Played a game yesterday and this hand came up.
I'm in first seat holding:
Upcard is .
We were down 82.
First round, everybody passes. Second round, I called diamonds.
We promptly got euchred, mostly because my partner couldn't help and one of the opponents had a totally killer hand in next.
My partner promptly starts cussing me out for calling when I only had two diamonds. I maintain though that I made the correct call. My reasons are:
1. It was a next call made from first seat.
2. I had two side aces.
3. I had the right.
He continued to maintain though that you should not make any call from first seat if you don't have three trump, just in case your partner can't help. I personally think he was an idiot and was playing way too conservatively.
The only reason we got euchred here is that one of the opponents had a very strong next hand. If I would have ordered up then this hand would actually be even weaker in hearts because I gave the dealer a trump and only have left+1 instead of right+1. Passing would be equally dumb because there's no strength in anything else (except that I could have stopped a probable second seat loner attempt in next).
I should also point out that I ended up with him in my next game... except that I was assigned a new partner and he was my righthand opponent. My new partner and I ended up winning that game 101.
Thoughts?
Was My Partner Right?

 Posts: 34
 Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2018 7:04 am
Of course he wasn't right, but you already know that. I'm guessing he's the reason you were down 82 as well.
I would have tried for a loner in diamonds here any day of the week, have to get back in the game somehow.
I would have tried for a loner in diamonds here any day of the week, have to get back in the game somehow.

 Posts: 5
 Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2019 8:51 am
Down 82 I would have gone alone. Good chance they don't have the left and if the ace pops up after you play the right, you can consider throwing the king and a solid chance for 4 points.

 Posts: 347
 Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am
Honestly, you're right. I should have gone alone. In hindsight, I'm not sure why I didn't try that. Yeah, I ended up getting euchred here but honestly, we got euchred on the diamonds call anyway. That's usually the case with loner euchres.
Considering that when I played against him next game with both of us having new partners, we completely destroyed them 101...

 Posts: 425
 Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
 Location: Florida
LOL. I wrote and saved this Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:13 pm.
Obviously we are all in agreement.
Your Partner doesn't understand Euchre at all. He thinks that you play to not get euchred. You need to have the mindset that you play to win. Remember his rant and go in the opposite direction.
Now let's talk about going in the opposite direction. Down 28, I am calling alone. In fact, I am calling alone at neutral scores. I have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred. EV= 1.45 points.
Would anyone else go alone?
Obviously we are all in agreement.
Your Partner doesn't understand Euchre at all. He thinks that you play to not get euchred. You need to have the mindset that you play to win. Remember his rant and go in the opposite direction.
Now let's talk about going in the opposite direction. Down 28, I am calling alone. In fact, I am calling alone at neutral scores. I have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred. EV= 1.45 points.
Would anyone else go alone?

 Posts: 347
 Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am
I'm not so sure about the less than 5% chance to get euchred. If one of the opponents has three trump then you could be in real trouble here. There's more than a 5% chance of that. It's definitely less than a 50% chance of getting euchred, but I find that especially when playing against conservative opponents, I get euchred more than 5% of the time when holding left+ace+king and two side aces. This is a weaker hand than that.Richardb02 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:17 pmLOL. I wrote and saved this Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:13 pm.
Obviously we are all in agreement.
Your Partner doesn't understand Euchre at all. He thinks that you play to not get euchred. You need to have the mindset that you play to win. Remember his rant and go in the opposite direction.
Now let's talk about going in the opposite direction. Down 28, I am calling alone. In fact, I am calling alone at neutral scores. I have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred. EV= 1.45 points.
Would anyone else go alone?
This is definitely worth trying though as a loner with the score down that much. Especially if you consider that the odds are that the opponents' strength is more than 50% likely to be in black.

 Posts: 19
 Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2019 1:57 pm
Just wondering: How did you calculate the percentages?Richardb02 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:17 pmI have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred.
Thanks.

 Posts: 347
 Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am
The only statistically accurate way to calculate them is literally running a simulation in which thousands if not millions of hands are played...MeeKer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 9:54 amJust wondering: How did you calculate the percentages?Richardb02 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:17 pmI have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred.
Thanks.

 Posts: 425
 Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
 Location: Florida
I'm not concerned about being statistically accurate. I want to be accurate in real time and within 10 points.RedDuke wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 12:10 pmThe only statistically accurate way to calculate them is literally running a simulation in which thousands if not millions of hands are played...MeeKer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 9:54 amJust wondering: How did you calculate the percentages?Richardb02 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:17 pmI have a 20% chance of getting 4 points and less than 5% chance of getting euchred.
Thanks.
My approach starts with evaluating the hand with my BPS (see post):
0.50 Seat 1, Round 2
0.75 Call in Next
1.00
0.50
0.50 Next Ace
0.75 Reverse Next Ace
4.00 points
The BPS is built on the Right being worth 1.00 point (1 sure trick). Every other value is a value that is relative to 1.00 for the Right. The Kd is worth 0.50, 50% of the Right. The Next Ace is valued at 0.50. The Reverse Next is valued at 0.75, 75% of the Right. The call in Next is worth 0.75, ad so forth.
The value of the hand is 4.00. If the Right is precisely 1.00 (trick), then it makes sense that other combinations must total a higher amount and still have a chance of being euchred. Since the increment is 0.25 point, I started my test of the system assuming that 1.25 points has a 95% chance of earning a trick. (Note, the system works best between 1.75 and 4.00 points because it uses averages). After 3,000 hands of testing I am satisfied with my statement that 3.75 points has a 95% chance of earning 3 tricks.
I will be happy to answer the other 2 questions (what if scenarios and 20% Loner success) later. First, let's discuss, "I have...less than 5% chance of getting euchred." Thank you.

 Posts: 19
 Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2019 1:57 pm
I like your system but I wonder about this statement: "3.75 points has a 95% chance of earning 3 tricks."
Which number did you divide by what to get 0.95?
Thanks.
Edited to add:
Actually, I realize that you might first be calculating the 5% (probability of getting euchred) and then subtracting it from 1 to get the probability of not getting euchred, namely, getting 3 or more tricks. If that's the case, then what numerator and denominator did you use to get 0.05?
Which number did you divide by what to get 0.95?
Thanks.
Edited to add:
Actually, I realize that you might first be calculating the 5% (probability of getting euchred) and then subtracting it from 1 to get the probability of not getting euchred, namely, getting 3 or more tricks. If that's the case, then what numerator and denominator did you use to get 0.05?

 Posts: 425
 Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
 Location: Florida
Good question. It points out that I am not calculating a probability but allowing for getting euchred 5% of the time. So simply divide by 3.75 by 1.25 average points per trick (with an assumed but tested 5% euchre rate) to expect 3 tricks, but allow for 5% failure.MeeKer wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2019 10:16 amI like your system but I wonder about this statement: "3.75 points has a 95% chance of earning 3 tricks."
Which number did you divide by what to get 0.95?
Thanks.
Edited to add:
Actually, I realize that you might first be calculating the 5% (probability of getting euchred) and then subtracting it from 1 to get the probability of not getting euchred, namely, getting 3 or more tricks. If that's the case, then what numerator and denominator did you use to get 0.05?
It's similar to a poll being identified, the results are plus or minus 4 percentage points. Using 1.25 points per trick comes with a 5% possibility (expect to be euchred 5% of the time, or successful 95% of the time.
The logic is that the Right is assigned 1.00 point. That represents 1.00 trick, with a 100% chance of earning 1 trick. But, with few exceptions (RL, RLA), nothing else has 100% of earning 1 trick. But lets evaluate a Left and King of trump: 0.75 + 0.50= 1.25. I expect those cards to earn a trick 95% of the time. Let's evaluate a Singleton Green Ace and a Doubleton Black Ace: 0.75 + 0.50 = 1.25, the same relative value.
The real power of the BPS is combining the relative value of very different strengths. The hand in this post is an excellent example:
0.50 Seat 1 Round 2 (0.25 S2 gets to lead, 0.25 2nd round  everyone's hand is proven weaker than R2)
0.75 Next call from Seat 1. I have found a numeric value that describes the value of Next. I started lower but had too much success, meaning less than 35% euchres! BTW Reverse Next get 0.00 points from Seat 1 R2, but 0.50 points from S2 Rs.
1.00 Right
0.50 Kd
0.50 Next Ace
0.75 Reverse Next Ace
0.00 Ts
0.00 No Voids
4.00 Points with "Basic BPS" with 95% expectation of taking 3 tricks.
IMO, this is a powerful way to combine: Seat, Round, Hoyle, Trump strength, Next (black) Ace, Reverse Next (Green) Ace and Voids, to analyze a hand. Once you get used to it, you analyze quickly and confidently. You analyze as much or as little as you want. I was successful and happy analyzing to the level I demonstrated in this hand. But I wanted more and with help from Wes, RedDuke, IrishWolf and others I keep adding observable factors: Score, blocking hands, Euchre hands and much more. 95% of what I use in BPS is from what I have learned on Ohio Euchre. Thank you Ohio Euchre.

 Posts: 743
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
I'm not so sure about going alone. I mean I'm totally behind the spirit of the call. We're down 82. We need to go into MAKE PLAYS mode. If my partner went alone with this hand I would never hold it against him. But I personally wouldn't. Just seems like too much of a reach to me. Ofc that still begs the question, assuming the same hand configuration, what would I go alone with in this spot down 82.
Well obviously if you change the into the I'm going alone:
But that's about as interesting as saying if I hand wings I would fly. I'm going alone with that hand at every score except when my team is at 8 or 9.
I would also snap go alone with this:
This hand is significantly weaker but i would still go alone with that at all scores except when my team is at 8 or 9. That could easily be too loose but I like to gamble and can't help myself.
"Yeah ok brah, but we're down 82, we're desperate. Isn't it hail mary time?!?!" Yes it is, and here is my made up criteria for choosing hail mary hands in this spot:
1) First optimistically assume that when you lead the Right you will clear out all your enemy's trump.
2) After that, if you only need two cards buried to pull off the sweep then go for it.
Using that criteria above that means this hand configuration would pass as a bonafide hail mary loner:
The 2 cards we need buried being the and
And I absolutely would go alone with that when desperate but certainly not at a neutral score.
So the hand in this thread:
Misses my hail mary cutoff. That doesn't mean one should not go alone with this hand down 82. I just think it's at least close either way. I wouldn't say just calling is a clear mistake or going alone is wrong. And honestly if my partner did go alone with this dubious holding down 82 his standing would only improve in my eyes even if I was convinced his play was incorrect. It gets tiresome constantly playing with people who never take any chances.

 Posts: 425
 Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
 Location: Florida
Whoa!! It looks like an alien has snatched Wes taken him to the Mother ship and removed 20% of his brave heart as well as 20% of his oddsslinging mentality.Wes (aka the legend) wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2019 9:49 pm
I'm not so sure about going alone. I mean I'm totally behind the spirit of the call. We're down 82. We need to go into MAKE PLAYS mode. If my partner went alone with this hand I would never hold it against him. But I personally wouldn't. Just seems like too much of a reach to me. Ofc that still begs the question, assuming the same hand configuration, what would I go alone with in this spot down 82.
"Yeah ok brah, but we're down 82, we're desperate. Isn't it hail mary time?!?!" Yes it is, and here is my made up criteria for choosing hail mary hands in this spot:
1) First optimistically assume that when you lead the Right you will clear out all your enemy's trump.
2) After that, if you only need two cards buried to pull off the sweep then go for it.
Using that criteria above that means this hand configuration would pass as a bonafide hail mary loner:
The 2 cards we need buried being the and
And I absolutely would go alone with that when desperate but certainly not at a neutral score.
So the hand in this thread:
Misses my hail mary cutoff. That doesn't mean one should not go alone with this hand down 82. I just think it's at least close either way. I wouldn't say just calling is a clear mistake or going alone is wrong. And honestly if my partner did go alone with this dubious holding down 82 his standing would only improve in my eyes even if I was convinced his play was incorrect. It gets tiresome constantly playing with people who never take any chances.
Obviously, I think you are way out of character on this analysis. Or you are egging me on to light up this post?! I also disagree strenuously.
From a 30,000 foot, lifesituation view, I see paralysis by analysis. At 20,000 feet I see static analysis vs. dynamic analysis! At 10,000 feet I see avoiding fear of failure being more powerful than the benefits of success. Let's get back to euchre.
Wes uses dynamic analysis with his statement, "First optimistically assume that when you lead the Right you will clear out all your enemy's trump. The dynamics of S1, first lead of a Right, 8 unseen cards increases the odds of clearing out the enemy's trump, significantly. Wes and I share this approach on most scenarios, just not the scenario in this post.
Wes continues, "After that, if you only need two cards buried to pull off the sweep then go for it." I would paraphrase it, "chicken out from calling if there are 3 or more cards in the wild that could stop your Loner." He assumes that 3 adverse cards is no go zone. I suggest otherwise based on dynamic analysis. If this hand is going to take 4 points, you have to win the first 4 hands. (I know, thank you Captain Obvious, but I am making a point that most analyses miss)! There are no longer 3, 4 or even 5 cards to stop your Loner. There are only 2! I actually discovered this reality by playing extra recklessly (aggressively) and observing that my edge Loners were having greater success than Loners where only 1 or 2 cards could stop 4 points! That was verification of Don Lund's guidance in the OE lessons. Based on my results I definitely call Alone with up to 5 adverse cards.
So my major Principles are:
30,000' analyze but don't analyze. There are 45,000 different hand combinations. You have to draw the line somewhere. Euchre is a game enjoy it. Euchre is a game of chance. If you aren't taking a chance, are you really playing euchre?
20,000' When you analyze realize that dynamic analysis is much more powerful than static analysis. Another example is analyzing your partner. If your partner is "conservative," meaning not calling callable hands, don't go static and assume he will never call. Conservative also means poor, they are making poor decisions. That is a dynamic analysis factor. I will limit my adjustment to 1 bump or 0.25 points in my BPS. (I will test my 0.25 point adjustment and that is another dynamic analysis).
10,000' A minimal analysis reaches a clear cut conclusion that you can be euchred 33% of the time and still have a winning situation. Using 100 hands, 67 1 point wins and 33 2 point euchres the result is: 6766= +1. So embrace being euchred at least half of 33% or 1617%, at least once every 6 hands. You are not a loser because you were euchred. You only lost 1 hand. Here is another thought, if you have never experienced calling edge hands, stretch hands, Hail Mary's, donations, do your really have experience playing euchre or only experience in, "playing it safe.?"