Weekly Games 1-27

[Dlan]

I would have posted this earlier but I’m still recovering from the pain inflicted by Wes and associates last night.



Would you have called on this hand?

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I would have posted this earlier but I’m still recovering from the pain inflicted by Wes and associates last night.



Would you have called on this hand?

I talk about this spot a lot in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=247

In short I believe this is a call for S1. I think it's a marginal losing play in the long run, but I think passing this hand and potentially putting your team in a terrible spot in the 2nd round where you have no aces and block nothing will cost your team more. This is one of those spots where I would give anything to put to the test with the mythical euchre simulator.

To me this hand is kinda like hitting a 16 vs a 10 in blackjack or splitting 8s vs a 10. Both are marginal losers, but they lose less than the alternative.

Now that said, if you have a read that your opponents are calling too much, then that could swing things to a pass.

[Tbolt65]

I typically don't call here.


Tbolt65
Edward

[Wes (aka the legend)]

The upcard is the AS. We are down 7-2.
Replicates Dylan’s hand from the 01/27/2020 OE Games

I will apply BPS:
0.25 S1 R1
0.25 10s
0.50 Qs
0.50 Ks
0.25 1 Void
0.50 3 Trump, no Bowers
-.25 Net value of As Up Card
2.00 Hand Value vs. 2.25 minimum. No Jacks or Aces to evaluate so:
____Pass, only a 60% expectation of success. It is better to hope that Partner can save the day, unless Opponents have 8 or 9 points.

I agree. At 60 percent success rate. That's winning 6pts vs losing 8 pts. And that's at its optimal win percentage for the hand. It can and will get worse for a team if they keep calling this in the long run. You are Just giving up too many points.

For the math gurus I can't tell you how often seat 2, round 2 calls and makes 1pt, 2pt, or 4pts or the likelihood of them passing to my 3rd seat partner. But it's gotta be plus EV to pass here. The goal for any euchre player is trying to max/minimize points taken and given away. If one calls too much in bad spots such as this they put their team at risk for bleeding unnecessary points away.

Tbolt65
Edward

Ok let's do some simple EV calcs using Richard's 60% number that Edward also endorses, which I agree is a very plausible number. In fact let's make it worse on the "pro-call" people. Let's say we only have a 55% chance at success if we call with Dlan's hand. Say 50% of the time we score 1 point, 5% of the time we get lucky and score 2 pts and the rest, 45% of the time, we get euchred.

So here's the expected outcome of calling:

(.50 x 1) + (.05 x 2) + (.45 x -2) = -.3

So in a vacuum this call will cost us around .3 pts.

Note 1) For the sake of simplicity I ignored those rare times our call blocks the Dealer's team when they would've had a successful loner sweep, which basically can only happen when S4 has JJA + a suited boss card and they don't have to blow a trump on the first lead or when S4 has 4 trump + a boss card. However rare this event is, keep in mind that ignoring it hurts the call strategy and helps the pass strategy.

Note 2) This guesstimate (-.3) is consistent with a non-analogous but similar strength hand from Eric Zalas' book:

EZ: "Hand 200. Dealer turns up the 10 of hearts. Seat #1 holds the Ace-K of hearts, Ace of spades, and the King-Q of clubs. Seat #1 orders the dealer to pick up the 10 of hearts. E0: = -.291. N = 309"

Dealer upcard

1st seat:

Wes: The euchre rate of EZ's example hand is 43.69%, it scores a point 54.37%, and gets 2 points 1.94%. Doing the math:

(.4369 x -2) + (.5437) + (.0194 x 2) = -.291 pts

So there's a great chance we're pretty close to truth on that number.

Ok, now we have to compare the EO of calling, -.3, to the EO of passing.

Here's some assumptions I'm gonna use to figure out the EO of passing.

1) If we pass the dealer's team will call 50% of the time, and thus pass 50% of the time. Again, for the sake of simplicity I'm ignoring those rare times the dealer has a loner sweep.

2) When they call we will euchre them 33% of the time, they will score a point 65% of the time, and they will get 2 points 2% of the time given that it will be very hard for them to get 2 points when we have 3 trump.

3) If the dealer's team passes we will call Next and get euchred 75% of the time, score a point 23% of the time, and get lucky and score 2 points 2% of the time.

Ok here we go. The EO of passing is:

.5[(.33 x 2) + (.65 x -1) + (.02 x -2)] + .5[(.75 x -2) + (.23 x 1) + (.02 x 2) = -.63

EO of calling = -.30
EO of passing = -.63

The EO of calling is .33 points better than passing, IOW the EV of calling = +.33, therefore making this marginal call is what's best for one's team despite the fact that it's a small loser (-.3) in a vacuum becuz the alternative loses more.

Now one may say HEY WAIT A SECOND WE DONT HAVE TO CALL NEXT AND BURN POINTS!! YOU'RE RIGGING THIS!!

Ok, let's not call Next. Let's pass instead. Just note that passing has a cost, and when you pass a hand that has no off aces and blocks nothing, the theoretical cost of passing is pretty close to its high point.

Say we guess that the cost of passing with this hand in the 2nd rd is 1 point (I bet it's more but let's go with 1 point on average).

Now the EO of passing = -.015 + (.5 x -1) = -.515

We're still better off calling since calling only costs us -.3 points

One may wonder what's the break even point that makes us indifferent between passing and calling? The answer is if we assume passing in the 2nd round costs us just .57 points:

EO of passing = -.015 + (.5 x -.57) = -.3
EO of calling = -.3

IMO, one has to be living in a dream world where their great great grandma is playing in the 2 seat to assume the cost of passing in the 2nd round is only .57 pts when one is passing a hand that blocks nothing with no off aces.

Bottom line: In Euchre, there are many spots that come up where you don't wanna call, but you gotta call. This is becuz in a race to 10 game, the cost of passing drives the action, whether one realizes it or not. This is one of those spots where you gotta grit your teeth, follow the math, and do what's best for your team. Call spades.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I typically don't call here.


Tbolt65
Edward

Well I know you don't call with this type of hand up 8-4!

I'm still suffering from PTSD from this hand: Around a month or two ago, I was your partner in the cash game and we were up 8-4. It was me and you vs Mark and Amy. Mark was the dealer with a non-bower spade up. You were in Seat 1 with 3 low spades + nothing else. Pretty much the same hand as Don's hand itt. You passed, Amy passed, I passed, and Mark turned down the spade. With no hand in the 2nd round you passed, Amy passed, I passed, and Mark went alone in Red and got the sweep to tie it up 8-8.

Now one may wonder what did I pass with from S3 in the 2nd rd? Here was my hand:

+ two other non-club/non-diamond garbage cards.

And one may think, why the f*** did you pass clubs Wes?? Becuz up 8-4, I assumed my partner would never pass from S1, 2nd rd without having at least reverse next blocked, and if that's the case there is a great chance my team has a combined euchre hand. And since we are playing a stick the dealer format, the correct strategy for me is to pass and go for the game winning euchre knowing the dealer will most likely have a weak holding that is set up to get clobbered.

But alas, one could argue that I made the fatal mistake of assuming my partner plays like me, but goddamn man, if S1 is not gonna play strong defense up 8-4 then when are they??!!

Funny thing is after Mark got that loner sweep to tie it at 8-8, I was so flustered with rage on the inside that I actually have no memory of whether we won the game or not. It's all a blur. That part is completely blocked out. It's as if 1988 Mike Tyson punched me in the nose at 8-8. That's how it felt too!

[Wes (aka the legend)]

1) If we pass the dealer's team will call 50% of the time, and thus pass 50% of the time. Again, for the sake of simplicity I'm ignoring those rare times the dealer has a loner sweep.

I wanna drive home how conservative the above assumption is--the idea that the dealer's team will call 50% of the time given that S1 has three trump. Firstly, keep in mind that the higher the call rate of the dealer's team the more likely passing in the first round is the correct move. Since I am making a mathematical argument for calling, I would want my proposed enemy calling percentage to err on the side of being too high, thus hurting my argument not helping it. That's what I mean by a conservative assumption.

Ideally when one is making an EV argument they would like all their assumptions to be conservative. That makes their case infinitely stronger! Disingenuous people who care more about winning arguments online than finding the truth will do just the opposite. Their assumptions will not be conservative but instead err on the side of benefiting their proposed argument. I spent the better part of a decade (2005-2015) teaching people how to make money at limit holdem at twoplustwo.com. EV arguments were common place and with experience it became easy to spot the disingenuous arguments from the serious ones. Ok digression over.

Back to that 50% call rate I assumed in my model. To touch 50% given that S1 already takes 3 trump out of the equation, you'd have to have two super aggressive people in S2 and S4. Basically imagine me in S2 and my clone in S4.

Here's my approx calling range in S2 after Don passes his 3 trump hand:

R+1 = 1C1 x 2C1 x 15C3 = 910 combos
3 trump = 3C3 x 15C2 = 105 combos
L+1+ 1 off ace, excluding JS + no red bowers = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C1 x 2C0 x 10C2 = 135 combos
L+1+2 off aces, excluding JS = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C2 x 12C1 = 36 combos
L+1+3 off aces, excluding JS = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C3 x 12C0 = 1 combo
L+1+no off aces, excluding JS, + no red bowers = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C0 x 2C0 x 10C3 = 120 combos.
R+0+2 off Aces + no red bowers = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C2 x 2C0 x 10C2 = 135 combos
R+0+3 off Aces + no red bowers = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C3 x 2C0 x 10C1 = 10 combos

Hand combinations I'm calling with : 1,452
Total combinations possible = 18C5 = 8,568
My 2 Seat calling % = 1,452/8568 = 16.95%

Here's my approx S4 calling range after Don passes his 3 trump hand:

R+1 = 1C1 x 2C0 x 15C4 = 1,365 combos
3 trump = 3C2 x 15C3 = 1,365 combos
4 trump = 3C3 x 15C2 = 105 combos
L+1+1 off ace + no red bowers, excluding hands that have a doubleton/tripleton next ace = (1C1 x 2C0 x 3C1 x 2C0 x 10C3 = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C1 x 2C0 x 10C3) - (1C1 x 2C0 x 1C1 x 4C1 x 2C0 x 2C0 x 6C2) - (1C1 x 2C0 x 1C1 x 4C2 x 2C0 x 2C0 x 6C1) = 264 combos
L+1+2 off aces + no red bowers = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C2 x 2C0 x 10C2 = 135 combos
L+1+3 off aces = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C3 x 12C1 = 12 combos
As9s + 1 off ace + no red bowers, excluding hands that have a doubleton/tripleton next ace = (1C1 x 2C0 x 3C1 x 2C0 x 10C3) - (1C1 x 2C0 x 1C1 x 4C1 x 2C0 x 2C0 x 6C2) - (1C1 X 2C0 x 1C1 x 4C2 x 2C0 x 2C0 x 6C1) = 264 combos
As9s + 2 off aces = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C2 x 12C2 = 198 combos
As9s + 3 off aces = 1C1 x 2C0 x 3C3 x 12C1 = 12 combos

Hand combinations I'm calling with : 3,720
Total combinations possible = 18C5 = 8,568
My S4 calling % = 3,720/8568 = 43.42%

Ok so I'm calling in S2 16.95% of the time and calling from S4 43.42% of the time. So how often total is this dream team of me and my clone calling after Don passes 3 trump? Is it simply 16.95% + 43.42% = 60.37%? Nope, if we did that we would be doing some double counting as S2 and S4 can't both have the same hands at the same time. A better approximation would be (S4 calling % multiplied by the probability the action gets to him) + (S2's calling %)

Ok, first we have to figure out S3's calling %. Well we can quickly figure out how often S3 is calling by assuming S3 is only calling in this spot when he has all 3 remaining trump in his hand (JsJc9s) and we will also say S3 will call if he has both bowers + 2 or more off aces.

JJ9 = (3C3 x 15C2) = 105. Minus out one combo to account for that time S3 passes with JJ9JJ, so 104 combos.
Both bowers + 2 off aces = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C2 x 12C1 = 36 combos
Both bowers + 3 off aces = 1C1 x 1C1 x 1C0 x 3C3 x 12C0 = 1 combos

Ok after Don passes his 3 trump hand, S3 is calling 141/8568 = 1.65% of the time.

So the approx probability me and my clone's team is calling after Don passes is (1 - .1695)(1 - .0165)(.4342) + (.1695) = 52.42%

Keep in mind the 52.42% is just an approximation. There are problems with the math becuz at certain steps I'm assuming a random distribution when the distribution is not random. E.G. after S2 passes he is less likely to have the Right bower in his hand, and therefore the Right is more likely to be in S3 or S4's hand. I ignored this dynamic. It just gets too complicated. Also, to get the probability of the action getting to S4, I multiplied two dependent probabilities (the probability S2 passes times the probability S3 passes) which is strictly incorrect but gets a 'close enough' answer. Either way 52.42% is a fair approximation, but still an overestimate based on my numbers due to the fact that S4 is passing R+1 if he has a stopper or euchre hand, and there's other 3 trump euchre hands S4 may be passing also. I did not account for those combos. So It's fair to say, that me and my clone are calling around 50% of the time after Don passes his 3 trump hand.

Ok so my assumption of 50% call rate in my EV model lines up with playing against one of the most aggressive teams possible, the kinda team you'd wanna bag A LOT and YET the math still strongly suggests calling with S1's hand is better than passing. Now imagine you're playing a normal team--not a bad team--I'm saying a normal aggressive team. That team is probably calling around 40% of the time in this spot which would making passing from S1 even more costly.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Took a poll at tonight's euchre tournament. I asked the three players who took turns winning the championship from 2012-2018, Pat, Phil and Kurt (blackcat)--all very strong, tough players--what they would do in S1, 1st rd with:



Edit: To be clear, the upcard in my poll was the

Each one, without hesitation, said they would call spades. All basically for the same reason. To paraphrase, "you have no where to go in the 2nd round and with 3 trump you have a decent shot". They all intuitively understood that having no where to go in the 2nd rd is a bigger problem than ordering up the enemy with 3 low trump. I didn't bother polling anybody else in the room becuz I know at least 90% of them are passing this hand. To put that in perspective, 90% of the people who will never come close to winning player of the year pass in this spot. The last 4 champions, including myself, are calling. Or another way to put it. There are five expert euchre players in our tournament. Edward, me and those three guys. Edward is the only one who passes in this spot. That means four out of five experts are calling. If you ever bought toothpaste becuz 4/5 dentists recommended it then how can you not call spades here!!

Seriously tho, what other expert players would do is not "proof" that something is correct, but it is a good piece of evidence that should be taken very seriously. This evidence combined with the math itt pointing towards calling makes a very compelling case.

[Richardb02]

The upcard is the AS. We are down 7-2.
Replicates Dylan’s hand from the 01/27/2020 OE Games

I will apply BPS:
0.25 S1 R1
0.25 10s
0.50 Qs
0.50 Ks
0.25 1 Void
0.50 3 Trump, no Bowers
-.25 Net value of As Up Card
2.00 Hand Value vs. 2.25 minimum. No Jacks or Aces to evaluate so:
____Pass, only a 60% expectation of success. It is better to hope that Partner can save the day, unless Opponents have 8 or 9 points.

Ok let's do some simple EV calcs using Richard's 60% number that Edward also endorses, which I agree is a very plausible number. In fact let's make it worse on the "pro-call" people. Let's say we only have a 55% chance at success if we call with Dlan's hand. Say 50% of the time we score 1 point, 5% of the time we get lucky and score 2 pts and the rest, 45% of the time, we get euchred.

So here's the expected outcome of calling:

(.50 x 1) + (.05 x 2) + (.45 x -2) = -.3

So in a vacuum this call will cost us around .3 pts.

Ok here we go. The EO of passing is:

.5[(.33 x 2) + (.65 x -1) + (.02 x -2)] + .5[(.75 x -2) + (.23 x 1) + (.02 x 2) = -.63

EO of calling = -.30
EO of passing = -.63

The EO of calling is .33 points better than passing, IOW the EV of calling = +.33, therefore making this marginal call is what's best for one's team despite the fact that it's a small loser (-.3) in a vacuum becuz the alternative loses more.

Now one may say HEY WAIT A SECOND WE DONT HAVE TO CALL NEXT AND BURN POINTS!! YOU'RE RIGGING THIS!!

Ok, let's not call Next. Let's pass instead. Just note that passing has a cost, and when you pass a hand that has no off aces and blocks nothing, the theoretical cost of passing is pretty close to its high point.

Say we guess that the cost of passing with this hand in the 2nd rd is 1 point (I bet it's more but let's go with 1 point on average).

Now the EO of passing = -.015 + (.5 x -1) = -.515

We're still better off calling since calling only costs us -.3 points

One may wonder what's the break even point that makes us indifferent between passing and calling? The answer is if we assume passing in the 2nd round costs us just .57 points:

EO of passing = -.015 + (.5 x -.57) = -.3
EO of calling = -.3

OK. I will concede that Passing costs 0.57 points. Now what? I want to quantify the cost of 0.57 points.

What do we have to consider?:
Partner has a 30% chance of having a good hand
What is my R2 opportunity
Do I have jacks to block Opponents’ R2 calls
Do I have aces to block Opponents’ R2 calls

TMI Richard. If we work from the bottom up:
We have no aces
We have no jacks
We have no R2 opportunity.
So by passing all we have going for us is Partner

So the simple question is how do we evaluate “our partner” based on seeing the 5 cards in our hand and the up card? The related question is when do we pass with a similar hand?

I want to start with the “related” question and relate it to another question! Is there a limit to these adjustments? My answer is yes, yes and yes again! Fortunately, when applying the BPS, I can define that limit. I suggest that you can apply it with or without BPS.

The concept is that Euchre revolves around tricks. I suggest that 80% of the time it revolves around a single trick. We don’t need deep analysis or BPS with obviously strong hands. It is obvious! We need it when it comes down to the value of the deciding trick.

As I have applied BPS, 1.25 points equals a trick. Yes, the Right is 1.00 points but the Right is the only card that delivers 1 trick with 1.00 points. Every other trick requires a card combination and that translates into 1.25 points.

So a swing of half a trick can swing a passing hand to an ordering hand and visa versa. Rounding up to 0.75 BPS points is the logical conclusion.

So my point is, this hand:
2.00 BPS (Basic)Value of this hand
0.25 Advanced BPS, based on no viable R2 hand
0.25 Advanced BPS, based on no jacks
0.25 Advanced BPS, based on no aces
2.75 Adv BPS Hand Value vs. 2.25 order so order

Does it pass other tests?
1.25 BPS Value - Equates to 1 trick. Even if we add:
0.75 for the 3 factors our total of:
2.00 is still below 2.25 minimum, so pass.

Even if the hand is stronger and has a value of:
1.50 BPS Value, adding
0.75 for the 3 factors (if appropriate) totals:
2.25 and being equal to the minimum, I still will use my judgement to make the final determination to order or pass.

Also note, the BPS works best with mediocre hands. Hands that are outside of the “norms” are not reflected in the BPS value. What is the norm? Since there are 5 tricks and each trick requires 1.25 BPS points, there are typically 5 x 1.25 or 6.25 points per hand. Then we simply divide by 4 hands, 6.25/4 = 1.56 points per hand being the “norm.” So a hand with 1.25 or 1.5 points is weaker than the norm and probably will perform weaker than the BPS indicates. Therefore I would err in that direction.

Strong hands work in reverse as expected. If you have 3.75 BPS points, 3 tricks with a 95% expectation per the BPS, your hand is probably stronger than the BPS value. That is why I will order alone with 3.75 points, with rare exceptions.

Conclusion: In BPS language I will add up to 0.75 for a weak R2 hand. In euchre speak I will add 1/2 a trick to the power of my hand to reflect my expectation of a greater loss by passing. IE, if I order from S1 R1 with 2 tricks (neutral hands). I would order with 1 1/2 tricks when my R2 hand is practically worthless.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

OK. I will concede that Passing costs 0.57 points. Now what? I want to quantify the cost of 0.57 points.

The .57 number represented the theoretical cost of passing in the 2nd round that would make us indifferent between calling and passing in the first round, assuming we accept the estimate that calling in the first round costs us .3 pts. So .57 pts is the wrong number to concede on. In order to concede you would simply have to believe that the cost of passing in the 1st rd will be greater than .3 pts. And more broadly, you don't even have to accept that the cost of calling in the first round = approx -.3 pts. You can simply concede that passing in the first round will generally cost more regardless what you think the cost of calling may be.

Conclusion: In BPS language I will add up to 0.75 for a weak R2 hand. In euchre speak I will add 1/2 a trick to the power of my hand to reflect my expectation of a greater loss by passing. IE, if I order from S1 R1 with 2 tricks (neutral hands). I would order with 1 1/2 tricks when my R2 hand is practically worthless.

Yep, that's the challenge. Having your BPS system account for the cost of having no where to go in the 2nd round/no defense in the 2nd round. Some hand examples to help fine tune (assume the AS upcard for all examples):



I call, for reasons already stated.



Now I pass, and if the dealer passes I'm calling hearts in the 2nd round. Jumping the fence with R+1 and nothing else but an extremely dirty boss card is not ideal, but it beats passing from that spot when you only block 1 out of 3 remaining suits. Having somewhere viable to go to in the 2nd round, even if not ideal, can change a first rd marginal call into a pass. Also, in case it's relevant, up 9-6/9-7 I would donate in the first rd with this hand since I don't block a loner.



I pass, with the intention of passing in the 2nd rd. While we have no where to go in the 2nd round, we now have good defense having reverse Next blocked (And again, it goes without saying, up 9-6/9-7 I would donate in the first rd with this hand since I don't block a loner).

[Richardb02]

Conclusion: In BPS language I will add up to 0.75 for a weak R2 hand. In euchre speak I will add 1/2 a trick to the power of my hand to reflect my expectation of a greater loss by passing. IE, if I order from S1 R1 with 2 tricks (neutral hands). I would order with 1 1/2 tricks when my R2 hand is practically worthless.

Yep, that's the challenge. Having your BPS system account for the cost of having no where to go in the 2nd round/no defense in the 2nd round. Some hand examples to help fine tune (assume the AS upcard for all examples):



I call, for reasons already stated.
0.25 S1 R1
0.50 Ks
0.50 Qs
0.25 Ts
0.50 3 Trump, no bowers
0.25 1 Void, c
2.00 Subtotal vs 2.25 order
0.25 No R2 hand
0.25 No jacks
0.25 No aces
2.75 Adjusted value > 2.25, order which confirms call






Now I pass, and if the dealer passes I'm calling hearts in the 2nd round. Jumping the fence with R+1 and nothing else but an extremely dirty boss card is not ideal, but it beats passing from that spot when you only block 1 out of 3 remaining suits. Having somewhere viable to go to in the 2nd round, even if not ideal, can change a first rd marginal call into a pass. Also, in case it's relevant, up 9-6/9-7 I would donate in the first rd with this hand since I don't block a loner.

0.25 S1 R1
0.50 Ks
0.50 Qs
0.25 Ts
0.50 3 Trump, no bowers
0.25 1 Void, c
2.00 Subtotal vs 2.25 order so pass and:

0.50 S1 R2
0.00 Reverse Next
1.00 Jh
0.25 9h
0.25 Bower + 1
0.75 2 Voids, c & d
2.75 Subtotal vs 2.25 order so order




I pass, with the intention of passing in the 2nd rd. While we have no where to go in the 2nd round, we now have good defense having reverse Next blocked (And again, it goes without saying, up 9-6/9-7 I would donate in the first rd with this hand since I don't block a loner).

0.25 S1 R1
0.50 Ks
0.50 Qs
0.25 Ts
0.50 3 Trump, no bowers
0.25 1 Void, c
2.00 Subtotal vs 2.25 order
-.25 Reverse Next Diamond blocked
-.25 Reverse Next Heart blocked
-.25 Both Reverse Next blocked
1.25 Pass R1, confirmed, Pass R2, confirmed, blocks both RN

Up 9-6 or 9-7:
color=#800000]0.25 S1 R1
0.50 Ks
0.50 Qs
0.25 Ts
0.50 3 Trump, no bowers
0.25 1 Void, c
2.00 Subtotal vs 2.25 order
+.75 Max adjustment when Donating is appropriate
2.75 vs 2.25 Order, Ordering confirmed

Conclusion: I can enhance BPS Basic with BPS Advanced and quantify everything that the mega, experienced and successful poster will share. I appreciate the sharing!

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Here's a similar hand that came up last night:

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

Score is 6-6. Dealer upcard is the

S1 has:

S1 has to commit here. Either he should call diamonds or pass with the intention of calling spades in the 2nd round. Pass-pass cannot be an option here when you block only 1 out of 3 remaining suits in the 2nd round (and have no off aces to boot). That's just setting your team up to fail.

In this spot I'm always passing diamonds and going for the euchre and then calling spades should the dealer's team pass. This spades call is not as bad as it looks. Yes it's against Hoyle but you still have R+1 and two voids. It's a viable backup plan, and you can always get lucky. It is often the case in euchre that making a dubious call and trying to get lucky is the safer option than passing a hand with little defense. IOW passing such a holding will cost your team so much in the long run that you might as well call something and hope to get lucky since the theoretical cost of a euchre will always be very low in this spot.

Results oriented note: If S1 calls spades in the 2nd rd, he gets the point no matter how S2 plays his 3 trump hand, assuming S1 starts off with the correct lead, the KD or QD. So in this instance S1 created a negative 5 point swing for his team, that also ended the game.

[irishwolf]

When S1 has 3 and turned down a diamond (JD is buried or with S3) it says someone is loaded in hearts and clubs. A perfect set up for a loner in clubs.

Thus you have to call Hearts or Spades! The spade call a bit of defense, and hearts a leap of faith.

[Richardb02]

I agree, passing Diamonds was the right call as long as I was prepared to call Spades. Passing in R2 was my mistake. BPS R2 calcs:
0.50 S1 R2
0.00 Reverse Next
1.00 Right
0.25 9s
0.25 Bower + 1
0.75 2 Voids
2.25 vs 2.25. I should have ordered.

OE, I’m backing off for a while. My priorities, God, wife, family, work, profession, health, churc h, racquetball, does not leave enough time to participate with OE at a high level. The stress of being an Investment Advisor Representative and Insurance Agent during a severe market correction is taking it’s toll. I have 2 family members who are doctors. More stress. I shall return, but it will take time before I participate with gusto. Thank you.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I agree, passing Diamonds was the right call as long as I was prepared to call Spades. Passing in R2 was my mistake. BPS R2 calcs:
0.50 S1 R2
0.00 Reverse Next
1.00 Right
0.25 9s
0.25 Bower + 1
0.75 2 Voids
2.25 vs 2.25. I should have ordered.

You didn't make any mistakes. You were the dealer. I was critiquing S1's play (Don's).

OE, I’m backing off for a while. My priorities, God, wife, family, work, profession, health, churc h, racquetball, does not leave enough time to participate with OE at a high level. The stress of being an Investment Advisor Representative and Insurance Agent during a severe market correction is taking it’s toll. I have 2 family members who are doctors. More stress. I shall return, but it will take time before I participate with gusto. Thank you.

Do whatever you gotta do to make you happy Richard, but I hope you can still make Monday's game. It's been very fun playing with you. You have a good spirit, someone I wish I could play with in real life.

[Richardb02]

Wes, I am not bailing. The game is excellent. All y’all are great. If you need a 4th I’m there. If you have 4 I will sit out. Because of the corona virus, visits to OE have sky-rocketed. I have invited the immense number of visitors to the Monday night games. I hope we attract more people to the wonderful game of Euchre. I immensely enjoy playing with you , IrishWolf, Dlan and Kirsten.

My priorities are just different. I suggest that many visitors are more like me than the posters on OE. I get it, that you and IrishWolf want the best plays in Euchre. Personally, I want more enjoyment out of Euchre, I don’t desire perfection.

What do you want Wes and IrishWolf, perfection or more players?

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Wes, I am not bailing. The game is excellent. All y’all are great. If you need a 4th I’m there. If you have 4 I will sit out. Because of the corona virus, visits to OE have sky-rocketed. I have invited the immense number of visitors to the Monday night games. I hope we attract more people to the wonderful game of Euchre. I immensely enjoy playing with you , IrishWolf, Dlan and Kirsten.

My priorities are just different. I suggest that many visitors are more like me than the posters on OE. I get it, that you and IrishWolf want the best plays in Euchre. Personally, I want more enjoyment out of Euchre, I don’t desire perfection.

What do you want Wes and IrishWolf, perfection or more players?

I want it all mother****er!!!

Seriously tho, If nobody makes mistakes/dubious/debatable plays then there's nothing to talk about. Perfection is boring. The only thing I really care about is that people are having fun.

[irishwolf]

Hey Richard, it's only a game. Take nothing personal the analysis is just because SOME people are OCD. lol

My wife quite playing long ago! Let me sit out unless a 4th is needed.

[Richardb02]

I apologize for my remark.

I didn’t take anything personally. If I wasn’t working 11 hours a day helping people with health and wealth issues I would be working diligently on the quality of my play. I don’t even remember posting that last statement. Zombie Richard was channeling frustration. Under normal situations, I appreciate the critiques, even harsh critiques! More appropriately, I would have said, be careful guys, other readers think that you are attacking me. I don’t take it that way, but let’s demonstrate a tone of helping people improve their game. That way they may join us Monday nights at 9PM ET at worldofcardgames.com.

Let me add that, I noticed that the number of “views” had increased dramatically on oe. Less OCD players, like me under professional and family stress, are trying to enjoy the great game of Euchre for enjoyment. Let’s adjust our style to be more inviting to those people. We can attract more people to Euchre. I take personal responsibility for my remark that contradicts every goal that I just expressed. Let’s try to attract more people to Euchre with our interactions.