SHOULD I GO ALONE ON THIS HAND

Ask questions, discuss and debate your strategies, euchre polls and more
Post Reply
irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

SHOULD I GO ALONE ON THIS HAND

Unread post by irishwolf » Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:32 pm

This occurred Monday OE Night. The score is 6 to 7, you as dealer have 6. The 9S is the upcard. You hold JC AS QD KH 10H. Of course spades will be trump.

However, the following questions need to be answered with your decision:

1) Should I swing for the fence and go alone?

2) If I do go alone, what are the chances of success, a four (4) pt march?

3) If I get euchred and put the enemy at 9 to 6, now what are my chances of winning?

4) What is the probability of being Euchred with this hand?

5) What if I take my partner along, will I get a sweep?

6) What if I take my partner along, will I get just one point?

7) Is taking my partner alone help or a hindrance?

8) Don't know, don't care, swing for the fence, let's get crazy?



Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Wed Apr 28, 2021 12:17 am

irishwolf wrote:
Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:32 pm
This occurred Monday OE Night. The score is 6 to 7, you as dealer have 6. The 9S is the upcard. You hold JC AS QD KH 10H. Of course spades will be trump.

However, the following questions need to be answered with your decision:

1) Should I swing for the fence and go alone? No, bring your partner for two. Too weak.
K-Qsuited swing for it K-10s no.


2) If I do go alone, what are the chances of success, a four (4) pt march? I don't know, guessing wildly here and with nothing to back it up, 15%?

3) If I get euchred and put the enemy at 9 to 6, now what are my chances of winning? I vagely remember wes saying something about equity here for the ppl up. I'm going to say somewhere 18-28% chance of winning for the 6-9

4) What is the probability of being Euchred with this hand? Getting euchred while going alone or playing with your partner? If it's playing by yourself for a loner. I'd say hmmmm 20-29% ballpark figure euchre rate.

5) What if I take my partner along, will I get a sweep? It's possible you might get a sweep, but its more likely you wont go set.

6) What if I take my partner along, will I get just one point? Depending on what and how it was played around the table, yes it's possible you can get two

7) Is taking my partner alone help or a hindrance? I think you mean is taking your partner a help or hinderance? I'm going to say help.

8) Don't know, don't care, swing for the fence, let's get crazy? I prefer to play for two here with this configuration and score. That's just me. Some ppl like to swing for fences I like to chip away and put my team in a spot to win on next deal instead of getting that once in a long while loner.

Tbolt65
Edward



Edit: I'll get back to you. Imma going cheat and check Eric Zalas euchre rate on this hand, :twisted:
Edit x2: Never mind, he doesn't have this particular hand. The closest I found Was a Right-King-9h K-10s off suit from seat 2.

Fair use employed, Taken from Eric Zalas book Power Euchre: Volume V


Hand 136 WEAK

Dealer turns down the 9 of clubs. Seat #2 holds the Jack-King-9Hearts and the King-10spades. Seat #2 names hearts trump and plays alone. EO=0.646




(Card_J-H) (Card_K-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_K-S) (Card_10-S)


Hands Won (288) 83% total points 224
Takes 3 tricks (270) 77.81% points 270
Takes all 5 tricks (18) 5.19% points 72
Euchred (59) 17% points -118

Analysis:
This is hand 115 except the player in seat #2 foolishly decides to play alone. It's a very poor decision because seat #2 only has o ne sure trick with this holding. When this hand played alone from seat #2, it generates a mean expected outcome of 0.646 points and a win rate of 83%. The loner success rate(i.e., take all five tricks) is only 5.3% based on a robust data set of 347 hands played. The optimal strategic decision is to play this hand with your partner. The difference in means between the expected outcome for playing this hand with the partner(mean EO =0.817) vs playing alone (mean EO =0.646) is statistically significant at the 90% confidence interval (t=1.808). Hand 136 is a good euchre hand when played from seat #1 or the dealer position where I suspect it would generate a mean expected outcome approaching one point per play over the long term.



Edit x3: I inserted the bold and underline.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Wed Apr 28, 2021 2:47 am

Interesting post by you Ed. I will not disclose the answer(s) until more people respond. Those aggressive players.

Also, an interesting hand, IMO! You have even have a hint of my approach to this hand.

I am sure Don is headed to the Work Shop, lol.

Irish

P.S. Thanks for looking up similar hands in Power Euchre.

User avatar
LeftyK
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:45 am
Location: North Carolina

Unread post by LeftyK » Wed Apr 28, 2021 10:47 am

irish you forgot a few questions.... 9) did your Partner (meaning you) bag you (me) earlier in the game holding two trumps from s2? and 10) did you (me) get berated two hands before for calling right, king two suited down 2-7 (we marched to make it 4-7). (You had the other 5 trumps but I'm not passing on that hand, down that much). IF I were down 9-1 or 9-3 I would normally lone this hand, but since the above happened that I just stated, then you get a spiteful loner call that botched.....and most (not all) botched loners do not make a point when teammate could have joined in, had loner not been called.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:24 pm

Okay lefty, let's talk about the Bagging your from S2. You say I bagged you but you forgot to say what I held. Hand 2, score is 1 to 1, you the dealer. I held:
9C QC AH 9H QD AS UP. You want me to order with 9C & QC? The full story is that you had a better hand than I if you pick up the AS: KH KS AD TD KC. Why did you not make AS trump if you are comparing hands and what you had guarding again Next????
But you passed, did you NOT? Tell the truth here, not some lopsided BS. And guess what, it would have been a euchre because the S3 seat held JC JS 10C. So you are the FOOL!

The score when your ordered was 7 to 2. You DO NOT assist at that score, and you had JC KC QD KD TH AC UP. You do NOT assist at that difference in score, you shut your mouth when you have a Good Partner. You also said you would go alone but your words are "If I were down 9- 1 or 9 -3, I would normally lone this hand." You have to be kidding? What are your chances of making a loner with KD,QD, TH off suit???

So what about the Discarding well discussed just last week, but you did it again, Hand 7, 9:26 9C up you had JC AH 10H KD QD and discarded the low off suit 10H to your AH and kept KD/QD. Do you want the line and verse and post this? Some people are Hard Core and do not want to change their bad habits.

Last hand of the last game, you ordered from S3 seat, with a hand of 2.25 strength. Had you passed you might have been able to euchre the dealer. Your last two hands of that game, should we post those Lefty? It was like playing 1 against 3. Enough to make me throw up! Your skill level is B - at best. Please, never be my partner again, ever until you learn something.

I can give you many more issues with your game Lefty, do you want them? Overall you make trump way to lean on a consistent basis. Your partner pulled you out, saved your butt so much is the only reason you won the first two games. That is why your win percentage is low against good players, they cannot pull you out of your hole as it goes both ways. You lose the close games. For real! Your sensing skills are much to be desired, IMO.

Irishwolf


irish you forgot a few questions.... 9) did your Partner (meaning you) bag you (me) earlier in the game holding two trumps from s2? and 10) did you (me) get berated two hands before for calling right, king two suited down 2-7 (we marched to make it 4-7). (You had the other 5 trumps but I'm not passing on that hand, down that much).

User avatar
LeftyK
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:45 am
Location: North Carolina

Unread post by LeftyK » Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:12 pm

Irishwolf:

I think your refill ran out .....you need back on your meds.......You have the cards mixed up on those hands. except for the one actually posted to start this thread. (Tbolt or you please post hand 2 and the last two hands of that match - all I saved was the 4-7 two point hand to make it 6-7)......anyways, *(1) that 2nd hand I did pick up and somehow (somehow) we made a point (as I recall.....) *2 - I'm sure the gurus on this site will concur that down 2-7 calling s2r1 with right king in my hand is good enough in that situation... *(3) "Your partner pulled you out, saved your butt so much is the only reason you won the first two games. " -- yeah !! there are no michael jordan's in euchre, pal. Only Chris Evert & Pam Shriver's (women's tennis doubles=dominated). PLUS those 1st two games I LONED it as dealer for game BOTH times ! Just post the hands rainman (leave the names in there too while you're at it) and leave the name calling out of the discussion.
You're no better than me at this game and don't forget it. I win alot of close games. Your loss if you don't partner with me, as you feel it's a chore "babysitting me" as a partner.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:23 pm

That is funny Lefty, I went 5 & 2 (Monday before last when I played) and 8 & 3 (Friday) against you in two settings. That is 13 & 5 against you. I forgot more about euchre than you will ever know.

So answer the questions of this Post. Glad you owned up to the one who went alone. Justify your going alone? Get real.

Answer the Discarding of the 10H vs KD/QD. Your knowledge of euchre is in your answers and comments, as well as your play - weak. To witness, your comments you made vs Wes posts. That as well tells the story.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:41 pm

Lefty,

When I get off work, I can post the seat 2 order with Right - King and the seat 3 spades order to me as dealer.

Tbolt65
Edward


Spoiler alert I only agree with one of the calls. I dont have the 2 trump to the ace or was it king seat 2 order either. Side note. I hate when Wes orders that up to me when its NOT a score of 8 to 9 , 9 to 9 9 to 8.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:31 pm

I have decided to go ahead and post the results of my 150 hand test played both ways:

TAKING MY PARTNER ALONG:
150 hands // You hold S4 - DEALER: JC AS 9S KH 10H (Note: 18 cards dealt randomly for each hand then played both ways.)
9 SWEEPS = 9/150 = 6% (+ 12 pts)
11 EUCHRES / 150 HANDS = 7.33% (- 14.66 pts)
132 = 1 PT / 150 = 88%
+ 18 – 22 + 132 = + 128 WITH PARTNER 128 / 150 = 85.33 PTS
EO = + .8533 (based on 100 hands)

GOING ALONE TAKE - OUT 16 HANDS S2 ASSISTING, NET 134
150 hands ADJUSTED WITH ASSISTS 16 FROM S1 = 134 NET HANDS
17 LONERS = + 68 17 / 134 = 12.69%
34 EUCHRES = - 68 34 / 134 = 25.37%
1 POINT = 134 – 51 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
51 (134 – 51 = 83) + 68 – 68 + 83 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
EO = + .6194 (based on 100 hands)
Note: Results is +/- 5% and exceeds a 95% CI that it is best to NOT go alone. If I did another 150 hands, the results will not differ by more that 5%

Ed, interestingly, you were very close with your answers. Also, that hand EZ Hand 136 WEAK appears to be very close although different seat and having the JS. I think the similarities is largely due to the weak off suit holdings. So which you rather have JS/KS or JC/AS? My answer is give me the JS/KS any day. I get to control the first two tricks.

" EZ HAND: Dealer turns down the 9 of clubs. Seat #2 holds the Jack-King-9Hearts and the King-10spades. Seat #2 names hearts trump and plays alone. EO=0.646 His hand has the Right bower which is a powerful card. But the off suit is similar. And the dealer has a little bit of an advantage, playing last on the first trick only. He will lose that advantage if the enemy has the Right to the 2nd trick."

For my hand, JC AS 9S KH 10h, there are numerous ways of getting euchred with unknown power cards against you of JS, AH, S3 has void & trumps first lead, etc.
I would say foolish to go alone as your success rate is only about 1 in 8 attempts when the score is close 6 to 7or8, and the euchre rate at 25%. You can get to 10 quicker by taking your partner along, mainly as it cuts the Euchres down (7.3%) vs (25%). You do not need a loner. Get 1 or 2 points, you are still in the game. Consider, your partner might have a void to what S1 leads, or an off suit Ace, or the AH or JS. He is your decoy to prevent the frontal attack by S1&S3. Use him to your advantage. Euchre after all is a partnership game.

You or anyone can then insert the results to the questions posed. By putting the enemy ahead 9 to 6 and their deal - a come back is about 10 - 20%.

Don't swing for the fence with this hand.

IRISHWOLF

Richardb02
Posts: 720
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2018 8:57 pm
Location: Florida

Unread post by Richardb02 » Wed Apr 28, 2021 8:34 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Tue Apr 27, 2021 11:32 pm
This occurred Monday OE Night. The score is 6 to 7, you as dealer have 6. The 9S is the upcard. You hold JC AS QD KH 10H. Of course spades will be trump.

However, the following questions need to be answered with your decision:

1) Should I swing for the fence and go alone?
It is marginal. Against OE opponents I order up and go for 2. Against any other lesser opponents, I go for it.

2) If I do go alone, what are the chances of success, a four (4) pt march?
I estimate 0.45^2.75=.11. That is too low, even against weaker opponents, unless the score is 6-9. At 6-9, I would swing for the walk off grand slam (it is baseball season), against less than OE caliber players.
3) If I get euchred and put the enemy at 9 to 6, now what are my chances of winning?
No info, except for a WAG (Wild Ass Guess). <10%
4) What is the probability of being Euchred with this hand?
BPS=3.75 (adjusted for a Loner), I estimate <5%.
5) What if I take my partner along, will I get a sweep?
I would take my average expectation of 10% sweeps and adjust upwards to 20%. I would expect that both lower level (because of fear)and OE players (trusting S4 to make the decision down 6-x) to pass on Rx. So 20% expectations for 2 points, seems reasonable.
6) What if I take my partner along, will I get just one point?
Using my previous conclusions, 95% success less 20% 2 points = 75% expectation of 1 point.
7) Is taking my partner alone help or a hindrance?
EVo= .75x1+.20x2-.05x2=0.75
EVoa=.84x1+.11x4-.05x2=1.18
So theoretically, based on EVo and EVoa(oa = ordering alone), EV=-.43.
So taking your partner along is a hindrance.

8) Don't know, don't care, swing for the fence, let's get crazy?
Based on my current thinking, I order when stopper-equivalents (2 single card stoppers and 2 parlays stop my 4 point Loner. This hand has 2 stoppers Js & Ah and 3 parlays Qxh, jxh and a void in hearts= 2.75 stopper-equivalents, which I used in Q2, 0.45^2.75=0.11.

Full disclosure, I posted before Irish posted his answer.

User avatar
Dlan
Site Admin
Posts: 588
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:08 pm
Location: Ohio

Unread post by Dlan » Wed Apr 28, 2021 10:55 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 2:47 am

I am sure Don is headed to the Work Shop, lol.

Irish

Image

Out chasing bees for most of the day, but....


The nice thing about using the workshop for testing is you have the option of replaying the same hand or keeping just the dealer’s hand and redealing the other seats. This came in handy when trying to decide on the best course of action. In this case, to bring along my partner or go alone.

I tried 30 hands, one by going alone, one by bringing along your partner, both using the same cards, so 15 total sets.

In 5 sets, the result for both was a euchre.

In one set, going alone resulted in a euchre. bringing a partner made a point.

In two sets, going alone resulted in 1 point, by bringing your partner, 2 points were made.

In the rest, it made no difference whether alone or with a partner, 1 point was made

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:15 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:31 pm
I have decided to go ahead and post the results of my 150 hand test played both ways:

TAKING MY PARTNER ALONG:
150 hands // You hold S4 - DEALER: JC AS 9S KH 10H (Note: 18 cards dealt randomly for each hand then played both ways.)
9 SWEEPS = 9/150 = 6% (+ 12 pts)
11 EUCHRES / 150 HANDS = 7.33% (- 14.66 pts)
132 = 1 PT / 150 = 88%
+ 18 – 22 + 132 = + 128 WITH PARTNER 128 / 150 = 85.33 PTS
EO = + .8533 (based on 100 hands)

GOING ALONE TAKE - OUT 16 HANDS S2 ASSISTING, NET 134
150 hands ADJUSTED WITH ASSISTS 16 FROM S1 = 134 NET HANDS
17 LONERS = + 68 17 / 134 = 12.69%
34 EUCHRES = - 68 34 / 134 = 25.37%
1 POINT = 134 – 51 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
51 (134 – 51 = 83) + 68 – 68 + 83 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
EO = + .6194 (based on 100 hands)
Note: Results is +/- 5% and exceeds a 95% CI that it is best to NOT go alone. If I did another 150 hands, the results will not differ by more that 5%

Ed, interestingly, you were very close with your answers. Also, that hand EZ Hand 136 WEAK appears to be very close although different seat and having the JS. I think the similarities is largely due to the weak off suit holdings. So which you rather have JS/KS or JC/AS? My answer is give me the JS/KS any day. I get to control the first two tricks.

" EZ HAND: Dealer turns down the 9 of clubs. Seat #2 holds the Jack-King-9Hearts and the King-10spades. Seat #2 names hearts trump and plays alone. EO=0.646 His hand has the Right bower which is a powerful card. But the off suit is similar. And the dealer has a little bit of an advantage, playing last on the first trick only. He will lose that advantage if the enemy has the Right to the 2nd trick."

For my hand, JC AS 9S KH 10h, there are numerous ways of getting euchred with unknown power cards against you of JS, AH, S3 has void & trumps first lead, etc.
I would say foolish to go alone as your success rate is only about 1 in 8 attempts when the score is close 6 to 7or8, and the euchre rate at 25%. You can get to 10 quicker by taking your partner along, mainly as it cuts the Euchres down (7.3%) vs (25%). You do not need a loner. Get 1 or 2 points, you are still in the game. Consider, your partner might have a void to what S1 leads, or an off suit Ace, or the AH or JS. He is your decoy to prevent the frontal attack by S1&S3. Use him to your advantage. Euchre after all is a partnership game.

You or anyone can then insert the results to the questions posed. By putting the enemy ahead 9 to 6 and their deal - a come back is about 10 - 20%.

Don't swing for the fence with this hand.

IRISHWOLF

Pardon me Irishwolf If I use this post here to illustrate some things to our local legend here. Maybe he will read into it or not but From the nuggets you have had given up, makes me a believer that I know that you know, that I know my stuff, but perhaps not as inclined mathematically as yourself or Wes.


With that said, Wes when in doubt about stuff and you can't see mathematically for yourself or prove it to yourself of what I say is right since you haven't worked on it. Just go with what I say until you find something yourself or someone else proves other wise. I need you to start talking that leap of faith to trust what I say and once you do, perhaps that will filter into parts of other area's of your game intuition, because your will be getting out of your head more and starting feeling the game a bit better and just trusting more. From what I have gathered IrishWolf at least accepts and acknowledges this part of the game. Now I may be putting words into his mouth with what comes next but I think he is pleasantly surprised that well maybe He(Edward) does know his stuff after all?


So with that said I like to be visual with stuff and hopefully these two clips here will highlight my sentiments. Consider the first one, well self explanatory, the second one is more of a teaching moment both to hammer home, what I have always been saying to you. That is trust me, Wes.


I know my stuff Wes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBgeCZW3upg


The Teacher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc3VG9JZM6I



Tbolt65
Edward

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:15 am

Ed,

I have no doubt you are at the top of the game. And I agree with your statement even though you are actually talking to Wes:

"Just go with what I say until you find something yourself or someone else proves other wise. I need you to start talking that leap of faith to trust what I say and once you do, perhaps that will filter into parts of other area's of your game intuition, because your will be getting out of your head more and starting feeling the game a bit better and just trusting more. From what I have gathered IrishWolf at least accepts and acknowledges this part of the game. Now I may be putting words into his mouth with what comes next but I think he is pleasantly surprised that well maybe He(Edward) does know his stuff after all?"

Any partnership it takes time to work out the style you want to play. And the thing that is hard is when one does not believe in this or that. How do work on those things to really get in sync, that is the 64 dollar question. Sometimes you actually get mad at each other. But you have to come to an agreement. It's like a marriage, work things out or else . . . You have to bury egos and be totally open to what each is saying. Oh boy, the work is when you disagree. But I say, be open and listen and work to prove those concepts. Then agree and move on to the next.

But actually, we (the three of us) all play similar enough that it is easy for me to partner with either of you. I could take either of you and we would be an awesome team, Not that that will ever happen. And the reason for that is that good players do 80% of the same things, principles, the same because they, or each, knows that that is what works. And the other 20% is as difficult as the first 80%.

So one more thing, forget the ego. I know a dozen or so elite players just as good as each of you! They are few and far between, however, you are not up there by yourself. The cream always rises to the top.

~IRISHWOLF

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:29 am

irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:24 pm
Okay lefty, let's talk about the Bagging your from S2. You say I bagged you but you forgot to say what I held. Hand 2, score is 1 to 1, you the dealer. I held:
9C QC AH 9H QD AS UP. You want me to order with 9C & QC?
Wait, the upcard was the AC right??

I actually strongly suspect that ordering up this hand from the 2S:

(Card_Q-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_Q-D)

(Card_A-C) upcard

Is a +EV call even with an expert partner. I still have to demonstrate that with a good sample tho. If down 3 or more points I pass that tho hoping my P either calls or has a loner. Similar to your "down 4" convention.
irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:24 pm
The full story is that you had a better hand than I if you pick up the AS: KH KS AD TD KC. Why did you not make AS trump if you are comparing hands and what you had guarding again Next????
But you passed, did you NOT? Tell the truth here, not some lopsided BS. And guess what, it would have been a euchre because the S3 seat held JC JS 10C. So you are the FOOL!
I'm kinda confused at what exactly the dealer had given that I can't really tell if the upcard was the AC or AS. But assuming the dealer had AK in trump + a doubleton green ace, I would call that given that I block no suits if I pass. I do believe that hand is a +EV call. I have not tested that configuration yet, but the work EZ has done suggests it's +EV in my estimation, and the work you did in that one thread on a similar hand also suggests it's a +EV call. So I agree that the dealer should've called.
irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:24 pm
So what about the Discarding well discussed just last week, but you did it again, Hand 7, 9:26 9C up you had JC AH 10H KD QD and discarded the low off suit 10H to your AH and kept KD/QD. Do you want the line and verse and post this? Some people are Hard Core and do not want to change their bad habits.
Yep, very bad discard. Making it harder to get rid of a loser suit on your team's call is very poor euchre. This should be so obvious that no further discussion/argument should be necessary.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:39 am

irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:31 pm
I have decided to go ahead and post the results of my 150 hand test played both ways:

TAKING MY PARTNER ALONG:
150 hands // You hold S4 - DEALER: JC AS 9S KH 10H (Note: 18 cards dealt randomly for each hand then played both ways.)
9 SWEEPS = 9/150 = 6% (+ 12 pts)
11 EUCHRES / 150 HANDS = 7.33% (- 14.66 pts)
132 = 1 PT / 150 = 88%
+ 18 – 22 + 132 = + 128 WITH PARTNER 128 / 150 = 85.33 PTS
EO = + .8533 (based on 100 hands)

GOING ALONE TAKE - OUT 16 HANDS S2 ASSISTING, NET 134
150 hands ADJUSTED WITH ASSISTS 16 FROM S1 = 134 NET HANDS
17 LONERS = + 68 17 / 134 = 12.69%
34 EUCHRES = - 68 34 / 134 = 25.37%
1 POINT = 134 – 51 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
51 (134 – 51 = 83) + 68 – 68 + 83 = 83 / 134 = 61.94%
EO = + .6194 (based on 100 hands)
Note: Results is +/- 5% and exceeds a 95% CI that it is best to NOT go alone. If I did another 150 hands, the results will not differ by more that 5%
Very good work Wolf!! I often wonder tho if the very best hand from this configuration would make the loner cut, I.E. take this spade hand from the dealer spot:

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

I really wanna test that hand soon. I'm hoping it will be a loner but won't be surprised if it's not.
irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 7:31 pm
For my hand, JC AS 9S KH 10h, there are numerous ways of getting euchred with unknown power cards against you of JS, AH, S3 has void & trumps first lead, etc.
I would say foolish to go alone as your success rate is only about 1 in 8 attempts when the score is close 6 to 7or8, and the euchre rate at 25%. You can get to 10 quicker by taking your partner along, mainly as it cuts the Euchres down (7.3%) vs (25%). You do not need a loner. Get 1 or 2 points, you are still in the game. Consider, your partner might have a void to what S1 leads, or an off suit Ace, or the AH or JS. He is your decoy to prevent the frontal attack by S1&S3. Use him to your advantage. Euchre after all is a partnership game.

You or anyone can then insert the results to the questions posed. By putting the enemy ahead 9 to 6 and their deal - a come back is about 10 - 20%.

Don't swing for the fence with this hand.

IRISHWOLF
I would just add that this hand is a decent hail mary loner at the right scores-- something I'm sure we all agree with--but in a tough game where S1 donates well, marginal hands like this may not be a loner at ANY score.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:55 am

Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 12:17 am
3) If I get euchred and put the enemy at 9 to 6, now what are my chances of winning? I vagely remember wes saying something about equity here for the ppl up. I'm going to say somewhere 18-28% chance of winning for the 6-9
Down 9-6 on opponent's deal, you have around 14% equity according to this

chart: https://members.tripod.com/borf_books/euchprob.htm

That's as good as an approximation as any, so I would just go with that.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 12:17 am
Edit: I'll get back to you. Imma going cheat and check Eric Zalas euchre rate on this hand, :twisted:
Edit x2: Never mind, he doesn't have this particular hand. The closest I found Was a Right-King-9h K-10s off suit from seat 2.

Fair use employed, Taken from Eric Zalas book Power Euchre: Volume V


Hand 136 WEAK

Dealer turns down the 9 of clubs. Seat #2 holds the Jack-King-9Hearts and the King-10spades. Seat #2 names hearts trump and plays alone. EO=0.646




(Card_J-H) (Card_K-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_K-S) (Card_10-S)


Hands Won (288) 83% total points 224
Takes 3 tricks (270) 77.81% points 270
Takes all 5 tricks (18) 5.19% points 72
Euchred (59) 17% points -118

Analysis:
This is hand 115 except the player in seat #2 foolishly decides to play alone. It's a very poor decision because seat #2 only has o ne sure trick with this holding. When this hand played alone from seat #2, it generates a mean expected outcome of 0.646 points and a win rate of 83%. The loner success rate(i.e., take all five tricks) is only 5.3% based on a robust data set of 347 hands played. The optimal strategic decision is to play this hand with your partner. The difference in means between the expected outcome for playing this hand with the partner(mean EO =0.817) vs playing alone (mean EO =0.646) is statistically significant at the 90% confidence interval (t=1.808). Hand 136 is a good euchre hand when played from seat #1 or the dealer position where I suspect it would generate a mean expected outcome approaching one point per play over the long term.



Edit x3: I inserted the bold and underline.
Dude, that seems like a really good reverse Next loner. Those numbers seem off to me. Like I wonder if the distribution is right in EZ's sample. Like is everybody legit passing clubs in the first round or not and is S1 legit passing or not in the 2nd rd (if biddable hands are being passed in the first rd or by S1-R2 than the distribution is off and the results will be off too). Only getting a 4 pt loner 5.3% of the time with that hand in that spot seems way too low to me. The sad part is I can't verify or falsify the above sample becuz testing round 2 hands on the kitchen table is WAY too tedious. Only a computer simulation can realistically do that. I will say this, in a tough game where S1 plays really well, this hand is just a call. S1 should have reverse Next blocked often enough to make going alone not worth it. But in a weak game, I find this loner hard to resist.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:01 am

LeftyK wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:12 pm
*2 - I'm sure the gurus on this site will concur that down 2-7 calling s2r1 with right king in my hand is good enough in that situation...
I think it's a call but I am sympathetic to Wolf's idea in that spot. This definitely feels like a "agree to disagree" situation becuz I don't see how either side can really prove their case.
LeftyK wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:12 pm
*(3) "Your partner pulled you out, saved your butt so much is the only reason you won the first two games. " -- yeah !! there are no michael jordan's in euchre, pal. Only Chris Evert & Pam Shriver's (women's tennis doubles=dominated).
If I had a dollar for every time someone said something like "you suck! your partner saved your ass over and over!" I'd have at least a thousand dollars! I agree with the sentiment above. No matter how good you are you are NOTHING without your partner! That's why euchre is a romantic game!

Of course one can certainly take it too far and order too thin. I know there's spots I probably order too thin that need to be cleaned up.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:21 am

Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:41 pm
Side note. I hate when Wes orders that up to me when its NOT a score of 8 to 9 , 9 to 9 9 to 8.
Just cuz you hate it don't mean it aint right (feel like I've said that to every ex gf but this time I'm serious!)

The hypothesis is simple enough:

2 low trump + a doubleton off green ace is a +EV call from the 2 spot when you block no suits even if your P is an expert. And if this is true it will suggest that other similar hands will be +EV too. Here's the 2S hand I'm testing right now:

Delear upcard: (Card_Q-C)

S2 has: (Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_9-D)

N = 30
2,-1,0,-1,0,4,3,3,2,0,5,0,0,-1,-2,1,0,0,2,-1,-1,1,0,0,-4,0,0,0,0,3
Mean of calling: .5
Standard deviation: 1.8523
P value: .1501

Calling gets euchred: 9/30 = 30%
Calling gets 1 pt: 17/30 = 56.67%
Calling gets sweep: 4/30 = 13.33%
EO of calling: .2333
EO of passing: -.2666
EV of calling: +.5

So right now calling is beating out passing, but it's a small sample and I haven't reached a 95% CI yet. BTW I intentionally choose the worst possible hand from this configuration since if this hand is a +EV call that will prove any better hand from this configuration is also a +EV call. I played all hands as myself which actually biases the sample AGAINST calling becuz I'm maximizing euchres on defense and I'm calling thin as the dealer in many spots. IOW this call has more value in a weak game where opponents don't play for the euchre and our P will pass biddable hands. So IF this hand is a +EV call under these tougher conditions that really says something.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:36 am

Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:15 pm
Pardon me Irishwolf If I use this post here to illustrate some things to our local legend here. Maybe he will read into it or not but From the nuggets you have had given up, makes me a believer that I know that you know, that I know my stuff, but perhaps not as inclined mathematically as yourself or Wes.
At the end of the day the indisputable fact for every game of probability whether we're talking poker, euchre, blackjack, etc, is math is the ultimate answer to every question/decision. If one doesn't know the math or is not willing to do the math, their game will forever be limited whether they realize it or not. There's just no getting around that.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:15 pm
With that said, Wes when in doubt about stuff and you can't see mathematically for yourself or prove it to yourself of what I say is right since you haven't worked on it. Just go with what I say until you find something yourself or someone else proves other wise. I need you to start talking that leap of faith to trust what I say and once you do, perhaps that will filter into parts of other area's of your game intuition, because your will be getting out of your head more and starting feeling the game a bit better and just trusting more. From what I have gathered IrishWolf at least accepts and acknowledges this part of the game. Now I may be putting words into his mouth with what comes next but I think he is pleasantly surprised that well maybe He(Edward) does know his stuff after all?
Sorry to burst your bubble but I don't value your expert intuition above mine, and I see no reason I should. But that's besides the point. I have a healthy disrespect for anyone's expert intuition when we can do better. And in many spots we can do better. We can put claims to the test. We don't need to guess anymore. At this point relying on expert intuition when we don't need to is just lazy.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 11:15 pm
So with that said I like to be visual with stuff and hopefully these two clips here will highlight my sentiments. Consider the first one, well self explanatory, the second one is more of a teaching moment both to hammer home, what I have always been saying to you. That is trust me, Wes.


I know my stuff Wes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBgeCZW3upg


The Teacher
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xc3VG9JZM6I



Tbolt65
Edward
I will never trust you or myself over a good sample. I'm a science guy bro. Show me the data. Empirical evidence is king. Expert intuition once thought we were at the center of the universe, that if you dropped a rock vs a feather in a vacuum the rock would hit the ground first, that slavery was ok, that women were property, etc

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:28 am

irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:15 am
Ed,

I have no doubt you are at the top of the game. And I agree with your statement even though you are actually talking to Wes:

"Just go with what I say until you find something yourself or someone else proves other wise. I need you to start talking that leap of faith to trust what I say and once you do, perhaps that will filter into parts of other area's of your game intuition, because your will be getting out of your head more and starting feeling the game a bit better and just trusting more. From what I have gathered IrishWolf at least accepts and acknowledges this part of the game. Now I may be putting words into his mouth with what comes next but I think he is pleasantly surprised that well maybe He(Edward) does know his stuff after all?"

Any partnership it takes time to work out the style you want to play. And the thing that is hard is when one does not believe in this or that. How do work on those things to really get in sync, that is the 64 dollar question. Sometimes you actually get mad at each other. But you have to come to an agreement. It's like a marriage, work things out or else . . . You have to bury egos and be totally open to what each is saying. Oh boy, the work is when you disagree. But I say, be open and listen and work to prove those concepts. Then agree and move on to the next.

But actually, we (the three of us) all play similar enough that it is easy for me to partner with either of you. I could take either of you and we would be an awesome team, Not that that will ever happen. And the reason for that is that good players do 80% of the same things, principles, the same because they, or each, knows that that is what works. And the other 20% is as difficult as the first 80%.

So one more thing, forget the ego. I know a dozen or so elite players just as good as each of you! They are few and far between, however, you are not up there by yourself. The cream always rises to the top.

~IRISHWOLF

All good points. Irishwolf.

Last statement though..... I've always maintain and still do and say repeatedly that I am not the best. The top is a limited group, sure. Many share the same qualities and can recognize who's the real deal. I believe and feel anyone who thinks they are the best are not humble and they in fact are too arrogant and potentially closed off to actually getting better or adjusting themselves.

With that being said I can most assuredly say with supreme confidence that I'm an authority in this game. Like many others have come to be. Mind you not "the" authority but "a" authority. Big difference. All great players know their place. It is that inner competitive juices which continually drives these type of players to continued excellence. Everyone has something of value to share and thats not only limited to those at the top. I implore everyone to remain open to ideas and if one comes along go with it until proven otherwise or you find something better. I've written many times about these sentiments here.

In any great discussions or partnerships there is always give and take. There must be understandings so the conversation can flow and the partnership can be flexible but resolute.


Tbolt65
Edward

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:43 am

@Wes


Yoda sigh. With his head lowering in disappointment.


I feel like yoda in the swamp and obi wan coming to console him on the difficulties of training and to not give up hope on Luke.


Tbolt65
Edward

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:48 am

Did 20 more samples. Here's' the update.

Delear upcard: (Card_Q-C)

S2 has: (Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_9-D)

N = 50
2,-1,0,-1,0,4,3,3,2,0,5,0,0,-1,-2,1,0,0,2,-1,-1,1,0,0,-4,0,0,0,0,3,2,0,2,0,-3,5,3,5,0,0,0,-1,0,0,2,0,0,2,1,-3
Mean of calling: .6
Standard deviation: 1.9378
P value: .0334

Calling gets euchred: 13/50 = 26%
Calling gets 1 pt: 32/50 = 64%
Calling gets sweep: 5/50 = 10%
EO of calling: .32
EO of passing: -.28
EV of calling: +.6

Ok, so we've reached almost a 97 CI and calling clearly beats out passing. End of story right? IDK something about this sample doesn't smell right to me. I think calling might be running a little too hot here. 4 times in this sample S1-R2 had a 4 pt loner after S2 and S4 passed. Those sequences created +2,+5,+5,+5 for calling. In the first case (+2) calling gets euchred (-2) but passing leads to a S1 4 pt loner (-4) to create a +2 for calling. In the three latter cases calling made 1 pt, but passing led to the dealer passing also and S1 getting a 4 pt loner, hence the +5s. 4 times in 50 hands seems like a lot of 4 pt loners for S1. I know S2 has a hand that blocks nothing so if his P passes, there is a greater danger of S1 having that loner but 4 times in 50 hands? IDK Man. What if we took out two of those samples, eliminating two +5s. What would our sample look like then:

N = 48
Mean of calling: .4167
Standard deviation: 1.7484
P value: .1054

Calling still wins with an EV of +.4167 but only at a 89% CI. Not bad. I still feel pretty confident that calling will beat out passing with every hand in this configuration group.

BTW for those who are curious, how many times did I block my P's 4 pt loner in this sample: twice. Once we would've gotten 2 pts if I called so calling created a -2 pt swing for my team, and the other one calling actually led to my team only getting 1 pt! so this call created a -3 pt swing for my team. Bottom line: the claim or idea that we should pass hands like this for fear of blocking our P's loner is not backed up by the numbers. It's more or less a superstitious/religious idea becuz it's not grounded in reality. One should NOT worry about blocking their P's loner. What one should worry about--especially in a tough game--is this hand getting to the 2nd rd. Passing a hand that blocks nothing--that has a decent chance of scoring a pt--and letting this hand get to the 2nd rd is much more of a tragic result on average than blocking our P's loner. However I am in agreement with Irishwolf that when our team is down a certain amount we should back off and pass hoping to get lucky when our P has that loner. I tend to pass when my team is down 3 pts or more. Irishwolf mentioned down 4 pts or more. I'm not married to the 3, I mean it's just a guess. I would be fine with doing it down 4+

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am

Comments, more of saying I think something is missing:

What is missing is this. Of those hands your partnership made a point, what percentage would your good partner have made trump anyway? That is a statistical number with 4 cards unknown. Having only the upcard of the QC, (23.4%) you probably got euchred 75% of those hands? The remainder he had two and you had two and still got euchred. So my point is you have to know the other side of the coin, not just your test results. So the Real question is what portion of those Assist would the dealer have turned it down that you actually made a point or got Euchred? Those hands should be factored in separately and now what are the test results? Here is my point, S4 the dealer will or should only pass when he has No trump to go with the upcard 23.4% and no trump no ace only 12%. If S2 assists you surely will be euchred most or all of the hands like this. The dealer will then have 2 or more 76.6% (with the upcard) and should be making trump unless he has Next blocked. Two trump no ace 24% and half those will (estimating no hard data) results in a euchre. So euchres I think will be greater than 26% (closer to 33%??). So of course it will be a positive EO. Are you assisting unnecessarily and actually obstructing? Stealing the Captaincy's of your partnership - mutiny? You should never assume your actions govern solely.

It is also the responsibility of the Dealer, not S2, in blocking Next. Rarely, will I assist from S2 with the idea of block Next unless I have a Weak partner who does not understand Euchre. Then I feel I must also consider those attributes as well. Sometimes you (dealer) has to Defense on Offense. I can show you results where Dealer side made a point anyway. It's Stay In Your Lane!

In addition, if he S2 was going to order anyway, you may be ruining his loner? Of course score and situation governs this. Are those points factored in the test results (might be 10%)? And in particular if down in score 4 points or more. Me in particular, do NOT want my partner, ever, to order me if down in score by 4 points or more. And I hope those in this OE forum who become my partner on occasion abides by that Convention.

Overall, limited sample size, but good stuff to consider!

~IRISHWOLF

WES's TEST RESULTS:
N = 50

2,-1,0,-1,0,4,3,3,2,0,5,0,0,-1,-2,1,0,0,2,-1,-1,1,0,0,-4,0,0,0,0,3,2,0,2,0,-3,5,3,5,0,0,0,-1,0,0,2,0,0,2,1,-3

Mean of calling: .6
Standard deviation: 1.9378
P value: .0334

Calling gets euchred: 13/50 = 26%
Calling gets 1 pt: 32/50 = 64%
Calling gets sweep: 5/50 = 10%
EO of calling: .32
EO of passing: -.28
EV of calling: +.6

Ok, so we've reached almost a 97 CI and calling clearly beats out passing. End of story right? IDK something about this sample doesn't smell right to me. I think calling might be running a little too hot here. 4 times in this sample S1-R2 had a 4 pt loner after S2 and S4 passed. Those sequences created +2,+5,+5,+5 for calling. In the first case (+2) calling gets euchred (-2) but passing leads to a S1 4 pt loner (-4) to create a +2 for calling. In the three latter cases calling made 1 pt, but passing led to the dealer passing also and S1 getting a 4 pt loner, hence the +5s. 4 times in 50 hands seems like a lot of 4 pt loners for S1. I know S2 has a hand that blocks nothing so if his P passes, there is a greater danger of S1 having that loner but 4 times in 50 hands? IDK Man. What if we took out two of those samples, eliminating two +5s. What would our sample look like then:

N = 48
Mean of calling: .4167
Standard deviation: 1.7484
P value: .1054

Calling still wins with an EV of +.4167 but only at a 89% CI. Not bad. I still feel pretty confident that calling will beat out passing with every hand in this configuration group.
Last edited by irishwolf on Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:30 pm, edited 2 times in total.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:31 am

This comment about can't be proven is just B.S. Done this for many years as it generally the best way you can get back in the game. Stop assisting when down in score by 4 or more. It is the difference between Standard Strategy and an Excellent Strategy. You treat the upcard like it is a Jack. And the other side is the Dealer knows to pick it up thin and go alone if you think you can. Disagreeing does not bother me because, I don't care who disagrees. I want 4 not 2 or 1.

~IRISHWOLF


Post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:01 am

LeftyK wrote: ↑
Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:12 pm
*2 - I'm sure the gurus on this site will concur that down 2-7 calling s2r1 with right king in my hand is good enough in that situation...

I think it's a call but I am sympathetic to Wolf's idea in that spot. This definitely feels like a "agree to disagree" situation becuz I don't see how either side can really prove their case.

User avatar
LeftyK
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:45 am
Location: North Carolina

Unread post by LeftyK » Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:49 am

irishwolf wrote:
Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:23 pm
That is funny Lefty, I went 5 & 2 (Monday before last when I played) and 8 & 3 (Friday) against you in two settings. That is 13 & 5 against you.

So answer the questions of this Post. Glad you owned up to the one who went alone. Justify your going alone? Get real.

Answer the Discarding of the 10H vs KD/QD.
I've had chitty cards in those sessions. Remember, euchre is about partnership and getting cards (mostly cards). I went 4/5 this last outing where you went 0/5. Did I botch the loner? Sure did, it was a bad call... and also I should have waited the next hand to trap dealer to call, but you're in game hammering your own partner had plenty to do with both calls......and yeah I want Empirical Statistical evidence that holding green A9 is better than holding KQ of the other green while getting a 9 of trump called into my hand as dealer and my partner having no idea I hold the right. I will proceed and read the rest of what's been said in this post, but I wanted to respond.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:14 am

Discount almost anything a B- player says, and about cards, your were not crappy cards. Botch the Loner, you still do not get it? I made One comment when you Ordered me down 7 to 2. The rest was on you. You can't even own your bad calls. Not just the loner call at 6 to 7 but ordering the Dealer with a lousy hand. I could more bad calls by you, not as my partner. Still the discarding issue you have as well.

Once you as Don Partner, score 6 to 7, LEFTY AT S1 ORDERS with 10D QD AS 10S 9C AND GETS EUCHRE, NOW 8 TO 7. HD 11. What type Euchre is that Lefty? That is your style of Play, all the time! Miracle you won that game.

~IRISHWOLF

I had chitty cards in those sessions. ... Did I botch the loner? Sure did, it was a bad call... and also I should have waited the next hand to trap dealer to call, but you're in game hammering your own partner had plenty to do with both calls......and yeah I want Empirical Statistical evidence that holding green A9 is better than holding KQ of the other green while getting a 9 of trump called into my . . .

User avatar
LeftyK
Posts: 226
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:45 am
Location: North Carolina

Unread post by LeftyK » Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:20 pm

admin, please close this thread out, we're done here.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:32 pm

Done because you do not want to OWN IT!

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 1:53 pm

LeftyK wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:49 am
and yeah I want Empirical Statistical evidence that holding green A9 is better than holding KQ of the other green while getting a 9 of trump called into my hand as dealer and my partner having no idea I hold the right.
Becuz it is self-evidently true that making it harder to get rid of a loser suit hurts your team I will not waste my time testing this spot. There are some things in life that should not need a test. For example, I don't need to look at a double blind, placebo controlled trial to know that mothers love their children. Some things you just know. This is one of those things.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:06 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:31 am
This comment about can't be proven is just B.S. Done this for many years as it generally the best way you can get back in the game. Stop assisting when down in score by 4 or more. It is the difference between Standard Strategy and an Excellent Strategy. You treat the upcard like it is a Jack. And the other side is the Dealer knows to pick it up thin and go alone if you think you can. Disagreeing does not bother me because, I don't care who disagrees. I want 4 not 2 or 1.

~IRISHWOLF
There is way your convention could be proven, sure, but we don't have access to that way right now. For example, all we'd have to do is take two equal bot teams. One team uses your convention and the other doesn't and we simulate the game results until we reach a 95 CI. Saying something like "I've done this for many years, and I have had success" doesn't move the needle much for me. At best that puts us at the hypothesis generating stage. We can't draw safe conclusions becuz the human brain is way too glitchy to be trusted.

Another problem we have here is when we're in a tough game where S1 donates properly, I don't think this convention is worth it. But I do see its merits in a standard weak game when S1 doesn't donate.

Here's an obvious example that i've always felt is true in a weak game:

I'm in the 2 seat, 1st rd, and my team is down 9-6/9-7 and the upcard is the: (Card_J-C)

The action is on me and I have any 3 trump but I don't have enough to go alone. IMO, I should always pass (IOW I should always pass unless I have a loner), and the dealer--knowing this--should always pick up even if the only trump they have is the Jack. I believe this convention will get more wins than playing it straight up. I tried to run this by Edward but he wasn't buying it. It seems so obviously true to me tho. Notice however that in a tough game where S1 donates correctly, this convention is useless in this spot.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:00 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
Comments, more of saying I think something is missing:

What is missing is this. Of those hands your partnership made a point, what percentage would your good partner have made trump anyway? That is a statistical number with 4 cards unknown. Having only the upcard of the QC, (23.4%) you probably got euchred 75% of those hands? The remainder he had two and you had two and still got euchred. So my point is you have to know the other side of the coin, not just your test results.

The other side of the coin is already factored into my test results. Hands my P would've made trump anyway are imbedded in the results. And they don't always necessarily get the same results as a S2 order becuz depending on who calls can change S1's lead strategy. As we both know what to lead vs a 2S call is different than what to lead vs a dealer call. Not only that but if S2 orders it will change how S4 plays the hand vs if S4 ordered himself. For example, say S4 has R+1+0. If S4 makes the order he is going to be playing off a lot giving his P every chance to help out, but if S2 orders up the same hand, S4 will now be trumping in with the QC and leading the JC in those same spots. All these different dynamics are factored into my sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
So the Real question is what portion of those Assist would the dealer have turned it down that you actually made a point or got Euchred? Those hands should be factored in separately and now what are the test results?

I don't think the question matters. That's just noise, all that matters is what does better with S2's hand, calling or passing. We don't need to know the particulars.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
Here is my point, S4 the dealer will or should only pass when he has No trump to go with the upcard 23.4% and no trump no ace only 12%. If S2 assists you surely will be euchred most or all of the hands like this.

That's factored in the sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
The dealer will then have 2 or more 76.6% (with the upcard) and should be making trump unless he has Next blocked.

I disagree with this approach. I don't think the dealer should be making trump with just 2 low trump, no aces just becuz he doesn't block Next. I mean maybe with a big enough lead that's the case but that's a different scenario. As the dealer I generally don't worry about Next specifically. That comes off as superstitious to me. Why focus on one suit when S1 could have a loner in any suit. I think my general defensive approach as the dealer is better than that, and that is when I block no 2nd rd suits or block only 1 out of 3 I will loosen up, hands like 2 low trump + a green ace now become calls, but if I block 2/3 that hand is a pass to me. I also dealer donate when up by 3 or more depending on my hand but that's not really relevant to this sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
Two trump no ace 24% and half those will (estimating no hard data) results in a euchre. So euchres I think will be greater than 26% (closer to 33%??).

I think I know why my euchre rate isn't higher. As you already now, I play every spot as myself. And when I'm the dealer I always short suit myself in green if I have the chance becuz I believe that's the correct strategy becuz it's more advantageous to be void in the longer suit. As a team, me and Edward play this way becuz it makes it SO much easier for S2 to find his P's void, and this helps us scratch out more points and even euchre more S1 or S3 calls when we're on defense. Why does this matter in this sample? Well S2 already has a void in spades. So if the dealer always creates a void in green if he can that means S2/S4 will almost always have 2 voids as a team. That's a pretty nice advantage here. Those times S2 orders up S4 and S4 only has 2 small trump + no aces, S2/S4's team still have a decent chance to make a point becuz of those 2 voids. I think that dynamic is leading to a lower euchre rate than when we would expect. This should also highlight the fact that S2 having a void is probably critical to his overall results. Change S2's hand to this:

(Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-D) (Card_9-S) (Card_9-H)

And there's no guarantee that calling does better than passing. In fact I would be surprised if it did. Having no voids really hurts.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
So of course it will be a positive EO. Are you assisting unnecessarily and actually obstructing? Stealing the Captaincy's of your partnership - mutiny? You should never assume your actions govern solely.

Yes! I am doing all of this, but it doesn't' matter. All that matters is what has the higher EO, S2 calling vs passing. Yes, when S2 calls with this hand, S4 will play less optimally, leading trump often when he shouldn't becuz he doesn't know the true nature of S2's hand. All that is factored into this sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
It is also the responsibility of the Dealer, not S2, in blocking Next. Rarely, will I assist from S2 with the idea of block Next unless I have a Weak partner who does not understand Euchre. Then I feel I must also consider those attributes as well. Sometimes you (dealer) has to Defense on Offense. I can show you results where Dealer side made a point anyway. It's Stay In Your Lane!
I fundamentally disagree with this approach. #1 I never just focus on Next. I think that's superstitious type thinking. I play defensively from the 2 spot and the dealer spot and loosen up my calling strategy when I block 0/3 or 1/3 2nd rd suits. If I block 2 out of 3, and that one suit I don't block is Next, I don't care unless I have a very nice lead. One cannot worry about stopping everything, they'll end up calling too much. S2 is not ordering in this spot becuz he doesn't block next, he is ordering in this spot becuz he blocks 0/3 2nd round suits.

BTW even if you strongly disagree with my stance on this (not worrying about Next in particular), you should know my play style still gets to a similar place as I probably make more defensive S2 and S4 calls than anyone on here. The fact that I play so defensively as the dealer should hurt the S2 calling strategy and yet the results still indicate that calling is best.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
In addition, if he S2 was going to order anyway, you may be ruining his loner? Of course score and situation governs this. Are those points factored in the test results (might be 10%)? And in particular if down in score 4 points or more. Me in particular, do NOT want my partner, ever, to order me if down in score by 4 points or more. And I hope those in this OE forum who become my partner on occasion abides by that Convention.

Overall, limited sample size, but good stuff to consider!

~IRISHWOLF

I assume you mean S4, and yes I have ruined 2 loners in 50 hands costing my team a total of 5 points (which is significant) but calling still beat out passing. That said, there is one benefit of S2 calls stopping S4 loner attempts. Many times, had S2 passed, S4 would've went alone and gotten only 1 pt, but if S2 assists their team gets 2 points. That has happened at least once in my sample.

Everything is factored in. And I agree with you that S2 should pass if down 4 pts or more. I was actually passing down 3 pts or more but will adopt your convention with this hand if you think 4 is better than 3.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:40 pm

Wes (aka the legend) wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 2:06 pm
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:31 am
This comment about can't be proven is just B.S. Done this for many years as it generally the best way you can get back in the game. Stop assisting when down in score by 4 or more. It is the difference between Standard Strategy and an Excellent Strategy. You treat the upcard like it is a Jack. And the other side is the Dealer knows to pick it up thin and go alone if you think you can. Disagreeing does not bother me because, I don't care who disagrees. I want 4 not 2 or 1.

~IRISHWOLF
There is way your convention could be proven, sure, but we don't have access to that way right now. For example, all we'd have to do is take two equal bot teams. One team uses your convention and the other doesn't and we simulate the game results until we reach a 95 CI. Saying something like "I've done this for many years, and I have had success" doesn't move the needle much for me. At best that puts us at the hypothesis generating stage. We can't draw safe conclusions becuz the human brain is way too glitchy to be trusted.

Another problem we have here is when we're in a tough game where S1 donates properly, I don't think this convention is worth it. But I do see its merits in a standard weak game when S1 doesn't donate.

Here's an obvious example that i've always felt is true in a weak game:

I'm in the 2 seat, 1st rd, and my team is down 9-6/9-7 and the upcard is the: (Card_J-C)

The action is on me and I have any 3 trump but I don't have enough to go alone. IMO, I should always pass (IOW I should always pass unless I have a loner), and the dealer--knowing this--should always pick up even if the only trump they have is the Jack. I believe this convention will get more wins than playing it straight up. I tried to run this by Edward but he wasn't buying it. It seems so obviously true to me tho. Notice however that in a tough game where S1 donates correctly, this convention is useless in this spot.

Ummmmmmmmm hold on buckaroo. Thats an entirely different scenario. I would pass there. In that spot. I did just respond to you though in that other thread.


Tbolt65
Edward

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:58 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:40 pm
Ummmmmmmmm hold on buckroo. Thats an entirely different scenario. I would pass there. In that spot. I did just respond to you though in that other thread.


Tbolt65
Edward
I ran that convention by you around a year ago and you rejected it. You weren't too keen on the idea that the dealer must pick up the Jack even if he has nothing else.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:32 pm

Wes (aka the legend) wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 3:00 pm
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
Comments, more of saying I think something is missing:

What is missing is this. Of those hands your partnership made a point, what percentage would your good partner have made trump anyway? That is a statistical number with 4 cards unknown. Having only the upcard of the QC, (23.4%) you probably got euchred 75% of those hands? The remainder he had two and you had two and still got euchred. So my point is you have to know the other side of the coin, not just your test results.

The other side of the coin is already factored into my test results. Hands my P would've made trump anyway are imbedded in the results. And they don't always necessarily get the same results as a S2 order becuz depending on who calls can change S1's lead strategy. As we both know what to lead vs a 2S call is different than what to lead vs a dealer call. Not only that but if S2 orders it will change how S4 plays the hand vs if S4 ordered himself. For example, say S4 has R+1+0. If S4 makes the order he is going to be playing off a lot giving his P every chance to help out, but if S2 orders up the same hand, S4 will now be trumping in with the QC and leading the JC in those same spots. All these different dynamics are factored into my sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
So the Real question is what portion of those Assist would the dealer have turned it down that you actually made a point or got Euchred? Those hands should be factored in separately and now what are the test results?

I don't think the question matters. That's just noise, all that matters is what does better with S2's hand, calling or passing. We don't need to know the particulars.
[quote=irishwolf post_id=4541

Irishwolf is right it does matter Wes.

time=1619706232 user_id=53]Here is my point, S4 the dealer will or should only pass when he has No trump to go with the upcard 23.4% and no trump no ace only 12%. If S2 assists you surely will be euchred most or all of the hands like this.

That's factored in the sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
The dealer will then have 2 or more 76.6% (with the upcard) and should be making trump unless he has Next blocked.

I disagree with this approach. I don't think the dealer should be making trump with just 2 low trump, no aces just becuz he doesn't block Next. I mean maybe with a big enough lead that's the case but that's a different scenario. As the dealer I generally don't worry about Next specifically. That comes off as superstitious to me. Why focus on one suit when S1 could have a loner in any suit. I think my general defensive approach as the dealer is better than that, and that is when I block no 2nd rd suits or block only 1 out of 3 I will loosen up, hands like 2 low trump + a green ace now become calls, but if I block 2/3 that hand is a pass to me. I also dealer donate when up by 3 or more depending on my hand but that's not really relevant to this sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
Two trump no ace 24% and half those will (estimating no hard data) results in a euchre. So euchres I think will be greater than 26% (closer to 33%??).

I think I know why my euchre rate isn't higher. As you already now, I play every spot as myself. And when I'm the dealer I always short suit myself in green if I have the chance becuz I believe that's the correct strategy becuz it's more advantageous to be void in the longer suit. As a team, me and Edward play this way becuz it makes it SO much easier for S2 to find his P's void, and this helps us scratch out more points and even euchre more S1 or S3 calls when we're on defense. Why does this matter in this sample? Well S2 already has a void in spades. So if the dealer always creates a void in green if he can that means S2/S4 will almost always have 2 voids as a team. That's a pretty nice advantage here. Those times S2 orders up S4 and S4 only has 2 small trump + no aces, S2/S4's team still have a decent chance to make a point becuz of those 2 voids. I think that dynamic is leading to a lower euchre rate than when we would expect. This should also highlight the fact that S2 having a void is probably critical to his overall results. Change S2's hand to this:


I agree here.

(Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-D) (Card_9-S) (Card_9-H)

And there's no guarantee that calling does better than passing. In fact I would be surprised if it did. Having no voids really hurts.


irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
So of course it will be a positive EO. Are you assisting unnecessarily and actually obstructing? Stealing the Captaincy's of your partnership - mutiny? You should never assume your actions govern solely.

Yes! I am doing all of this, but it doesn't' matter. All that matters is what has the higher EO, S2 calling vs passing. Yes, when S2 calls with this hand, S4 will play less optimally, leading trump often when he shouldn't becuz he doesn't know the true nature of S2's hand. All that is factored into this sample.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
It is also the responsibility of the Dealer, not S2, in blocking Next. Rarely, will I assist from S2 with the idea of block Next unless I have a Weak partner who does not understand Euchre. Then I feel I must also consider those attributes as well. Sometimes you (dealer) has to Defense on Offense. I can show you results where Dealer side made a point anyway. It's Stay In Your Lane!
I fundamentally disagree with this approach. #1 I never just focus on Next. I think that's superstitious type thinking. I play defensively from the 2 spot and the dealer spot and loosen up my calling strategy when I block 0/3 or 1/3 2nd rd suits. If I block 2 out of 3, and that one suit I don't block is Next, I don't care unless I have a very nice lead. One cannot worry about stopping everything, they'll end up calling too much. S2 is not ordering in this spot becuz he doesn't block next, he is ordering in this spot becuz he blocks 0/3 2nd round suits.

BTW even if you strongly disagree with my stance on this (not worrying about Next in particular), you should know my play style still gets to a similar place as I probably make more defensive S2 and S4 calls than anyone on here. The fact that I play so defensively as the dealer should hurt the S2 calling strategy and yet the results still indicate that calling is best.

I agree with Irishwolf here Wes, you are the one that taught me about dealer donates but yet with a competent partner you still order seat 2 to protect against seat 1. You are still in 1 vs 3 mode here and you cant do that to your competent p's

irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 10:23 am
In addition, if he S2 was going to order anyway, you may be ruining his loner? Of course score and situation governs this. Are those points factored in the test results (might be 10%)? And in particular if down in score 4 points or more. Me in particular, do NOT want my partner, ever, to order me if down in score by 4 points or more. And I hope those in this OE forum who become my partner on occasion abides by that Convention.

Overall, limited sample size, but good stuff to consider!

~IRISHWOLF

I assume you mean S4, and yes I have ruined 2 loners in 50 hands costing my team a total of 5 points (which is significant) but calling still beat out passing. That said, there is one benefit of S2 calls stopping S4 loner attempts. Many times, had S2 passed, S4 would've went alone and gotten only 1 pt, but if S2 assists their team gets 2 points. That has happened at least once in my sample.

Everything is factored in. And I agree with you that S2 should pass if down 4 pts or more. I was actually passing down 3 pts or more but will adopt your convention with this hand if you think 4 is better than 3.
[/quote]

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:48 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:32 pm
Irishwolf is right it does matter Wes.
No it does not matter. It CANNOT matter becuz all that matters is the math. All that matters is what strategy has the higher EV. If calling is +EV, and we've reached a 95%+ CI, and there's no reason to believe the sample is wack, and we get independent replicated results backing that up, then the discussion ends there assuming we wish to remain rational.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:32 pm
I agree with Irishwolf here Wes, you are the one that taught me about dealer donates but yet with a competent partner you still order seat 2 to protect against seat 1. You are still in 1 vs 3 mode here and you cant do that to your competent p's
Nope, I am only in math mode. It doesn't matter how competent S4 is. Calling with the S2 hand I tested is +EV. And part of the reason it's +EV is becuz S2 blocks no suits. So the idea that it's the dealer's job to worry about the 2nd round has been falsified. The truth is the responsibility falls on both parties. That's what the data is suggesting. It doesn't matter how we feel about it. The math is the math.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:24 pm

You have to analyze the other scenarios to compare to your seat 2 calls round 1. The value of passing , ordering and getting set. Ruining a loner. Seat 1 calling and making point, two or 4, also getting set and then finally getting back to you in seat 2 round 2 and the actions you take. That all needs to be factored in and it does matter Wes. Plus trust your partner to self donate in key spots. Somthing of which your controlling mind won't or cant accept/deal with/understand. That trust factor Ive been talking about which Irishwolf has talked about here recently. It just not in these scenarios but its in the fabric of euchre itself in a true partnership game.

Tbolt65
Edward

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:33 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:24 pm
You have to analyze the other scenarios to compare to your seat 2 calls round 1. The value of passing , ordering and getting set. Ruining a loner. Seat 1 calling and making point, two or 4, also getting set and then finally getting back to you in seat 2 round 2 and the actions you take. That all needs to be factored in and it does matter Wes. Plus trust your partner to self donate in key spots. Somthing of which your controlling mind won't or cant accept/deal with/understand. That trust factor Ive been talking about which Irishwolf has talked about here recently. It just not in these scenarios but its in the fabric of euchre itself in a true partnership game.

Tbolt65
Edward
R U KIDDING ME. DO YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE TALKING TO??? IT IS ALL FACTORED IN.

Again, what the data is showing us is that correct play from the 2 seat is way more dynamic that you think. Your old school rigid approach to 2S play is simply wrong and now youre at a crossroads. Follow the math or follow your feelings.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm

Wes (aka the legend) wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:48 pm
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 4:32 pm
Irishwolf is right it does matter Wes.
No it does not matter. It CANNOT matter becuz all that matters is the math. All that matters is what strategy has the higher EV. If calling is +EV, and we've reached a 95%+ CI, and there's no reason to believe the sample is wack, and we get independent replicated results backing that up, then the discussion ends there assuming we wish ....

Nope, I am only in math mode. It doesn't matter how competent S4 is. Calling with the S2 hand I tested is +EV. And part of the reason it's +EV is becuz S2 blocks no suits. So the idea that it's the dealer's job to worry about the 2nd round has been falsified. The truth is the responsibility falls on both parties. That's what the data is suggesting. It doesn't matter how we feel about it. The math is the math.
So if thats the case why do you still say you self donate at a score of 3 or greater?

I've been preaching about leaking points away to you. You keep trucking along about the math. Thats all fine and dandy but it all adds up. The take aways. The point give aways. That which you do in many scenarios. You have this seat 2 r1 dont block anything that myself and Irishwolf hates. You have the self donates in as dealer when up 3 or more. You have the seat 1 donates at most scores. Even with expert players you get saved at times but too many times these scenarios all add up in a game and are costly in a good game. I dont need a calculator to tell me whats right and wrong, Ive seen it from the get go. Your games will be much more solid. It already is but you will plug the leakage of points. Now what you do in any other game, you may be able to over come these leakages. In the higher end games it is detrimental. Everything is that much more scrutinized since basic mistakes are nearly gone at that level of play.


Tbolt65
Edward

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:07 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
So if thats the case why do you still say you self donate at a score of 3 or greater?
Very good question! Ok like i've mentioned before, if we were playing up to 1 million, then making the +EV decision would all that matters. Donating would almost cease to exist except if somehow both teams were extremely close to 1 million at the exact same time. But in a game where we are playing to 10, where 4 pt loners are quite devastating--mathematically speaking--there is presumably value in controlling variance. Like the cost of insurance. The working hypothesis being, it is worth paying this insurance, I.E. making a slight -EV decision and dealer donating (depending on my hand obv) when up 3+ to control some luck in the game. Wolf also has presented another hypothesis from S1: that it is not worth donating vs a non-jack unless up by 3 or more (save up 9-7 ofc). Unfortunately there is no way to falsify either hypothesis without a real computer simulation. The idea that there is an appropriate time to make a -EV decision is unfortunately inherently controversial. The only way I can see to prove such a claim would be to have two equal bot teams, one team incorporating this concept the other not. Then keep running game results until you reach a 95 CI.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
I've been preaching about leaking points away to you. You keep trucking along about the math. Thats all fine and dandy but it all adds up. The take aways. The point give aways. That which you do in many scenarios.

Again, all that matters is the math. Your perception that i'm leaking excessive points is irrelevant. And BTW as far as I'm concerned we are all leaking points until the first round is effectively solved, which it will be. Not just because I'm working on it, but Irishwolf is too. Again, all one can do is make the most +EV decisions possible. Naturally when one does that, they will be very aggressive and players that don't know the math will understandably think one is "leaking points" but it's all an illusion. Keep in mind my overall approach has already won one euchre championship in our tournament and my app results are outstanding (beat my record, come at me bro!). My game is doing great. But here's the thing, I'm a better player now than I was a year ago, and I'll be a better player a week from now/month from now/year from now than I am today. I never stop, and I have the perfect tool to keep refining my play. Any leak I have in the first round will be fixed eventually. And any leak we have as a team will be fixed too. I wont stop until I've done the math on all the relevant spots.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
You have this seat 2 r1 dont block anything that myself and Irishwolf hates.
First of all Irishwolf doesn't hate that. Ironically Irishwolf is the one who clued me into the fact that this hand configuration is probably a call. I can't find the thread, but I remember him advocating for this type of S2-R1 marginal call maybe around 2 years ago (I can't remember). He had an amusing phrase about it, something like "Sometimes you have to sneak through the backdoor instead of bash it down". I'm totally butchering that lol. And besides that what you hate DOES NOT MATTER. All that matters is the math. Is calling a +EV decision or not. If the data says it is, then that's the end of the story assuming we're rational actors.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
You have the self donates in as dealer when up 3 or more.

Yes. I also have the +EV semi-dealer donates in my arsenal, not just the slightly -EV dealer donates.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
You have the seat 1 donates at most scores.

True. I probably donate too much. In my sample from the Monday Night donating thread, it's amazing how much better my results would be if I just cut out all donates where I'm up 1 or less. Still a small sample tho so who knows.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
Even with expert players you get saved at times but too many times these scenarios all add up in a game and are costly in a good game. I dont need a calculator to tell me whats right and wrong, Ive seen it from the get go.

Yes you do need that proverbial calculator. If you're ignoring the math you'll forever be in the dark.
Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 6:23 pm
Your games will be much more solid. It already is but you will plug the leakage of points. Now what you do in any other game, you may be able to over come these leakages. In the higher end games it is detrimental. Everything is that much more scrutinized since basic mistakes are nearly gone at that level of play.


Tbolt65
Edward
My sample simulates a tough game and calling with that hand:

(Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_9-D)

(Card_Q-C) upcard

Is still the right play, and it's not very close either. Reached a 95% CI before I got to 50 hands. That's all that matters at the end of the day. Your opinions, my opinions, your feelings my feelings, on such and such play are not relevant. And if we're not willing to follow the data then our games will forever be hindered. We'll be stuck in place forever. We'll be like the old men playing blackjack never hitting their 16s and 15s vs a 10 cuz they bust out too often.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:58 pm

You are looking at stuff sometimes with a limited view. As such your capacity to understand is limited due to preexisting beliefs. The reason you lack expansion in some areas is you cant suspended your disbelief. You cant rationalize that someone can ascertain information differently than straight math. How is it that I am the best partner you have had and employ a very simlilar game? Was I lucky in the way i came upon this information and play style/understanding? Or maybe I had teachers and personal experience to help mold my play? I am an accomplished euchre player. I have won awards, tournaments, cash games at all levels of play mind you in a very short time from learning the game. Attained high win percentages with 3k plus games in before it was stolen from me. I have taken on authors who said i was full of crap and won. Authors and accomplished hearts player have come to me for insight and opinion on euchre matters and thoughts about tourney structure and rules. I had a hand in the shaping the wsoe.(world series of euchre) Ive even placed in my first and only wsoe. I stepped away from euchre for 9 years. I had nothing to prove or to show. My life took a different turn. Thats who I am. Thats what Ive have done. Like I said to Irishwolf. Im not the authority in euchre, no one is. However I am a authority. That means I know what I am talking about.

Tbolt65
Edward
Last edited by Tbolt65 on Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:32 pm

Tbolt65 wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:58 pm
You are looking at stuff sometimes with a limited view. As such your capacity to understand is limited due to preexisting beliefs. The reason you lack expansion in some areas is you cant suspended your disbelief. You cant rationalize that someone can ascertain information differently than straight math. How is it that I am the best partner you have had and employ a very simlilar game? Was I lucky in the way i came upon this information and play style? Or maybe I had teachers and personal experience to help mold my play? I am an accomplished euchre player. I have won awards, tournaments, cash games at all levels of play mind you in a very short time from learning the game. Attained high win percentages with 3k plus games in before it was stolen from me. I have taken on authors who said i was full of crap and won. Authors and accomplished hearts player have come to me for insight and opinion on euchre matters and thoughts about tourney structure and rules. I had a hand in the shaping the wsoe.(world series of euchre) Ive even placed on my first and only wsoe. I stepped away from euchre for 9 years. I had nothing to prove or to show. My life took a different turn. Thats who I am. Thats what Ive have done. Like I said to Irishwolf. Im not the authority in euchre, no one is. However I am a authority. That means I know what I am talking about.

Tbolt65
Edward
That's a nice story but you can't outsmart the math man.

Tbolt65
Posts: 717
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
Location: Las Vegas

Unread post by Tbolt65 » Thu Apr 29, 2021 9:21 pm

Darth Vader: " I find your lack of faith disturbing". 🤓😎😁

Tbolt65
Edward

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:28 pm

WES's TEST HERE IS MY RESULTS:

The results is for 150 hands but this is just the data on S2/S4 scoring (not if they both passed):

Calling gets euchred: 38/150 = 25.33%
Calling gets 1 pt: 102/150 = 68%
Calling gets sweep: 10/150 = 6.67%
Dealer would Pass = 28/150 = 18.67%
Hands Euchred That Dealer Passed = 18/28 = 64.3%
Hands Scored when Dealer Passed = 10/28 = 35.7%
EO S2 ASSISTING = + 30.67
EO OF S2 ASSISTING = 74.67% (100 - 25.33)

Then I looked at my sample data to see if it was close to what the EV of the trumps:
1 trump EV = 47.7% vs AV = 56% (AV = Actual sample value)
2 trumps EV = 25.5% vs AV = 20%
3 trumps EV = 4.2% vs AV 2.7%
0 trump EV = 23.4% vs AV = 23.3%
So you can see having 1 trump was high, 2 trumps low and 0 close to expected. I do this to see if I am close to random dealing. This is why I do my data each seat for and against the dealer each hand so that it all averages out statistically (it does).

Also highly variable was the euchre rate. In sets of 50 hands it was 10/50; 16/50 & 12/50 = Total 38 / 150. 25.33% and extremely close to Wes's results (comforting).

I think it is also critical to say something about playing these hands, from S1, S2 & S4. Only when S4 has 1 trump (23.3%) of the time is an advantage for the defenders. Also, I never had S2 leading trump and S4 only when he had two trumps and 2 aces. Never if S4 won the 1st trick and had one trump (1 ace or no ace). There are various ways to play the hand, most players from the dealer spot is going to lead trump. That is NOT advisable in this test. Does it impact the results, I suspect it would in a Negative way for S2/S4. Trying to sneak in the back door, if you will!

I have not looked at Hands & Points of S2 Passing. But it will be those 38 / 150. Tired, not looking at it tonight!
I think what is interesting is Dealer Passing vs Not Passing. That will be my focus, STAY TUNED. PART II: I want to do this also as S2 NOT assisting to see if Necessary! That will take some time.

PART III: I also want to test 10c 9c KH QH 9H and 10c 9c KH 9H 9D as this is the ultimate extreme in assisting from S2. This sample extreme is the lower limit of assisting from S2. I think I know the answer of both but hard data would be beneficial.

~IRISHWOLF

===========================================================
WES's TEST:

Did 20 more samples. Here's' the update.

Delear upcard: (Card_Q-C)

S2 has: (Card_10-C) (Card_9-C) (Card_A-H) (Card_9-H) (Card_9-D)

N = 50

2,-1,0,-1,0,4,3,3,2,0,5,0,0,-1,-2,1,0,0,2,-1,-1,1,0,0,-4,0,0,0,0,3,2,0,2,0,-3,5,3,5,0,0,0,-1,0,0,2,0,0,2,1,-3

Mean of calling: .6
Standard deviation: 1.9378
P value: .0334

Calling gets euchred: 13/50 = 26%
Calling gets 1 pt: 32/50 = 64%
Calling gets sweep: 5/50 = 10%
EO of calling: .32
EO of passing: -.28
EV of calling: +.6

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Fri Apr 30, 2021 3:45 pm

UPDATE ON HAND QC UP S2 has 10C 9C AH 9H 9D
Recall in doing 150 hands, S2 assisting all 150 hands my EO = +30.67

I then tested having S2 passing all 150 times. Of the 150 hands, S4 the dealer then passed 28 times and netted 89 points from those 122 hands. Here the results of the 28 hands that he passed:

Of the 28 passes by the dealer:
Loners S1 = 6 = -24 pts
Sweeps by S1/S3 = 5 = -10 pts
S1/S3 – was euchred = 3 = +6
S1/S3 scored 1 point = 12 = -14
Total points by S1/S3 on R2 = -42 is the net net of S1/S3
S2/S4 R1 points = 89
Net Points for S2/S4 = 89 – 42 = 47/150 = 31.33

EO = + 31.33 S2 Passed every time.

Compare this vs S2 assisting of EO = + 30.67 Basically no statistical difference.

One of the main reason is those euchres avoided. But look at the loners, six by S1 of 28 hands. This is extremely high, S4 the dealer passed ans S2 basically has a nothing hand in Clubs and Diamonds. And sweeps as well, 5 of 28 hands. Combined 11 sweeps/loners of 28 hands = 39%.

So the conclusion I arrived at is that it makes no difference to assist or pass. You might block loners/sweeps but give up a lot of euchres.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Fri Apr 30, 2021 5:51 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Fri Apr 30, 2021 3:45 pm
UPDATE ON HAND QC UP S2 has 10C 9C AH 9H 9D
Recall in doing 150 hands, S2 assisting all 150 hands my EO = +30.67

I then tested having S2 passing all 150 times. Of the 150 hands, S4 the dealer then passed 28 times and netted 89 points from those 122 hands. Here the results of the 28 hands that he passed:

Of the 28 passes by the dealer:
Loners S1 = 6 = -24 pts
Sweeps by S1/S3 = 5 = -10 pts
S1/S3 – was euchred = 3 = +6
S1/S3 scored 1 point = 12 = -14
Total points by S1/S3 on R2 = -42 is the net net of S1/S3
S2/S4 R1 points = 89
Net Points for S2/S4 = 89 – 42 = 47/150 = 31.33

EO = + 31.33 S2 Passed every time.

Compare this vs S2 assisting of EO = + 30.67 Basically no statistical difference.

One of the main reason is those euchres avoided. But look at the loners, six by S1 of 28 hands. This is extremely high, S4 the dealer passed ans S2 basically has a nothing hand in Clubs and Diamonds. And sweeps as well, 5 of 28 hands. Combined 11 sweeps/loners of 28 hands = 39%.

So the conclusion I arrived at is that it makes no difference to assist or pass. You might block loners/sweeps but give up a lot of euchres.
That's crazy that you find no statistical difference and I get a calling EV of +.6 which is pretty huge. Of course my sample size is only 50. But then again, I would argue that your data still backs up my claim that we should being calling from this configuration. As stated before, this is the worst possible hand from this specific configuration. If calling with the worst possible hand in this configuration is a statistical tie, that strongly suggests that any better hand from that configuration is a +EV call. So why not always call from this configuration for the sake of simplicity.

Wes (aka the legend)
Posts: 1423
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm

Unread post by Wes (aka the legend) » Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:08 pm

irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:28 pm
I think it is also critical to say something about playing these hands, from S1, S2 & S4. Only when S4 has 1 trump (23.3%) of the time is an advantage for the defenders. Also, I never had S2 leading trump and S4 only when he had two trumps and 2 aces.

I never had S2 leading trump either. For example, if S1 led the AS, S2 would trump in and lead his AH, unless the dealer exposed a heart on the spade lead, then S2 would lead to his partner's void with the 9D. That's the correct way to play it imo when you know your P is always voiding green. BTW I always had S4 leading trump even tho I think this is clearly suboptimal but I liked that feature becuz it presumably made my sample more conservative. I.E. S4 always leading trump should hurt the calling strategy, so if calling is still best with that feature baked in, then that's stronger evidence that calling is indeed the best play. I also liked that feature cuz players often DO lead trump in that spot whether it's right or not.
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:28 pm
Never if S4 won the 1st trick and had one trump (1 ace or no ace). There are various ways to play the hand, most players from the dealer spot is going to lead trump. That is NOT advisable in this test. Does it impact the results, I suspect it would in a Negative way for S2/S4. Trying to sneak in the back door, if you will!

What's crazy is I agree with you that S4 leading trump should hurt the calling strategy but now I'm not so sure anymore. Maybe the reason my results are so different than yours is becuz I always had S4 leading trump?
irishwolf wrote:
Thu Apr 29, 2021 11:28 pm
PART III: I also want to test 10c 9c KH QH 9H and 10c 9c KH 9H 9D as this is the ultimate extreme in assisting from S2. This sample extreme is the lower limit of assisting from S2. I think I know the answer of both but hard data would be beneficial.
I would be curious about those hands too. I'll definitely add them to my list.

irishwolf
Posts: 1050
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm

Unread post by irishwolf » Fri Apr 30, 2021 6:30 pm

Hey, I don't want my partner Leading trump to me when i assist. Especially, if I had a chance to lead and did not. That means I do not have the Right (generally).

What's crazy is I agree with you that S4 leading trump should hurt the calling strategy but now I'm not so sure anymore. Maybe the reason my results are so different than yours is becuz I always had S4 leading trump?

One more thing about the EO hand S4, I did not let S4 Donate. I know he could have so the EO will be higher yet. I wanted to see it without Donates. I have to go back and look at the hands that S4 might have donated (not because a loner was made but had a donate hand).

Ok,I cannot explain the difference in your 50 hands vs my 150. I do have confidence in the 150, and as explained earlier, I deal out the hands, and all three seats take turns being S2's partner, for and against. So you cut down on those potentially lopsided streaks (runs in cards that you know does and will occur). 150 hand sample done like this (I have found) is a pretty powerful test. But I have another 150 to do when I get time, as sometimes I do 300 in total to be damn sure. I want this 'lean assist' to be fully Ironclad strategy. Not only in having a euchre rate lower than 33% (the breakeven) but also because in is basically a Block as well. Even though it now says, you can trust your 'good' partner, (but not weak ones), who cares, order.

For the test results, I do know those 17 euchres is - 34 points and that is pretty big to overcome for S1/S3. I suspect when all pass on R1, S1/S3 will score or have an EO ov 31 to 41. In that range.

I have given up, offer, a lot of tid-bits on this forum that most good players are very reluctant to offer anything. But I see it as CATCH ME IF CAN! I am not a selfish person. But my wife says, NO GOOD DEED GOES UNPUNISHED. And she is threatening me about dealing out more cards, lol. The best euchre is with and against good players. lol

Later,

IRISHWOLF

Post Reply