; all other trump = 2 points; non-trump Aces = 1 point; void one suit = 1 point; void two suits = 2 points; order your partner then add the value of that card to your hand total; and order your opponent, subtract that card value from your total." I say that is over-simplistic. I take into account 12 factors in BPS (Bidding Point System) Basic and will cover much more with BPS-Advanced.
Pertinent to this post, the Z-Score gives no value to Green Ace vs. Black Ace; no value to Singleton vs Doubleton to Triple Ace. It is too simplistic to reliably analyze this hand or similar hands. Einstein said, "everything should be as simple as possible, but not too simple." Eric's MBA is no match for Einstein's earned title of "Genius."
Obviously you already know I'm not a big fan of point systems, but it does seem like you've tweaked your point system to try to fit more situations. Therefore without having read much on Eric Salas' system, I'd bet that yours is better. Funny thing is Edward (tbolt65) is actually currently busy reading some of Eric Salas' work. He purchased the 5th book only. Edward may have something more relevant to say on the subject down the road. I'm just guessing but based on what you've pointed out Richard, I agree that those are some pretty big flaws.
Richardb02 wrote: Thu Nov 14, 2019 10:00 pmEric also says that he only orders 17%. Think simply for a minute. If there are 4 players, wouldn't ordering average 25% per player over time? Any other answer is ludicrous! If Eric is ordering 17% of the time, he is giving up control of the situation, 8/25 or 32% of the time. How is that even a reasonable proposition?! His "simple analysis" is overly-simple analysis. His extensive tests and analysis are a sham because they do not test real life euchre.
Something is definitely WAY off here. In order to only bid 17% of the time you have to basically only focus on your own cards. Trying not to get euchred must be your only objective. Trying to hit your partner will be completely disregarded. The idea that euchre is a partnership game goes completely out the window when it comes to bidding. That cannot be right. And as I've said before only the very poor players in my tournament or my euchre app call at this kind've low frequency. Before me and Edward starting playing in our Vegas tournament, there were only 3 high frequency players, i.e. aggressive players that called greater than 30% of the time. They've dominated that tournament the last 7 years each one trading Player of the Year honors. That's pretty strong evidence that aggressive play is the key to success at this game.