Weekly games 11/24 Hand #2

[Dlan]

Now that we have 4 players for the OE games, I’m going to start posting some of the hands again. However, I think we need to do it a little differently. Any reference to players will be removed and I will only show seat positions. (North, South, and so on). If you played and remember this hand, please keep that to yourself. The focus should be on the cards played and not who played them.

What happens on the 4th trick is often the deciding factor for the outcome of the hand.

On the following hand, North is faced with a choice.

What would you have done?



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

[Richardb02]

Tough call for North! There was some chat after the hand that I didn’t fully understand.

Thanks to Dlan posting this hand, I now see that East would have played the Left on trick 3, if he had the left. So North playing the 9 of trump would have taken advantage of that observation. Was that the point of the chat?

Let’s back up to South’s trick 4 lead. Leading the A trump seems to be the correct play, since he knew that North had the right and only one trump had been played. Is that correct?

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Tough call for North! There was some chat after the hand that I didn’t fully understand.

Thanks to Dlan posting this hand, I now see that East would have played the Left on trick 3, if he had the left. So North playing the 9 of trump would have taken advantage of that observation. Was that the point of the chat?

I was mistaken for pointing that out as a relevant factor, i.e. the fact that West played the Kh under the Ah means he can't have the Left since if he had the Left he would've played over the Ah to prevent the maker from potentially stripping him. Yes it's true we can deduce that West can't have the Left but that actually has no strategic bearing on what North should do.

We can actually figure out exactly what North should do based on the logic of the hand. But I won't reveal the answer yet. I'll give you and others a chance to watch the hand and figure it out yourselves.

Let’s back up to South’s trick 4 lead. Leading the A trump seems to be the correct play, since he knew that North had the right and only one trump had been played. Is that correct?

Yes, in general when your partner calls it and your enemy already has 2 tricks in it is imperative to lead trump on the 4th trick. There are rare exceptions to this rule, but this strategy will get it right 95%+ of the time.

[Dlan]

Having lost the first two tricks, South was correct in leading trump ace on 4th lead.

We know that South didn’t hold the left or they would have led it on 4th lead.

I don’t think there was any way to know if the left was held by either West or East.

If West had left-X, they would have been correct in playing low because North picked up the right and would have over trumped.

It was only at the end of the 4 lead that we knew East had no trump. At that point it was too late anyway.

North had a sure 2nd trick with the right.

North should have played the 9 and hoped that East didn’t have the left.

Euchre is a game of many split-second decisions and here North got it wrong.

[Richardb02]

Tough call for North!
Thanks to Dlan posting this hand, I now see that East would have played the Left on trick 3, if he had the left. So North playing the 9 of trump would have taken advantage of that observation. Was that the point of the chat?

I reviewed the 3rd trick again. North had picked up the Right. East had the last play on the 3rd trick. East threw off! He was void and did not trump! If East had the Left, it was a 100% certain trick and he would have played the Left and euchred NS. So East doesn’t have the Left. Since East doesn’t have the Left, North should play low on trick 4.

Of course, this is with hindsight. In fact I’ve reviewed this hand 7 times, to be confident with my conclusion but I am still only 95% confident! LOL.

[Dlan]

Holding the left in 3rd, I agree that they should trump the 3rd trick, but how many players would trump their partners ace?

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Tough call for North!
Thanks to Dlan posting this hand, I now see that East would have played the Left on trick 3, if he had the left. So North playing the 9 of trump would have taken advantage of that observation. Was that the point of the chat?

I reviewed the 3rd trick again. North had picked up the Right. East had the last play on the 3rd trick. East threw off! He was void and did not trump! If East had the Left, it was a 100% certain trick and he would have played the Left and euchred NS. So East doesn’t have the Left. Since East doesn’t have the Left, North should play low on trick 4.

Of course, this is with hindsight. In fact I’ve reviewed this hand 7 times, to be confident with my conclusion but I am still only 95% confident! LOL.

You did it! This is the answer!

[Dlan]

What if East had left-X and was sitting back. One way to rattle the opponents is to let them think the call was Successful till the end.

While North played it wrong, I don't think you can say with 100% certainly that East didn't have the left.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

What if East had left-X and was sitting back. One way to rattle the opponents is to let them think the call was Successful till the end.

While North played it wrong, I don't think you can say with 100% certainly that East didn't have the left.

If East has L-X, then he should not trump the Ac double lead since unguarding is now the only way his team can blow the euchre (I just recalled that North picked up the Right so East could unguard by playing the Left or troll his enemy by staying guarded, I always recommend troll!). But whether East has L-X or not is strategically irrelevant since in that case North is screwed no matter what he does.

It's true that at North's strategic moment, East could still have an unguarded Left if East played the hand poorly. Nothing is 100% certain with humans involved, but I do think basing one's decisions off of strong hand reading logic will benefit them more often than not in the long run even vs unknown players. IOW I would need a very strong player specific read before I would consider deviating course.

Although in this particular hand I would argue one should always play under regardless of player reads because EVEN IF East is bad enough to have an unguarded Left in that spot, that translates into North having a 50% chance of getting euchred no matter what he does. So might as well go with hand reading logic for practice! :-)

Edit: more accurately, North is in a 50-50 spot if East is bad enough to have a Lone Left in that spot. Here's the breakdown

There are two trump in the wild, the Left which only East can have, and the Qh which West or East can have. We know South can't have either card cuz he's not passing 3 trump. If East has L-Qh you're screwed no matter what you do so this permutation is irrelevant. If East had just the Qh you score a pt no matter what you do becuz this would mean the Left is buried so this permutation is irrelevant. If both the Qh and the Left are in the Kitty you succeed no matter what you do so this permutation is irrelevant. If West has KhQh and East has the Left, again you're screwed no matter what you do so this permutation is also irrelevant.

So when does playing the Right as North did succeed? When East has the Left and the Qh is in the kitty. When does playing under succeed? When the Left is in the kitty and West still has the Qh. Probabilistically both scenarios are equally likely. Hence 50-50 spot.

[Richardb02]

Holding the left in 3rd, I agree that they should trump the 3rd trick, but how many players would trump their partners ace?

The Left is boss for this play only. If East does not play the Left, he has squandered his opportunity to euchre NS. He is up 2-0, he knows that North holds the Right, so playing the Left is with a 100% certainty, is the best play.

If East holds Lx, NS will be euchred if East ducks. East is trolling to upset NS emotionally. Focusing on “best play,” avoids the emotional stress.

As part of my MO, I focus on the best play and ignore conjecture about the thinking of my opponent. Weak opponents, IMO, are erratic. Logically, you cannot project the play of someone who is erratic. Strong Opponents will be devious. They have control, I don’t. Therefore, I focus on the factors that I control.

Your question does deserve a direct answer. Casual or weaker players would probably not trump their partner’s ace. “Do not trump thy partner’s ace,” is Hoyle. They have probably been derided for doing so in the past. They are conditioned emotionally to not trump partner’s ace. I get it! I just focus on “best play” and ignore emotional reactions during the stress of a game.

Your question has directed me to a response of, “best play,” to an objection to trumping my partner’s ace. I have learned to reply, “Defense,” when I make weak, semi-donate or donate orders. It has been very effective in defusing the tensions!

[Richardb02]

What if East had left-X and was sitting back. One way to rattle the opponents is to let them think the call was Successful till the end.

While North played it wrong, I don't think you can say with 100% certainly that East didn't have the left.

If East has L-X, then he should not trump the Ac double lead since unguarding is now the only way his team can blow the euchre (I just recalled that North picked up the Right so East could unguard by playing the Left or troll his enemy by staying guarded, I always recommend troll!). But whether East has L-X or not is strategically irrelevant since in that case North is screwed no matter what he does.

It's true that at North's strategic moment, East could still have an unguarded Left if East played the hand poorly. Nothing is 100% certain with humans involved, but I do think basing one's decisions off of strong hand reading logic will benefit them more often than not in the long run even vs unknown players. IOW I would need a very strong player specific read before I would consider deviating course.

Although in this particular hand I would argue one should always play under regardless of player reads because EVEN IF East is bad enough to have an unguarded Left in that spot, that translates into North having a 50% chance of getting euchred no matter what he does. So might as well go with hand reading logic for practice! :-)

Edit: more accurately, North is in a 50-50 spot if East is bad enough to have a Lone Left in that spot. Here's the breakdown

There are two trump in the wild, the Left which only East can have, and the Qh which West or East can have. We know South can't have either card cuz he's not passing 3 trump. If East has L-Qh you're screwed no matter what you do so this permutation is irrelevant. If East had just the Qh you score a pt no matter what you do becuz this would mean the Left is buried so this permutation is irrelevant. If both the Qh and the Left are in the Kitty you succeed no matter what you do so this permutation is irrelevant. If West has KhQh and East has the Left, again you're screwed no matter what you do so this permutation is also irrelevant.

So when does playing the Right as North did succeed? When East has the Left and the Qh is in the kitty. When does playing under succeed? When the Left is in the kitty and West still has the Qh. Probabilistically both scenarios are equally likely. Hence 50-50 spot.

I absolutely agree with Wes’ more general guidance to play low.

I suggest that a 50-50 probability of playing the Right is high. The Left and another trump could still be in the kitty, in general, not necessarily in this hand. That tilts the probability to at least 49-51 that playing the Right is the best play. So playing low is slightly better, in general.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

BTW North's mistake is the kind of mistake ANYBODY can make. I don't care how good you are, euchre is a game that demands an exorbitant amount of concentration and focus, and the easily distracted human brain--that almost always wants to be on auto-pilot and daydream--is going to fail to some degree in reaching that ideal level of focus. It only takes a split second of thinking about something else (did I put the laundry in the dryer yet?) to miss what the upcard was (and then you accidently false-card your P) or to fail to take in the key information that transpired on the previous trick that could save you on the current trick.

The ideal is to never make these mistakes, but it's only an ideal that can never be 100% attained. For me personally, I love shooting for that ideal. That's what makes this game so fun. But when I invariably make this type of mistake I still tend to get mad at myself but then I just quickly remind myself, "dude it's not your fault, you're only a dumb human". We'll call these glitchy human brain mistakes, but there's another kind of mistake that's more important becuz they are more controllable: Fundamental mistakes.

A fundamental mistake is the type of mistake that in theory you can completely eliminate becuz once you understand the situation you can avoid this mistake just by playing on auto-pilot. IOW you can daydream about a million things and still not make this mistake. EG you're playing limit poker, it's a fundamental mistake not to raise AK for value after 5 limpers. Once you see the math and understand why, you always raise AK in that spot for the rest of your life no matter what you're thinking about.

IMO, East made a fundamental mistake on his 2nd lead. East's first lead, the As, is correct, but after the action (S2 plays the 9s, S3 plays off, and the dealer plays a low spade, the Ts), East needs to understand that with the Ks and the Qs still in the wild, the maker--the dealer--is very likely to have another spade. Remember, the dealer already had a chance to create a void when he picked up, so the chances the dealer has another spade after that action is HUGE. East needs to exploit this fact by leading the Js on the 2nd lead. This gives S3, his P, a potential opportunity to pick up a cheap trick by trumping in knowing there's a great chance the dealer will have to follow suit with a higher spade. Basically when the dealer is forced to expose his underbelly on the first lead you ATTACK that weakness when you have the opportunity!!! And yes there are times when the dealer won't have that second spade and your double lead will just end up squeezing off one of your P's trump, but the number of times your team picks up a cheap trick will make this strategy worth it.

In the actual hand, if East had led the Js, S2 would've been forced to trump high and send low, and once he does that the maker's team is euchred every time.

[Richardb02]

Great post Wes. Please let me emphasize your point, Play the general rule unless you are in the zone, 100% focused without distractions, and see a near 100% advantage in breaking the general rule!!

I would like to add my general rule about posting, keep your post simple, straight forward and let other posters add their input. In Oe language, give your fellow poster a chance.

I purposely omitted that North, although an excellent player, made a fundamental mistake that EVERY player has made. IMO, that invited Wes’ post.

Wes responded with his excellent point to play fundamentally. He then went deeper and pointed out East’s R2-lead mistake, another excellent player, missing a fundamental play! Note, I omitted the details of the mistake, to invite further discussion.

[LeftyK]

up 5-2 the dealer made the correct call to pick up the right because loner R2S1 is certain 4... However this hand could have gone all kinds of sideways and that's why euchre is fun because you just never know..... as I watched it play out (watched this five times already), it's trouble all the way for the callers....but seeing the 4th trick lead from S2 ,(if me as dealer), AND playing MMQB (Monday Morning Quarterback), I let the ace side by and go under because I think S3 is bagging a guarded left. IF the score were tighter I might panic and play the right. The real pressure could have been put on by S3 if they led trumps because then dealer is in a pickle on which trump to let go of.