5-7 Friday Hand #6

[Tbolt65]

Seat 2 plays with partner with possible loner hand and takes two points instead.



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


Tbolt65
Edward

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Seat 2 plays with partner with possible loner hand and takes two points instead.



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


Tbolt65
Edward

S2 needs to go alone in this spot. With no possibility of getting overtrumped on the first lead, this hand is too strong not to go alone with. Not that it matters but if S1 leads a club S2 will likely score a 4 pt loner cuz S3 will get squeezed off of 1 heart as he clings to the QC hoping to catch ACXC.

Whether to go alone or not gets more debatable IF S2 can get overtrumped on the first lead, but this hand is a clear loner imo. I think just calling here is a significant mistake.

[Tbolt65]

Seat 2 plays with partner with possible loner hand and takes two points instead.



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


Tbolt65
Edward

S2 needs to go alone in this spot. With no possibility of getting overtrumped on the first lead, this hand is too strong not to go alone with. Not that it matters but if S1 leads a club S2 will likely score a 4 pt loner cuz S3 will get squeezed off of 1 heart as he clings to the QC hoping to catch ACXC.

Whether to go alone or not gets more debatable IF S2 can get overtrumped on the first lead, but this hand is a clear loner imo. I think just calling here is a significant mistake.

Faulty hand reading logic here. You can't treat seat 2 like a dealer loner. Seat two is more often going to have two off suits than being two suited all together than a dealer loner because dealer as you know can short suit themselves. Seat 2 can't. So this comes down to play based loner tries. With aggressive players they will be less likely to be two suited with Seat 2 loner tries. So then seat three has to hope for that seat two has the Jack of clubs left to have a potential stopper. If they are going to go with the logic of seat 2 loner going to be two suited, low probability that is the case.


I don't fault the Seat 2 for not going alone here. Personally I think it pays off for going for two points here. However at this score you could take your chances at going for 4 points. Usually things are done for a reason with most thinking players. I'm sure there is a reason for this. I'm pretty sure they were not afraid of getting set going alone. That leads me to believe they were specifically trying to play for two points.


Tbolt65
Edward

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Faulty hand reading logic here. You can't treat seat 2 like a dealer loner. Seat two is more often going to have two off suits than being two suited all together than a dealer loner because dealer as you know can short suit themselves. Seat 2 can't. So this comes down to play based loner tries. With aggressive players they will be less likely to be two suited with Seat 2 loner tries. So then seat three has to hope for that seat two has the Jack of clubs left to have a potential stopper. If they are going to go with the logic of seat 2 loner going to be two suited, low probability that is the case.

Dude, S3 doesn't hold any stopper cards. If a club is led on the opening lead and the maker exposes his AC, S3 has to cling to the QC for the next 2 streets as the maker is leading trump, which means S3 has to break up his guarded KHXH. It's not like S3 has great options here. Might as well cling to the QC hoping the maker has that outside suited AcJc.

I don't fault the Seat 2 for not going alone here. Personally I think it pays off for going for two points here. However at this score you could take your chances at going for 4 points. Usually things are done for a reason with most thinking players. I'm sure there is a reason for this. I'm pretty sure they were not afraid of getting set going alone. That leads me to believe they were specifically trying to play for two points.


Tbolt65
Edward

S2 has the equivalent of both bowers. He's gotta go alone in this spot.