57 Friday Hand #7

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
57 Friday Hand #7
A better relead could have netted a point, but a euchre ensued instead.
https://worldofcardgames.com/#!replayer ... %3A1%7D%5D
Tbolt65
Edward
https://worldofcardgames.com/#!replayer ... %3A1%7D%5D
Tbolt65
Edward

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
S3 makes an unequivocal mistake on 2nd Street. He needs to understand that after trump has been led and he has no boss leads, the turndowned suit (QD) is now the best lead as that is the suit his P most likely is boss in.Tbolt65 wrote: ↑Sat May 08, 2021 3:18 amA better relead could have netted a point, but a euchre ensued instead.
https://worldofcardgames.com/#!replayer ... %3A1%7D%5D
Tbolt65
Edward

 Posts: 1273
 Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm
However, I see this as just another shuffler dealing opposing hand. Obvious that the the dealer is going to turn down diamonds and Eldest will make clubs trump. This is a lone hand in MOST cases as well. Combinations that are statistically super Rare. Do you even know the probability is of having the combinations of this situation? Odd and rare is not even the word for it! A PERFECT SET UP both with the trumps and the off suits. Coincidence like this is a planned event, not RANDOM! BELIEVE IT! It is a pure set up by WOCG. Very common on WOCG. The point is, you have to consider what the shuffler might do. What's the trigger?? I am sure I could find it if I wanted to. I care not to invest time in such contrived NONSENSE. And its a shame as the cards are dealt quite randomly up to a point, then it goes into this chaotic sequence of deals of loners and opposing hands. But you have to put this sequence of events in a long string of hands to see it (100 or so).
But being a curious fellow, it makes me curious as to the preceding situation, THE TRIGGER! And the originator could also make this a random sequence as well not based on a situation but x number of deals. I think this makes sense all because of the Seating Arrangement is random. That too is by design and I think it fits in this patterned world of shuffling. So you also make the good hands, runs and opposing hands Random. There is a system, and a patterned sequence, Pseudorandom Generator designed as such. My mind works in Probabilities. I see it, I see it, I see it, (statistical facts, rare probabilities with a common occurrence) and thus, I am convinced I am not hallucinating! In life as in euchre, you have to see more than the individual trees, you have to see the whole forest or you get over whelmed.
So why do I care, you might say? Because, in a card game, it's a statistical world of combinations that should be governed by "Probabilities" and not this B.S stuff. It throws a monkey wrench and interrupts the statistical dynamics of my Favorite Game. I adjust to players and the situation. I do not want to adjust because of this contrived phenomenon because it will affect me in live play. That is where I like to excel, live euchre. I see similar things on many web sites (each has its own dynamics), such that if one plays long enough on such web sites, it will affect your game. What is worst, is like 'going under', what craziness that is. That is a different game all together than standard euchre. My point is, you begin to play differently than you would if you did not have to contend with this factor!. Now I know shuffling and dealing is a BIG ISSUE IN LIVE PLAY! Especially euchre games that are timed, it's grab and go and cards are not shuffled. But this is a different animal that you expect to be randomly shuffled cards. Believe me, it affects the statistical combinations expected.
Frequent enough that ijt Destroys the beauty of this game. Of course the designer will NEVER tell you the truth, it's his/her livelihood. Get real!
Okay, I said my piece!
~IRISHWOLF
But being a curious fellow, it makes me curious as to the preceding situation, THE TRIGGER! And the originator could also make this a random sequence as well not based on a situation but x number of deals. I think this makes sense all because of the Seating Arrangement is random. That too is by design and I think it fits in this patterned world of shuffling. So you also make the good hands, runs and opposing hands Random. There is a system, and a patterned sequence, Pseudorandom Generator designed as such. My mind works in Probabilities. I see it, I see it, I see it, (statistical facts, rare probabilities with a common occurrence) and thus, I am convinced I am not hallucinating! In life as in euchre, you have to see more than the individual trees, you have to see the whole forest or you get over whelmed.
So why do I care, you might say? Because, in a card game, it's a statistical world of combinations that should be governed by "Probabilities" and not this B.S stuff. It throws a monkey wrench and interrupts the statistical dynamics of my Favorite Game. I adjust to players and the situation. I do not want to adjust because of this contrived phenomenon because it will affect me in live play. That is where I like to excel, live euchre. I see similar things on many web sites (each has its own dynamics), such that if one plays long enough on such web sites, it will affect your game. What is worst, is like 'going under', what craziness that is. That is a different game all together than standard euchre. My point is, you begin to play differently than you would if you did not have to contend with this factor!. Now I know shuffling and dealing is a BIG ISSUE IN LIVE PLAY! Especially euchre games that are timed, it's grab and go and cards are not shuffled. But this is a different animal that you expect to be randomly shuffled cards. Believe me, it affects the statistical combinations expected.
Frequent enough that ijt Destroys the beauty of this game. Of course the designer will NEVER tell you the truth, it's his/her livelihood. Get real!
Okay, I said my piece!
~IRISHWOLF
Last edited by irishwolf on Mon May 10, 2021 1:35 am, edited 1 time in total.

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 12:09 amHowever, I see this as just another shuffler dealing opposing hand. Obvious that the the dealer is going to turn down diamonds and Eldest will make clubs trump. This is a lone hand in MOST cases as well. Combinations that are statistically super Rare. Do you even know the probability is of having the combinations of this situation? Odd and rare is not even the word for it! A PERFECT SET UP both with the trumps and the off suits. Coincidence like this is a planned event, not RANDOM! BELIEVE IT! It is a pure set up by WOCG. Very common on WOCG. The point is, you have to consider what the shuffler might do. What's the trigger?? I am sure I could find it if I wanted to. I care not to invest time in such contrived NONSENSE. And its a shame as the cards are dealt quite randomly up to a point, then it goes into this chaotic sequence of deals of loners and opposing hands. But you have to put this sequence of events in a long string of hands to see it (100 or so).
But being a curious fellow, it makes me curious as to the preceding situation, THE TRIGGER! And the originator could also make this a random sequence as well not based on a situation but x number of deals. I think this makes sense all because of the Seating Arrangement is random. That too is by design and I think it fits in this patterned world of shuffling. So you also make the good hands, runs and opposing hands Random. There is a system, and a patterned sequence, Pseudorandom Generator designed as such. My mind works in Probabilities. I see it, I see it, I see it, (statistical facts, rare probabilities with a common occurrence) and thus, I am convinced I am not hallucinating! In life as in euchre, you have to see more than the individual trees, you have to see the whole forest or you get over whelmed.
So why do I care, you might say? Because, in a card game, it's a statistical world of combinations that should be governed by "Probabilities" and not this B.S stuff. It throws a monkey wrench and interrupts the statistical dynamics of my Favorite Game. I adjust to players and the situation. I do not want to adjust because of this contrived phenomenon because it will affect me in live play. That is where I like to excel, live euchre. I see similar things on many web sites (each has its own dynamics), such that if one plays long enough on such web sites, it will affect your game. What is worst, is like 'going under', what craziness that is. That is a different game all together than standard euchre. My point is, you begin to play differently than you would if you did not have to contend with this factor!. Now I know shuffling and dealing is a BIG ISSUE IN LIVE PLAY! Especially euchre games that are timed, it's grab and go and cards are not shuffled. But this is a different animal that you expect to be randomly shuffled cards. Believe me, it affects the statistical combinations expected.
Frequent enough that it Destroys the beauty of this game. Of course the designer will NEVER tell you the truth, it's his/her livelihood. Get real!
Okay, I said my piece!
~IRISHWOLF
Wes,
IrishWolf drops a major bomb here on various area's in euchre.
Pay attention to what he is saying!
Tbolt65
Edward
Edit: LOL Irish, I fixed your mistake in my quotation of your post and when I'm done doing this and rereading your original I see you have also edited the same thing,

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
Lol I don't care about any of the above. I don't care how "rigged" a site may or may not be. I don't even care about winning and losing let alone "Pseudorandom Generators". I only care about what I can control, and that's the decisions I make. Make as many +EV decisions as possible and let the rest take care of itself. You guys are wasting your time on this nonsense. There's no point in caring about stuff you can't control. And BTW I am not arguing with anything Irishwolf said, not that I agree with him, I just don't care. Even if Irishwolf is right nothing changes. It's still going to be about making as many +EV decisions as possible (and choosing the right spots to make EV decisions to control some variance) So why waste the mental energy on it.Tbolt65 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 1:19 amirishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 12:09 amHowever, I see this as just another shuffler dealing opposing hand. Obvious that the the dealer is going to turn down diamonds and Eldest will make clubs trump. This is a lone hand in MOST cases as well. Combinations that are statistically super Rare. Do you even know the probability is of having the combinations of this situation? Odd and rare is not even the word for it! A PERFECT SET UP both with the trumps and the off suits. Coincidence like this is a planned event, not RANDOM! BELIEVE IT! It is a pure set up by WOCG. Very common on WOCG. The point is, you have to consider what the shuffler might do. What's the trigger?? I am sure I could find it if I wanted to. I care not to invest time in such contrived NONSENSE. And its a shame as the cards are dealt quite randomly up to a point, then it goes into this chaotic sequence of deals of loners and opposing hands. But you have to put this sequence of events in a long string of hands to see it (100 or so).
But being a curious fellow, it makes me curious as to the preceding situation, THE TRIGGER! And the originator could also make this a random sequence as well not based on a situation but x number of deals. I think this makes sense all because of the Seating Arrangement is random. That too is by design and I think it fits in this patterned world of shuffling. So you also make the good hands, runs and opposing hands Random. There is a system, and a patterned sequence, Pseudorandom Generator designed as such. My mind works in Probabilities. I see it, I see it, I see it, (statistical facts, rare probabilities with a common occurrence) and thus, I am convinced I am not hallucinating! In life as in euchre, you have to see more than the individual trees, you have to see the whole forest or you get over whelmed.
So why do I care, you might say? Because, in a card game, it's a statistical world of combinations that should be governed by "Probabilities" and not this B.S stuff. It throws a monkey wrench and interrupts the statistical dynamics of my Favorite Game. I adjust to players and the situation. I do not want to adjust because of this contrived phenomenon because it will affect me in live play. That is where I like to excel, live euchre. I see similar things on many web sites (each has its own dynamics), such that if one plays long enough on such web sites, it will affect your game. What is worst, is like 'going under', what craziness that is. That is a different game all together than standard euchre. My point is, you begin to play differently than you would if you did not have to contend with this factor!. Now I know shuffling and dealing is a BIG ISSUE IN LIVE PLAY! Especially euchre games that are timed, it's grab and go and cards are not shuffled. But this is a different animal that you expect to be randomly shuffled cards. Believe me, it affects the statistical combinations expected.
Frequent enough that it Destroys the beauty of this game. Of course the designer will NEVER tell you the truth, it's his/her livelihood. Get real!
Okay, I said my piece!
~IRISHWOLF
Wes,
IrishWolf drops a major bomb here on various area's in euchre.
Pay attention to what he is saying!
Tbolt65
Edward
Edit: LOL Irish, I fixed your mistake in my quotation of your post and when I'm done doing this and rereading your original I see you have also edited the same thing,
 Dlan
 Site Admin
 Posts: 671
 Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 10:08 pm
 Location: Ohio
Do we have a little of the full moon theory at work here?

 Posts: 1273
 Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm
LOL, FULL MOON THEORY!
It altered how Eldest played this hand, did it not! How, standard play is to lead the JC not wasting a trump by leading low. Eldest crossed suit, but leads low as he is for sure playing for ONE point. This is a loner hand or even not going alone, a two pointer. He crossed the suit, thinking, a set up for Next (and it was). But is cautious thinking lead low, then they will lead to an ace and I can lead my Right.
And opponent has to have three trumps and next to euchre me (and they did). Statistical odds, well under 6 to 8%. Maybe Eldest should have asked the Man in the Moon, "what should I do?" Eldest already changed his game based on the shuffle's algorithm. So now what does the eldest do in Live play? He also alters his play to account for a rare situation that does not happen, giving away points.
And that is the hazard, it changes how players approach the game whether they do it consciously or unconsciously.
Think it does not change your play. On Nidink, three + hours of play, not more than 3 loners scored against us, as donating to those string loners that come in bunches prevented those. And dealer turns it down, about half the time you will see Next loaded up with the opponents. That factor has to be accounted for in your decision making. And it the same on WOCG as well. Look at Wes, crossing suit at a frequency greater than normal. Such that he tosses out Next and Hoyle. But does he do it during LIVE play as well. It changes opponent who play frequently on the Web, setting up more for Next (bagging).
Okay, a Moon THEORY!
IRISHWOLF
It altered how Eldest played this hand, did it not! How, standard play is to lead the JC not wasting a trump by leading low. Eldest crossed suit, but leads low as he is for sure playing for ONE point. This is a loner hand or even not going alone, a two pointer. He crossed the suit, thinking, a set up for Next (and it was). But is cautious thinking lead low, then they will lead to an ace and I can lead my Right.
And opponent has to have three trumps and next to euchre me (and they did). Statistical odds, well under 6 to 8%. Maybe Eldest should have asked the Man in the Moon, "what should I do?" Eldest already changed his game based on the shuffle's algorithm. So now what does the eldest do in Live play? He also alters his play to account for a rare situation that does not happen, giving away points.
And that is the hazard, it changes how players approach the game whether they do it consciously or unconsciously.
Think it does not change your play. On Nidink, three + hours of play, not more than 3 loners scored against us, as donating to those string loners that come in bunches prevented those. And dealer turns it down, about half the time you will see Next loaded up with the opponents. That factor has to be accounted for in your decision making. And it the same on WOCG as well. Look at Wes, crossing suit at a frequency greater than normal. Such that he tosses out Next and Hoyle. But does he do it during LIVE play as well. It changes opponent who play frequently on the Web, setting up more for Next (bagging).
Okay, a Moon THEORY!
IRISHWOLF

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
Besides what Irishwolf says about the sites , algorithm and other nuances. I am in full support of his assessments. I cant speak to nidink.
There are other things Irishwolf addressed or rather pointed out. Thats being ignored by some and perhsps missed by others.
Tbolt65
Edward
There are other things Irishwolf addressed or rather pointed out. Thats being ignored by some and perhsps missed by others.
Tbolt65
Edward

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
Wes by you not caring and dismissing what is said you are missing out in a lot of things Irishwolf is saying. By not putting the mental energy in to see what he is saying. You are missing out on opportunities to understand whats have been discussed recently

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
No that's not what is going on. As I've talked about before, in any gambling game when you are playing against other people, when the EVs between two decisions are virtually equal or indiscernible one should always take the more unconventional line to throw their opponents off. You get your cake and eat it too in these spots becuz you become more unreadable at zero cost. Here's an example in poker: Say the villain bets the river vs me and I believe the EVs between folding and bluffraising are roughly equal. In that case I should always bluffraise. It's the more unconventional line, it makes me more unreadable/keeps my opponents guessing, and taking that line costs me nothing over just folding in the long run. This concept exists in all gambling games when you are playing other people. That's not debatable. It is theoretically sound. The debatepart comes in, in its application, I.E. which hands fall into the bucket I am talking about.irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 11:32 amLook at Wes, crossing suit at a frequency greater than normal. Such that he tosses out Next and Hoyle. But does he do it during LIVE play as well. It changes opponent who play frequently on the Web, setting up more for Next (bagging).
Okay, a Moon THEORY!
IRISHWOLF
The "playing other people" part is important too. In Blackjack when you're playing against the house it's actually the opposite of the above. Now in spots where the EVs between two decision points are close/indiscernible you should ALWAYS take the more conventional line so the pit bosses don't catch on to you. In fact a card counter should even take small EV hits in the name of playing more conventional. For example, when the count is right there are many spots in blackjack where it is correct to take insurance or split 10s vs a 6. The problem is a savvy pit boss knows that only idiots and experts make those plays, so when a card counter makes those unconventional pays they immediately put themselves under the radar if the pit is paying attention, so they have to be careful in those spots.
Ok onto euchre. As I have said on this site before, when it's close go with Hoyle. Obviously that's a good rule of thumb. HOWEVER there are hands out there in the euchre universe where decision paths are STILL close EVEN AFTER one factors in the positives of going with Hoyle (I never toss out Hoyle, I always factor it in). Those are the hands I cross the river in, becuz it doesn't cost my team and it makes me more unreadable. We're talking about 3 or 4 hands in my range when I do this. It's not a big deal even if you disagree with the hands I've chosen. Whether I'm playing Live or on an app/site, I utilize this concept.
Last edited by Wes (aka the legend) on Mon May 10, 2021 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
I'm never gonna waste my time caring about stuff I can't control. EVEN IF Wolf is right and these apps/sites are rigged in some fundamental way, life goes on and I'm still gonna play euchre on my phone when I'm bored/have to go the bathroom/can't sleep at night/etc. And when I play I'm faced with the same challenge regardless of the possible riggedness of an app/site: make as many good decisions as possible. That's all one can control and therefore that's all one should care about.

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
Wes (aka the legend) wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 2:03 pmI'm never gonna waste my time caring about stuff I can't control. EVEN IF Wolf is right and these apps/sites are rigged in some fundamental way, life goes on and I'm still gonna play euchre on my phone when I'm bored/have to go the bathroom/can't sleep at night/etc. And when I play I'm faced with the same challenge regardless of the possible riggedness of an app/site: make as many good decisions as possible. That's all one can control and therefore that's all one should care about.
I suggest you reread what he said. Look for the deeper meaning, look for whats being said and what have been said and link them. Especially what I underlined. Maybe a lightbulb will go off maybe not. As I postulated and aserted in my recent big post to you. It may still take you a while to get to that point of understanding. I still have hope.
Tbolt65
Edward
 LeftyK
 Posts: 261
 Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 9:45 am
 Location: North Carolina
IrishWolf is totally correct on this hand. It's a loner in by book also but to have it snagged like that with partner as additional help? WOCG is rigged like this and one of the reasons I've been imploring to play on another app just for change in venue. You just don't see these hands IRL as much as on WOCG.irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 12:09 amHowever, I see this as just another shuffler dealing opposing hand. Obvious that the the dealer is going to turn down diamonds and Eldest will make clubs trump. This is a lone hand in MOST cases as well. Combinations that are statistically super Rare. Do you even know the probability is of having the combinations of this situation? Odd and rare is not even the word for it! A PERFECT SET UP both with the trumps and the off suits. Coincidence like this is a planned event, not RANDOM! BELIEVE IT! It is a pure set up by WOCG. Very common on WOCG. The point is, you have to consider what the shuffler might do. What's the trigger?? I am sure I could find it if I wanted to. I care not to invest time in such contrived NONSENSE. And its a shame as the cards are dealt quite randomly up to a point, then it goes into this chaotic sequence of deals of loners and opposing hands. But you have to put this sequence of events in a long string of hands to see it (100 or so).
But being a curious fellow, it makes me curious as to the preceding situation, THE TRIGGER! And the originator could also make this a random sequence as well not based on a situation but x number of deals. I think this makes sense all because of the Seating Arrangement is random. That too is by design and I think it fits in this patterned world of shuffling. So you also make the good hands, runs and opposing hands Random. There is a system, and a patterned sequence, Pseudorandom Generator designed as such. My mind works in Probabilities. I see it, I see it, I see it, (statistical facts, rare probabilities with a common occurrence) and thus, I am convinced I am not hallucinating! In life as in euchre, you have to see more than the individual trees, you have to see the whole forest or you get over whelmed.
So why do I care, you might say? Because, in a card game, it's a statistical world of combinations that should be governed by "Probabilities" and not this B.S stuff. It throws a monkey wrench and interrupts the statistical dynamics of my Favorite Game. I adjust to players and the situation. I do not want to adjust because of this contrived phenomenon because it will affect me in live play. That is where I like to excel, live euchre. I see similar things on many web sites (each has its own dynamics), such that if one plays long enough on such web sites, it will affect your game. What is worst, is like 'going under', what craziness that is. That is a different game all together than standard euchre. My point is, you begin to play differently than you would if you did not have to contend with this factor!. Now I know shuffling and dealing is a BIG ISSUE IN LIVE PLAY! Especially euchre games that are timed, it's grab and go and cards are not shuffled. But this is a different animal that you expect to be randomly shuffled cards. Believe me, it affects the statistical combinations expected.
Frequent enough that ijt Destroys the beauty of this game. Of course the designer will NEVER tell you the truth, it's his/her livelihood. Get real!
Okay, I said my piece!
~IRISHWOLF

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
There's no deeper meaning dude. This might blow your mind but you are not as clever as you think you are.Tbolt65 wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 3:39 pmI suggest you reread what he said. Look for the deeper meaning, look for whats being said and what have been said and link them. Especially what I underlined. Maybe a lightbulb will go off maybe not. As I postulated and aserted in my recent big post to you. It may still take you a while to get to that point of understanding. I still have hope.
Tbolt65
Edward

 Posts: 1273
 Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 9:33 pm
To Wes & Ed:
I have decided to weight on your arguments as an observer without trying to getting crushed in the discussion, lol. I have read both of your discussions and given good thought to both of your approaches. They do differ to some degree and maybe less than you might think. I hope you do not read over this lightly! I don't give my thoughts freely.
Wes playing more to statistics and + EV with avoidance of more negative EV which leads one to believe, "Giving away points!" So I take liberty and say more reliance on the math and not what a particular player might error being faced with a decision, passing or playing incorrectly (not taking the best line of play to optimize the situation). I think we also know Ed's style. He plays leaning heavily on experience of many games played, more on intuition and player situational analysis.
And I suggest both of you have points that are true and correct. And neither is 100% right because NO ONE plays perfect euchre because you can't unless you are looking into everyone's hand. Ed's experience can equate to mathematical and statistical analysis. Few players care about or even can do the combinations calculations, probably less than 1%. Whether you can do the math does not matter if you have the experience that correctly approximates the Math! Whether by correctly played experience, which MOST human are terrible with gut probabilities, or by the numbers a Player to be good MUST have that mathematical foundation. Without it you will make mistakes! And both of you have acknowledged that most players get it wrong, at least some of the time.
But that is only one side of the equation in my most humble opinion. I know the math and there are times that my euchre sense, or call it intuition, I do the opposite. For the very reason my gut or cues tell me what is the correct approach. Of course not 100% correct, but I have learned to lean on intuition in those situations more than the math. It more "righter", lol! Most of that is on offense, making trump or what card to play, who has what, etc. etc. On defense it far more cutndried as what to play and intuition not being as big a factor. There are times you just cannot ignore the math because cards fall within the statistical probabilities. I think that is more where Ed's skill and approach comes from.
I suggest that intuition is actually another whole different dimension and and leaves math sucking wind. That is where I now place my focus because I have the math behind me.
In summary, you both can be right and wrong. That said, you both play as well with similarity. As they say in euchre (Gerry BLue said it often.) "It all Depends."
Saying it again, my point being is Math always right? I say no! Is 'Experience' without the Math always right? I say no.
That said, you both play as well with similarity. Just thought I might weigh in on your discussion. I am not really taking sides because I think both can be right, it's situational. So now I will butt out!
~IRISHWOLF
Wes said, "No that's not what is going on. As I've talked about before, in any gambling game when you are playing against other people, when the EVs between two decisions are virtually equal or indiscernible one should always take the more unconventional line to throw their opponents off. You get your cake and eat it too in these spots becuz you become more unreadable at zero cost.
Ok onto euchre. As I have said on this site before, when it's close go with Hoyle. Obviously that's a good rule of thumb. HOWEVER there are hands out there in the euchre universe where decision paths are STILL close EVEN AFTER one factors in the positives of going with Hoyle (I never toss out Hoyle, I always factor it in). Those are the hands I cross the river in, becuz it doesn't cost my team and it makes me more unreadable. We're talking about 3 or 4 hands in my range when I do this. It's not a big deal even if you disagree with the hands I've chosen. Whether I'm playing Live or on an app/site, I utilize this concept."
I have decided to weight on your arguments as an observer without trying to getting crushed in the discussion, lol. I have read both of your discussions and given good thought to both of your approaches. They do differ to some degree and maybe less than you might think. I hope you do not read over this lightly! I don't give my thoughts freely.
Wes playing more to statistics and + EV with avoidance of more negative EV which leads one to believe, "Giving away points!" So I take liberty and say more reliance on the math and not what a particular player might error being faced with a decision, passing or playing incorrectly (not taking the best line of play to optimize the situation). I think we also know Ed's style. He plays leaning heavily on experience of many games played, more on intuition and player situational analysis.
And I suggest both of you have points that are true and correct. And neither is 100% right because NO ONE plays perfect euchre because you can't unless you are looking into everyone's hand. Ed's experience can equate to mathematical and statistical analysis. Few players care about or even can do the combinations calculations, probably less than 1%. Whether you can do the math does not matter if you have the experience that correctly approximates the Math! Whether by correctly played experience, which MOST human are terrible with gut probabilities, or by the numbers a Player to be good MUST have that mathematical foundation. Without it you will make mistakes! And both of you have acknowledged that most players get it wrong, at least some of the time.
But that is only one side of the equation in my most humble opinion. I know the math and there are times that my euchre sense, or call it intuition, I do the opposite. For the very reason my gut or cues tell me what is the correct approach. Of course not 100% correct, but I have learned to lean on intuition in those situations more than the math. It more "righter", lol! Most of that is on offense, making trump or what card to play, who has what, etc. etc. On defense it far more cutndried as what to play and intuition not being as big a factor. There are times you just cannot ignore the math because cards fall within the statistical probabilities. I think that is more where Ed's skill and approach comes from.
I suggest that intuition is actually another whole different dimension and and leaves math sucking wind. That is where I now place my focus because I have the math behind me.
In summary, you both can be right and wrong. That said, you both play as well with similarity. As they say in euchre (Gerry BLue said it often.) "It all Depends."
Saying it again, my point being is Math always right? I say no! Is 'Experience' without the Math always right? I say no.
That said, you both play as well with similarity. Just thought I might weigh in on your discussion. I am not really taking sides because I think both can be right, it's situational. So now I will butt out!
~IRISHWOLF
Wes said, "No that's not what is going on. As I've talked about before, in any gambling game when you are playing against other people, when the EVs between two decisions are virtually equal or indiscernible one should always take the more unconventional line to throw their opponents off. You get your cake and eat it too in these spots becuz you become more unreadable at zero cost.
Ok onto euchre. As I have said on this site before, when it's close go with Hoyle. Obviously that's a good rule of thumb. HOWEVER there are hands out there in the euchre universe where decision paths are STILL close EVEN AFTER one factors in the positives of going with Hoyle (I never toss out Hoyle, I always factor it in). Those are the hands I cross the river in, becuz it doesn't cost my team and it makes me more unreadable. We're talking about 3 or 4 hands in my range when I do this. It's not a big deal even if you disagree with the hands I've chosen. Whether I'm playing Live or on an app/site, I utilize this concept."

 Posts: 1522
 Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2018 3:03 pm
That's not "Ed's style" tho. Like take me and you wolf. We both have played thousands of game vs all playing stylesI've played almost 30K in the last 4 years along. We both lean heavily on that experience and we both have sharpened expert intuition and we both understand the need to adjust to differing player profiles. There's nothing about "Ed's style" that is special. We have all that. But as you already know, we can do better. It should only take one hand to put all that experience/expert intuitionas valuable as it isin its place. Your QhTh9hAsKs 3SR1 hand.irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmWes playing more to statistics and + EV with avoidance of more negative EV which leads one to believe, "Giving away points!" So I take liberty and say more reliance on the math and not what a particular player might error being faced with a decision, passing or playing incorrectly (not taking the best line of play to optimize the situation). I think we also know Ed's style. He plays leaning heavily on experience of many games played, more on intuition and player situational analysis.
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmAnd I suggest both of you have points that are true and correct. And neither is 100% right because NO ONE plays perfect euchre because you can't unless you are looking into everyone's hand. Ed's experience can equate to mathematical and statistical analysis.
Well the ideal is to only make correct decisions based on the information we knowthat's perfect euchre to menot based on the actual cards people hold.
Like if I get it all in preflop with KK at 100 bbs vs an aggressive fish and he just happens to have AA I still played the hand perfectly in the sense I'm talking about. We're not psychic. But that said, even the kind of "perfect" I'm talking about is unreachable. Mistakes will be made, but it's a fun ideal to chase.
I agree that experience can often equate to mathematical and statistical analysis, but as you know experience/expert intuition will still lead us astray at a frequency that should disturb us and compel us to seek out the math and do better.
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmFew players care about or even can do the combinations calculations, probably less than 1%. Whether you can do the math does not matter if you have the experience that correctly approximates the Math! Whether by correctly played experience, which MOST human are terrible with gut probabilities, or by the numbers a Player to be good MUST have that mathematical foundation. Without it you will make mistakes! And both of you have acknowledged that most players get it wrong, at least some of the time.
Without the math I would say ALL players including the best will get it wrong more times then they realize. Human beings are not that smart. That's why we need tools like math/statistics. That's why we gotta do the dirty work and grind out the samples.
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmBut that is only one side of the equation in my most humble opinion. I know the math and there are times that my euchre sense, or call it intuition, I do the opposite. For the very reason my gut or cues tell me what is the correct approach. Of course not 100% correct, but I have learned to lean on intuition in those situations more than the math. It more "righter", lol! Most of that is on offense, making trump or what card to play, who has what, etc. etc. On defense it far more cutndried as what to play and intuition not being as big a factor. There are times you just cannot ignore the math because cards fall within the statistical probabilities. I think that is more where Ed's skill and approach comes from.
I suggest that intuition is actually another whole different dimension and and leaves math sucking wind. That is where I now place my focus because I have the math behind me.
Intuition/experience is the driving force in the heat of battle. As you know, nobody is doing complex calculations during a hand. My main point is the supposed adversarial relationship between math and intuition/experience is an illusion. They are joined at the hip. They have to be. It's all unified. Intuition/experience hones the assumptions underpinning our math. And the math can help hone our intuition for the future.
Now I agree that intuition/experience is more important than the math in terms of becoming a strong player. You can become a strong player based on experience/honed intuition/introspection/observing other strong players, without ever doing the math. And one can know everything there is to know about euchre math, but if they don't have the experience, their knowledge will be useless. My point is tho, if one ignores the math they will stunt their potential big time. Like they can still be one of the best players in the room but they'll never be the player they should be. They'll never reach that next level. Without the math, one can only get so far. I know I'm not telling you something you don't already know.
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmIn summary, you both can be right and wrong. That said, you both play as well with similarity. As they say in euchre (Gerry BLue said it often.) "It all Depends."
Saying it again, my point being is Math always right? I say no! Is 'Experience' without the Math always right? I say no.
That said, you both play as well with similarity. Just thought I might weigh in on your discussion. I am not really taking sides because I think both can be right, it's situational. So now I will butt out!
~IRISHWOLF
This whole discussion is probably the most annoying experience I've had on this site. It's a complete waste of our time. I do things Ed doesn't like. I get it. We should be analyzing hands man. Not measuring d**ks.

 Posts: 795
 Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2019 9:14 pm
 Location: Las Vegas
irishwolf wrote: ↑Mon May 10, 2021 5:56 pmTo Wes & Ed:
I have decided to weight on your arguments as an observer without trying to getting crushed in the discussion, lol. I have read both of your discussions and given good thought to both of your approaches. They do differ to some degree and maybe less than you might think. I hope you do not read over this lightly! I don't give my thoughts freely.
Wes playing more to statistics and + EV with avoidance of more negative EV which leads one to believe, "Giving away points!" So I take liberty and say more reliance on the math and not what a particular player might error being faced with a decision, passing or playing incorrectly (not taking the best line of play to optimize the situation). I think we also know Ed's style. He plays leaning heavily on experience of many games played, more on intuition and player situational analysis.
And I suggest both of you have points that are true and correct. And neither is 100% right because NO ONE plays perfect euchre because you can't unless you are looking into everyone's hand. Ed's experience can equate to mathematical and statistical analysis. Few players care about or even can do the combinations calculations, probably less than 1%. Whether you can do the math does not matter if you have the experience that correctly approximates the Math! Whether by correctly played experience, which MOST human are terrible with gut probabilities, or by the numbers a Player to be good MUST have that mathematical foundation. Without it you will make mistakes! And both of you have acknowledged that most players get it wrong, at least some of the time.
But that is only one side of the equation in my most humble opinion. I know the math and there are times that my euchre sense, or call it intuition, I do the opposite. For the very reason my gut or cues tell me what is the correct approach. Of course not 100% correct, but I have learned to lean on intuition in those situations more than the math. It more "righter", lol! Most of that is on offense, making trump or what card to play, who has what, etc. etc. On defense it far more cutndried as what to play and intuition not being as big a factor. There are times you just cannot ignore the math because cards fall within the statistical probabilities. I think that is more where Ed's skill and approach comes from.
I suggest that intuition is actually another whole different dimension and and leaves math sucking wind. That is where I now place my focus because I have the math behind me.
In summary, you both can be right and wrong. That said, you both play as well with similarity. As they say in euchre (Gerry BLue said it often.) "It all Depends."
Saying it again, my point being is Math always right? I say no! Is 'Experience' without the Math always right? I say no.
That said, you both play as well with similarity. Just thought I might weigh in on your discussion. I am not really taking sides because I think both can be right, it's situational. So now I will butt out!
~IRISHWOLF
Wes said, "No that's not what is going on. As I've talked about before, in any gambling game when you are playing against other people, when the EVs between two decisions are virtually equal or indiscernible one should always take the more unconventional line to throw their opponents off. You get your cake and eat it too in these spots becuz you become more unreadable at zero cost.
Ok onto euchre. As I have said on this site before, when it's close go with Hoyle. Obviously that's a good rule of thumb. HOWEVER there are hands out there in the euchre universe where decision paths are STILL close EVEN AFTER one factors in the positives of going with Hoyle (I never toss out Hoyle, I always factor it in). Those are the hands I cross the river in, becuz it doesn't cost my team and it makes me more unreadable. We're talking about 3 or 4 hands in my range when I do this. It's not a big deal even if you disagree with the hands I've chosen. Whether I'm playing Live or on an app/site, I utilize this concept."
Thanks for your thought's IrishWolf. I did read over them carefully. I agree with all point's and thoughts made. Some may find that hard to believe but yes, nothing you said isn't true and I accept your thoughts for what they are. A mutual understanding/grasping opportunity for myself and Wes from a Third party so that both parties could garner a better perspective, perhaps even a new one of said situation which has been unfolding and of Each other. Thanks for the thoughtful interjection IrishWolf.
Tbolt65
Edward

 Posts: 473
 Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2018 2:22 am
S1 should have gone alone and led the right. The goal is to bleed the opponents of trumps so that those aces are good.