8-7-21 OE Friday Hand#1

[Dlan]

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

[Richardb02]

Three obvious weak plays:
1. R1S4 (Dealer) passed on 3 trump Lxx. Why? Next is blocked but no help in Reverse Next!?
2. R2S1 orders 2 trump clubs but the 3 trump spades LAK is much stronger. Yes, it worked on this particular hand but the probability favors the 3 trump order.
3. S1 Street 2 lead was a Ks. This "false cards" his partner, by not leading the As. It is a classic example of confusing your partner, instead of communicating valuable information to your partner. If S3 (Partner) was void in spades, he would waste one of his trumps.

[LeftyK]

dealer had marginal hand - I too would pass at 2-2 score....

[jspectre]

Richard, there's a big difference between passing 3 non bower trump, and passing the lowest 3 bower trump combo when you also have right+1 in next. Sure, I don't block reverse, but my priority should always be blocking next, not blocking reverse, if my partner can't call me up, then I should assume they have better cards in green. Sometimes you get burned if S1 can cross the river, but I would wager that it's more likely you will be euchred if you try and force this call with an expert partner in S2.

I also have to disagree with the assessment of left+A+K being "much stronger". You're either counting on your partner for the right, 2 trump, or an ace, while leading the right in a JK combo likely knocks out 4/7 trump, with one in your hand, and only 2 remaining in play. You then have an AK doubleton to lead to draw out the final trumps. You're vulnerable to a 3 trump hand that can lead the left and strip you of your remaining trump, but even then they still have to have the winning card at the end of it.

[Richardb02]

I failed to be perfectly clear. You need to order R1S4 with this hand.

I posted an analogous explanation yesterday (Post titled, “Why Pass in North), OE Lesson 3: “How and when to bid” is the best place to answer this question.If can can take 2 tricks you should order.
The R1S4 hand has a triple LT9 of trump and a void. That is 2+ tricks and is stronger than the OE General Principle! Blocking a Next order is not a strong enough reason to contradict the General Principle.

You can do a simple EV and see the math.
I will assume, Dealer has a strong 2 tricks and 80% expectation of Partner taking a 3rd trick.
Dealer having only 2 tricks suggests a 95% expectation of taking 2 tricks.
So average the expectations, (.95+.8)/2= .875 expectation of taking 3 tricks.
EVo: .875x1-.125x2= .875-.25=+.625 points

Double the euchre rate. You now have a .75 expectation of taking 3 tricks:
EVo: .75x1-.25x2= .75-.5= +.25 points

Passing a positive EVo (Expected Value outcome) surrenders points. Plus:
You are open to giving up 2 points as the OP played out.
You may even give up a 4 point Loner.
Your team may even have taken 2 points. I opine that you have a minimum 10% opportunity to take 2 points.

If you accept a 10% opportunity to take 2 points, you can accept a 35% euchre rate! That is greater than 1 out of 3 hands!
EVo: .1x2 +.55x1 -.35x2= .2 + .55 - .70 = +.05
You can be euchred 1/3rd of the time and have a positive outcome.
Don’t get caught up in avoiding euchres. Euchre is a game of probabilities.
I wear getting euchred as a badge of playing winning euchre.

Ordering aggressively is a General Principle to winning Euchre. Focusing on General Principles trumps (pun intended) focusing on the exceptions. There are no defensible exceptions with this hand. Blocking 1 out of 3 suits is not a winning strategy.

[jspectre]

If it's just simple math, then I question how I can get euchred so often trying to play this type of hand, I know from experience that it often works out better if I pass, because giving the opponents 1 point is better than 2, not counting the possibility for a euchre. Sure, they can get a march or a loner crossing the river, but that's rare enough that it shouldn't necessarily be factored into the equation. At the very least, I would be curious what the results would be from 100 hands.

[justme]

There's little to discuss about this weak dealer hand. It's only 2-2 Next is covered, pass. Experience tells me that I would act differently if desperation was in the picture. Trying to get blood out a stone is a losing game. If the dealer picks up there is no guarantee that he will even capture more than one trick.

[irishwolf]

The conversation is nauseating,
Dealer is playing the bagging game with JD & a low trump. You don't pass with a biddable hand, Left + 2 trumps. Pass on a biddable hand with no clear victory in anything else and black is open to march or a loner. Unless you have almost certainty that S1 will call next, get your Point and move on.

The score here has nothing to do with Passing. Get real!

IRISHWOLF

[jspectre]

Irish, I'm sure that statistically this hand is playable, it's just not a hand I'm happy to call, and I hoped I was either saving a point by passing or that my partner could make a point in green, but that's a gamble, and probably an unnecessary one. Still, I would like to see the results from 100 hands to see how close this is, and I suspect that many times the difference between making this hand and being euchred all comes down to the luck of the discard.

[irishwolf]

WELL THEN, get off your b u t t and do the work! I would not make the statement unless I knew the EV was positive for the dealer ordering!

Still, I would like to see the results from 100 hands to see how close this is, and I suspect that many times the difference between making this hand and being euchred all comes down to the luck of the discard.

IRISH

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Three obvious weak plays:
1. R1S4 (Dealer) passed on 3 trump Lxx. Why? Next is blocked but no help in Reverse Next!?

Yep. Passing 3 trump from the dealer spot blocking only 1 out of 3 suits is very poor euchre. Nothing else needs to be said really. The only time one should consider passing 3 trump in this spot is if they have a euchre hand and even then it's still a debatable pass.

2. R2S1 orders 2 trump clubs but the 3 trump spades LAK is much stronger. Yes, it worked on this particular hand but the probability favors the 3 trump order.

Irishwolf talked about this in another thread. With the lead calling clubs may outperform a spade call. I think he's probably right. In any case, I think it's wrong to assume S1 made a bad call here. Without the lead, then I think a spade call beats out a club call.

3. S1 Street 2 lead was a Ks. This "false cards" his partner, by not leading the As. It is a classic example of confusing your partner, instead of communicating valuable information to your partner. If S3 (Partner) was void in spades, he would waste one of his trumps.[/color]

Actually S1 leading the KS on 2nd street WAS the correct lead. How could that be? On the first lead, S1 led trump and S3 played the Left. That means S3 is out of trump and thus S1 no longer has to worry about false-carding him. So on 2nd street S1 might as well lead the KS as this will sometimes trick the enemy into playing off. Of course in the actual hand S3 was NOT out of trump. S3 actually false-carded S1 on the first lead by playing the Left instead of the Ace of trump!

[jspectre]

Actually S1 leading the KS on 2nd street WAS the correct lead. How could that be? On the first lead, S1 led trump and S3 played the Left. That means S3 is out of trump and thus S1 no longer has to worry about false-carding him. So on 2nd street S1 might as well lead the KS as this will sometimes trick the enemy into playing off. Of course in the actual hand S3 was NOT out of trump. S3 actually false-carded S1 on the first lead by playing the Left instead of the Ace of trump!

I'm not even sure what I was arguing about on this hand, it's obviously a bad pass, I just hoped that I was gambling a 1 point call for the opponents in next for what would have been a euchre in hearts, and it backfired spectacularly. However, I am glad that we both agree that showing the left to your partner means you're void, not that you are also holding the ace. This is something you do to trick your opponents, right? So, don't trick your partner, and just play the ace, then let them play their hand with the knowledge the left is potentially still in play, and that you may even have it, whereas if you show the left, they should not assume you could also have the ace.

[Dlan]

Actually S1 leading the KS on 2nd street WAS the correct lead. How could that be? On the first lead, S1 led trump and S3 played the Left. That means S3 is out of trump and thus S1 no longer has to worry about false-carding him.

Leading a king before the ace would be considered "bad play" no matter what the circumstances are.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Actually S1 leading the KS on 2nd street WAS the correct lead. How could that be? On the first lead, S1 led trump and S3 played the Left. That means S3 is out of trump and thus S1 no longer has to worry about false-carding him.

Leading a king before the ace would be considered "bad play" no matter what the circumstances are.

Not when your P is out of trump. Think about it. In that scenario leading the King can only help your team.

Also there are other scenarios where leading the King before the Ace is the best play EVEN IF you think your P still has trump. For example, say you called something, your team is up 2-1 in tricks, and you have the lead. Your last 3 cards are a non boss trump + AK, and you know the player to the left of your P is out of trump so your P can never get overtrumped. Once again leading the off King would be the best play.

Circumstances mean everything.

Another example would be a similar scenario where your team is at 9, up 2-0 in tricks and you know the player on your P's left is out of trump.

PS: In blackjack, poker, and euchre I make lots of plays that most would consider "bad play". Making the best play is all that matters, not the most popular play.

[Dlan]

Why yes, fooling your partner would fall under " not the most popular play "

I'm done here.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Why yes, fooling your partner would fall under " not the most popular play "

I'm done here.

Seriously? You can't fool your partner if they are out of trump. When your P is out of trump the only people you can fool is the enemy which is a good thing. This isn't a difficult concept.

And in the other scenario I talked about fooling your P can't cost you but fooling the enemy can benefit you.

PS: And to put a different spin on my "popular" point: If one knows a play is logically correct--like the 'exception to the rule' plays I've talked about here--who gives a s**t if the whole world thinks they're wrong. At the end of the day a euchre player has one job: make the best play possible every single street, not the perceived best play.

[Richardb02]

Great discussion hand for the forum!

Personally, I wish Dlan would state what is on his mind, instead of just posting the hand for general discussion. Yes, that is my personal pet peeve, but based on Dylan’s response, on this thread, he is focused on “communication with his partner.” More on this later.

Now, I am not dissing the “Boss.” He also wants to post hands that will create interest on the forum. Perhaps, that was his #1 purpose. We wouldn’t have this wonderful OE site without his unparalleled efforts to originate and oversee all the work involved to maintain OE. He has earned the right to post as he sees fit.

I have a linear mind. So the #1 egregious error is R1S4 not ordering. Irish & Wes have posted in agreement. Even jspectre has posted that ordering R1S4 is the key to this hand, even though he laments about his personal experience of dealing with the high rate of getting euchred. Irish summed it up “ You don’t pass with a biddable hand, Left + 2 trump,” [R1S4]. Case closed, IMO.

Dylan’s responses, on this thread, indicate to me that he posted to again illustrate the problem of false carding your partner. So, the second group of egregious errors is based on the general principle to not false card your partner (communicate to your partner what is in your hand).

Wes added to my summary, that Street 1 S3 false carded his partner, S1, by playing the Jc (indicating that he was out of trump) instead of the Ac (indicating that he may have the Jc. To me, I have been communicating in error! I will correct my error. GP, if I have 2 connected cards and partner is the maker, I will lead the lower of the 2 cards to communicate the possibility that I “may” have the higher card. This “revelation” is my take away from this post.

The Street 2 S1 Ks lead was also false carding your partner. Dlan was adamant that the false carding was an egregious error. Wes countered with an exception to the GP. Wes’ point makes sense but is beyond my pay grade. It was also based on S3 making the correct play. S3 failed. Personally, I am simplifying my play to Lead the Boss, which is clearly communicating to partner that As is the boss spade and S1 is not asking S3 to trump. Communicating clearly trumps world class thinking!

Welcome back Wes! It was great talking to you a few days ago. You and I know that we can agree to disagree. That is a huge take away from this post, too! I appreciate your posts as well as every other strongly worded post.

[irishwolf]

FALSE CARDING:

A good discussion on this topic.

My comment on false carding is that it could have applied to the hand discussed where S3 trumps the AC with the JH on trick 2 from Monday.

On that hand where Eldest had the Left bower and needs his partner to trump high and lead diamonds on trick 3. Although it was said that after the AS won trick 2, the JS could have been led. However, if Eldest really wanted his partner to trump that Club lead high and lead a diamond, he could have FALSE CARDED his partner by leading the KC to trick 2. If S2 had a trump he might get tricked into sloughing but S3 having no clubs surely would use that JH. And if S3 did not have a trump but the dealer had a Club, Eldest still gets his cake and eat it too!

My point is this, and the statement someone recently said, "don't ever try to trick your own partner!" I contend there are a number of situations to false card your partner. Good players don't always know to trump a lead, so you have to help them in their decision making. But I do agree win Don, using it randomly and inappropriately as suggested on several of hands recently posted served no purpose. I think it could be said, in general, you don't false card your partner when he/she is the maker on offense. You are in a supporting role and don't steal the Captaincy as it is Mutiny. You have to chose when it applies to best serve your team.

In particular on defense at S1. I have used this ploy numerous times when I need my partner to trump high while trying to fool S2 to engage in 2nd Hand Low to a King or Queen lead (like A,K,Q and I have two trumps).

IRISHWOLF

[Tbolt65]

I don't know if I am going to be able to add anything here. It's all been said.

People now understand that pass three here with the left. Generally is not a good play over all. There could be some arguements logically to say pass and hope to set seat 1 who calls next a lot but that's a flawed arguement and why it is has also been spoken about already.

With R2S1 call and play. It's exactly how I would have played with the information at hand. People should be bitching at seat 3's error in my opinion but logically It could be a misclick. If if it wasn't the all I have to say is don't False card your partner.

When seat 1 comes back with the King of spades after what plays on the first round/first trick. The king of spades either forces trump out from seat 2 or 4, and allows for Seat 3 to throw off and show what they are not covering.

There are various different situations to false card and in all of them it's there to force trump out of the opponents and in vary rare cases asking your partner to go as high as possible. These cases are usually on a double suit lead and knowing likely either opponent or atleast one if void and to force trump out with out leading trump. Sometimes your partners trump takes it and other times it doesn't but it effectively pulls multiple trump out and puts your team in a better situation. Also to take a cheap trick where normally the opponents would have trumped but waiting on their partner to help out.... but I digress.

To sum it up, Don't pass Seat 4 in round 1. Don't False card your partner with trump or suit for that matter in Seat 3 to your partners. False carding to your opponents is a different story though.


Tbolt65
Edward

[Dlan]

Wes added to my summary, that Street 1 S3 false carded his partner, S1, by playing the Jc (indicating that he was out of trump) instead of the Ac (indicating that he may have the Jc. To me, I have been communicating in error! I will correct my error. GP, if I have 2 connected cards and partner is the maker, I will lead the lower of the 2 cards to communicate the possibility that I “may” have the higher card. This “revelation” is my take away from this post.

For a play such as playing the left and holding back the ace to work, one would need a partner open to the possibility that their partner also has the ace. Unfortunately, there is no clear way to commutate this. Playing the top card is the best we have.

Also playing a queen from a king/queen set sends the wrong message.

I was wrong in stating “Leading a king before the ace would be considered "bad play" no matter what the circumstances are.”

As already pointed out, a hand where you need your partner to take a trick could be an exception.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Welcome back Wes! It was great talking to you a few days ago. You and I know that we can agree to disagree. That is a huge take away from this post, too! I appreciate your posts as well as every other strongly worded post.

"Agreeing to disagree" actually doesn't apply here. The claims I am making itt are logical truths, as logically true as 2+2=4. They are not up for debate. When your P is out of trump, and you have an off AK, leading your King is better than leading your Ace. That statement is logically irrefutable. Even if every intelligent lifeform in the universe disagreed with that statement it wouldn't matter. It's still true, just like it doesn't matter if no one in the universe believes 2+2=4. It's still true regardless. That's how logical truths work. They're stubborn like that. Now if I make a claim based on my experience/expert intuition/observance of other strong players, that statement is inherently debatable. Now there is plenty of rational room to "agree to disagree".

Here's another example of the kind of logical truths I'm talking about itt:

Score is 0-0, youre the dealer and after you order up in clubs you have:



S1 leads to your void--hearts--and you trump in with the QC and take the first trick. Now you lead the JC and your P shows void in trump. Leading your off KD on trick 3 instead of the AD is unequivocally the best play. Leading the KD cannot "trick your P" cuz he's out of trump, but sometimes leading the KD and tricking S1 into playing off will be the only way your team scores a point. This is a logical truth. Leading the KD is the best play in this instance. There is NO WAY to argue against it. There is no rational way to "agree to disagree".

Let's do another example to drive this home. Same hand, same action where you take the first 2 tricks by trumping the heart lead with the QC on 1st street and then leading the JC, but this time your team has 9 pts and instead of your P showing void in trump on 2nd street it's S3 who shows void in trump. Leading the KD on 3rd street is now unequivocally the best play, as unequivocal and logically true as 2+2=4. Why? becuz leading the KD can NEVER hurt your team becuz EVEN IF you induce your P to "incorrectly" trump your diamond lead he can NEVER get overtrumped (the's games over the instant your KD lead gets by S1). But leading the KD can STILL help your team/hurt the enemy by inducing S1 to incorrectly play off. Like before, there is no way to argue against what I just said without looking like a fool just as there is no way to argue against the claim "2+2=4" without looking like a fool. Some things are not up for debate, sometimes there is no rational room to "agree to disagree". And sometimes it doesn't matter if the whole universe thinks your play is bad. They're still wrong. Logical truths don't care what the universe thinks.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

The Street 2 S1 Ks lead was also false carding your partner. Dlan was adamant that the false carding was an egregious error. Wes countered with an exception to the GP. Wes’ point makes sense but is beyond my pay grade. It was also based on S3 making the correct play. S3 failed. Personally, I am simplifying my play to Lead the Boss, which is clearly communicating to partner that As is the boss spade and S1 is not asking S3 to trump. Communicating clearly trumps world class thinking!

When I play against randoms/amateurs, IOW like 99% of the time I play, I would have to lead the AS in this spot even after my P plays the Left on my Right bower lead. You can't trust the typical partner. Them playing the Left doesn't necessarily mean they are out of trump. Most people don't know how to be great partners. Like I've said before. They have other priorities in life, mastering euchre is not one of them, they're more rational than us in that sense They play for fun.

But when I'm in a Monday/Friday night OE game, whether I trust my P or not I am making the correct lead of the KS on trick 2 in this spot. Why you may ask? Becuz people playing in those games are a different breed. They presumably aspire to be great and I'm going to facilitate that aspiration by assuming they already ARE great!

[Wes (aka the legend)]

My point is this, and the statement someone recently said, "don't ever try to trick your own partner!" I contend there are a number of situations to false card your partner.

Yep. There are many spots where false-carding your P is the right play. And obviously I agree with the general principle "Don't false-card your P". But it's just like the general principle to not not trump your P's Ace. There are many exceptions to the rule. And if one wants to be really great they have to move beyond the general principles of this game and learn all those exceptions. They have to build up their library as you would say.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I was wrong in stating “Leading a king before the ace would be considered "bad play" no matter what the circumstances are.”

As already pointed out, a hand where you need your partner to take a trick could be an exception.

Yeah, in complex games like euchre and poker anytime someone says or implies the word "never" they are usually setting themselves up. I've been guilty of that before, especially when I'm in a hurry, usually posting from my phone, and don't have time to elaborate. I can slip in the word "never" to keep things simple, and invariably someone will come after me and post an exception showing my "never" statement is wrong.

[Richardb02]

Welcome back Wes! It was great talking to you a few days ago. You and I know that we can agree to disagree. That is a huge take away from this post, too! I appreciate your posts as well as every other strongly worded post.

"Agreeing to disagree" actually doesn't apply here. The claims I am making itt are logical truths, as logically true as 2+2=4. They are not up for debate. When your P is out of trump, and you have an off AK, leading your King is better than leading your Ace. That statement is logically irrefutable. Even if every intelligent lifeform in the universe disagreed with that statement it wouldn't matter. It's still true, just like it doesn't matter if no one in the universe believes 2+2=4. It's still true regardless. That's how logical truths work. They're stubborn like that. Now if I make a claim based on my experience/expert intuition/observance of other strong players, that statement is inherently debatable. Now there is plenty of rational room to "agree to disagree".

Wes, your statement is true but your assumption was wrong!

Your statement is, “When your P is out of trump, and you have an off AK, leading your King is better than leading your Ace.” No debate about that statement.

But your assumption that P is out of trump is not a truth. I am referring to OP S3, the hand in question. The Ac is still in the wild and could be in P’s hand. My statement is inherently true since 4+1<>7. 4 trump played plus 1 trump in S1’s hand does not account for 7 trumps. Your assumption that S3 playing the Left because he has no other trump is based on your analysis and convention, not the visible facts.

Now, as strongly as I disagree with your logic about how to play following a Left lead, instead of the Ac in trumps, I agree that playing the Ace, is the best way to communicate information to your partner. I do this despite Dylan’s statement, “Unfortunately, there is no clear way to communicate this. Playing the top card is the best that we have.” My logic is that if all S3 had was the Left, then he would have to play the Left. Leading the Ace communicates the possibility that S3 (Partner) has the Left. That is good and valuable communication. It is based on observable information as S3 sees it. The concept expands to leading the lower of 2 connected non-trump possible plays. There is zero value, in playing the higher of the 2 connected cards. So from a zero-based approach leading the lower card is better communication.

Wes’ analysis is based on “world class” play including OE games, is supported by my logic, but confuses the issue. The issue is that S3 holds both the Left and the Ace of trumps and which card communicates information more accurately. So I agree based on the Ace lead as communicating more information.

I appreciate Dylan’s statement. It simplifies the thought process, which is very important in real-game time and under real-game stress. As the OE “teacher” he is guiding players not to false-card your partner! He is simplifying the approach for the 99% of players who enjoy Euchre but want to forgo the additional analysis. It is a GP (General Principle) for casual players. Better players though will find the exception to GP’s.

Great discussion! We should be able to agree on that.

[irishwolf]

I see no issue with leading that KS instead of the AS. Reason is the QC & the AC are still out and S2 played the 10C. What cares that S3 still had the AC, the issue is what S2 holds. So leading the KS if he holds either of the two unknown he (S1 perspective) just might slough hoping the dealer has the AS and/or the QC setting him up a squeeze. To me it matters little that S3 could have the AC as the most important point is he crossed suit and just want to score his point. And leading the KS is the BEST option to fool S2. When S3 false carded, he took himself out of a couple options that S1 had to make his point. Had he not false carded, a Sweep was possible.

RI said, "Now, as strongly as I disagree with your logic about how to play following a Left lead, instead of the Ac in trumps, I agree that playing the Ace, is the best way to communicate information to your partner. I do this despite Dylan’s statement, “Unfortunately, there is no clear way to communicate this. Playing the top card is the best that we have.” My logic is that if all S3 had was the Left, then he would have to play the Left. Leading the Ace communicates the possibility that S3 (Partner) has the Left"...

IRISHWOLF

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Wes, your statement is true but your assumption was wrong!

Your statement is, “When your P is out of trump, and you have an off AK, leading your King is better than leading your Ace.” No debate about that statement.

But your assumption that P is out of trump is not a truth. I am referring to OP S3, the hand in question. The Ac is still in the wild and could be in P’s hand. My statement is inherently true since 4+1<>7. 4 trump played plus 1 trump in S1’s hand does not account for 7 trumps. Your assumption that S3 playing the Left because he has no other trump is based on your analysis and convention, not the visible facts.

Now, as strongly as I disagree with your logic about how to play following a Left lead, instead of the Ac in trumps, I agree that playing the Ace, is the best way to communicate information to your partner. I do this despite Dylan’s statement, “Unfortunately, there is no clear way to communicate this. Playing the top card is the best that we have.” My logic is that if all S3 had was the Left, then he would have to play the Left. Leading the Ace communicates the possibility that S3 (Partner) has the Left. That is good and valuable communication. It is based on observable information as S3 sees it. The concept expands to leading the lower of 2 connected non-trump possible plays. There is zero value, in playing the higher of the 2 connected cards. So from a zero-based approach leading the lower card is better communication.

Wes’ analysis is based on “world class” play including OE games, is supported by my logic, but confuses the issue. The issue is that S3 holds both the Left and the Ace of trumps and which card communicates information more accurately. So I agree based on the Ace lead as communicating more information.

I appreciate Dylan’s statement. It simplifies the thought process, which is very important in real-game time and under real-game stress. As the OE “teacher” he is guiding players not to false-card your partner! He is simplifying the approach for the 99% of players who enjoy Euchre but want to forgo the additional analysis. It is a GP (General Principle) for casual players. Better players though will find the exception to GP’s.

Great discussion! We should be able to agree on that.
[/color]

I have already said that when I have an amateur partner I would lead the AS on that spot. But if you have an expert P, then when you lead the Right and they play the Left they will be out of trump every time becuz an expert P doesn't false-card their partner in that spot. They would never play the Left if they also had the Ace. IOW with an expert P, leading the KS is irrefutably correct in this spot becuz that expert P is out of trump. When I'm in an OE game I am going assume I play with experts whether it's true or not. I don't care if I'm wrong. I'm gonna hold you guys to that high standard.

The take home message: with an expert P, the KS being a better lead than the AS in this spot becomes another logical truth.

[Dlan]

I don't care if I'm wrong.

Ya, that pretty much sums it up

[Richardb02]

This post has become as complicated as the nuances of Euchre!

This is a quote from my relevant post:
“GP, if I have 2 connected cards and partner is the maker, I will lead the lower of the 2 cards to communicate the possibility that I “may” have the higher card. This “revelation” is my take away from this post.”

I will additional clarification. If partner is the maker and leads a boss, I will lead the lower of my connected cards to communicate the possibility that I “may” have the higher card.

I even retract my GP designation. I was describing a very detailed situation, where partner is deciding what to play to maker’s boss lead, when holding connected cards.

My GP does not apply to S1’s decision to lead the As or the Ks. S1 is the maker, not his partner. The maker has the “captaincy” of the hand, as Irish accurately describes elsewhere.

Irish, Wes and Tbolt’s responses are powerful explanations, IMO, that false-carding is probably the best lead, when the maker is leading as in the OP.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I don't care if I'm wrong.

Ya, that pretty much sums it up

When you or anyone in the OE game is my P, I am going to assume you are playing expertly and base my decisions off of that. If my decision ends up being wrong becuz my P does not play expertly, I truly don't care. It's just a game. It's not like we are playing for money. The cool thing tho is my approach to the OE game of always assuming my P plays expertly is a wonderful didactic tool. By doing this, more learning moments will be created and that's good for the forum. 99% of the time I play euchre I have to constantly adjust to and guess what my amateur P's are doing. It's exhausting and annoying. When I play the OE games, I get to take a break from that and assume the very best from my Ps. If they can't live up to my expectation, who cares. It's just a game anyways.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I don't care if I'm wrong.

Ya, that pretty much sums it up

This interchange reminds me of that one thread where Irishwolf was right and you were wrong but you rudely dismissed him:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=359

Irishwolf--one of the best euchre players on this planet with lots to teach--left the forum for almost a year after that. He didn't even lurk. I know cuz I would click on his name all the time hoping he'd come back. What a stone cold killa!

Here we are again and now you're being dismissive with me when once again you are wrong. Unlike Wolf tho I'm not going anywhere. He probably has a life. I don't. I know that you run this site, but the kind of petty behavior you have a history of displaying should have no place here.

[Dlan]

I think I’m being baited to respond on a personal level, but sorry, I’ll pass.

Yes, it does seem like we disagree. IMO in this hand, leading a king before the ace is wrong. It serves no purpose other than confuse your partner. To do it just because you can and it will not affect the outcome is not a good enough reason.

On to the left-king. And once again we disagree. As I said earlier, there is no good way to signal one has left/ace. Playing the left gives a partner more information, playing the Ace leaves open the question of do they only have the ace? Or maybe ace/king or maybe ace/left. Playing the left and you have only 2 possibilities. Bare left or left/ace. K.I.S.

All though it didn’t work out in this hand, one may also be able to guess by the cards previously played.

Being a partnership game, it is best to your partner the most accurate information possible. Neither one of your proposed Strategies does this.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I think I’m being baited to respond on a personal level, but sorry, I’ll pass.

No you are not being baited. That's not how I operate. I put my heart and soul in this game. I come here to help players like you and others become better. Your rude dismissive responses add nothing to the discussion. Are we here to get better or are we here to turn this into the Jerry Springer show. Let's leave the ego and pettiness out and focus on improving. That's all I'm saying.

Yes, it does seem like we disagree. IMO in this hand, leading a king before the ace is wrong. It serves no purpose other than confuse your partner. To do it just because you can and it will not affect the outcome is not a good enough reason. pass.

My claim on this spot is that IF S1s partner is an expert than leading the KS on trick 2 is unequivocally better than leading the AS. This is because when an expert S3 plays the Left on S1's Right bower lead he will always be out of trump. And crucially IF S1's P is out of trump then S1 can never false-card him BUT S1 can false-card the enemy and trick them into playing off which can win a trick S1's team otherwise wouldn't get which can be the difference between scoring a point and getting euchred.

So leading the KS instead of the AS can only help S1s team. It cant hurt his team. Again this isn't up for opinion. Your opinion on this matter and my opinion on this matter is completely irrelevant. What I'm talking about is a logical truth. Anybody can solve this logical puzzle and they will HAVE to reach the same conclusion assuming they are rational.

On to the left-king. And once again we disagree. As I said earlier, there is no good way to signal one has left/ace. Playing the left gives a partner more information, playing the Ace leaves open the question of do they only have the ace? Or maybe ace/king or maybe ace/left. Playing the left and you have only 2 possibilities. Bare left or left/ace. K.I.S.

I'm not sure what you are talking about. S3 had Left-Ace in trump. When S1 leads the Right, an expert S3 will always play the Ace. To be clear, if S3 has Left-X, S3 will always play the lower card X when S1 leads the Right. Why? Because then those times S3 plays the Left he will be perfectly communicating to his P he is out of trump and this often critical information can help S1 better play his hand. There is no strong player on this planet who disagrees with that.

All though it didn’t work out in this hand, one may also be able to guess by the cards previously played.

Being a partnership game, it is best to your partner the most accurate information possible. Neither one of your proposed Strategies does this.

You're speaking generally. I agree with the general truth to give your P the most accurate information possible. That doesn't change the fact that in this particular hand If S1 has an expert P, the KS is unequivocally the best lead. I encourage everyone to solve this simple logical puzzle and the other logic puzzles I've talked about itt.

Also I'd like to add I'm very thankful S1 correctly led the KS after his P incorrectly played the Left so this discussion could even happen. It's been mostly enjoyable for me because I love logical puzzles.

[irishwolf]

I can't believe this issue is still up for debate.

Don said, " On to the left-king. And once again we disagree. As I said earlier, there is no good way to signal one has left/ace. Playing the left gives a partner more information, playing the Ace leaves open the question of do they only have the ace? Or maybe ace/king or maybe ace/left. Playing the left and you have only 2 possibilities. Bare left or left/ace. K.I.S.

All though it didn’t work out in this hand, one may also be able to guess by the cards previously played.

Being a partnership game, it is best to your partner the most accurate information possible."

I KNOW I DO NOT WANT MY PARTNER, WHEN I MAKE TRUMP, FOOLING ME BY PLAYING THE HIGHER OF ANY DOUBLETON TRUMP COMBO. Play the lower one and sure and leave the question of the higher one unknown. In this hand, it is the most accurate information if the AC was played and it could have resulted in a Sweep if eldest leads QD on trick 4. Many games are won/lost by 1 point so it could have been a game changer as well.

Different if on Defense, fool the opponents.

Further, if you took a poll of higher skilled players I would lay odds they will agree, "player the lower trump card" and it gives better information. I think if I searched the old text on advise this would be covered??

And since this is a website to teach euchre, this issue should be left in question.

IRISHWOLF

[jspectre]

I don't care if I'm wrong.

Ya, that pretty much sums it up

When you or anyone in the OE game is my P, I am going to assume you are playing expertly and base my decisions off of that. If my decision ends up being wrong becuz my P does not play expertly, I truly don't care. It's just a game. It's not like we are playing for money. The cool thing tho is my approach to the OE game of always assuming my P plays expertly is a wonderful didactic tool. By doing this, more learning moments will be created and that's good for the forum. 99% of the time I play euchre I have to constantly adjust to and guess what my amateur P's are doing. It's exhausting and annoying. When I play the OE games, I get to take a break from that and assume the very best from my Ps. If they can't live up to my expectation, who cares. It's just a game anyways.

Wes, to me this is an interesting statement, because I genuinely feel as if playing euchre against other experts is easy, you know to a certain degree what experts are willing to call on, and aside from situations where you may try to bag a playable hand in order to bait S1 into calling next or try an uncharacteristic call, we're really all quite predictable. Compared to the almost complete unknown of dealing with amateurs, and trying to make the best plays for that unknown environment, playing against experts is a walk in the park. lol

[jspectre]

Also, I want to add that even while I was still an amateur, I understood that showing the left if you have left/ace is simply a bad play if your team are the maker's. When your partner only has the left bower, he will have to play it to your right lead, but if he has another trump, then he can play under instead, and save the highest remaining trump left in play. If you think that it doesn't matter which trump you show, because either one is now the highest left in play, this is a false assumption. That perspective only exists from your solitary view of the hand, this does not hold true from your partner's perspective.

The left still carries a greater value than the ace, and that is why showing the left to your partner on their right bower lead is a universal single that you are void in trump, for the same reason that you slog the left on your opponents call/right bower lead if you're also holding the ace. Showing your partner the left, so that they know it's out of play doesn't help at all, because the ace is still missing, all you have done is make them think you are now void of trump, and slogging the left when you hold a trump lower than the ace to show your partner where the left is doesn't make any sense, because now the opponents could be left with the ace, this is amateur logic.

The idea that showing an ace could mean your partner either has the king or the left is also false, it's the same exact situation. If you hold the A/K then you need to show your partner the K for the same reason you show the ace if you hold the left. If you show the ace and your partner does not have the K, then he should assume you are void or have the left. Plus, you simply can't have your partner throwing away the left to keep the ace, this means you have to wonder every time that your partner shows the left whether or not he is void, compared to this being a universal signal that he is void in trump, and there is no downside to not showing your partner the left.

[jspectre]

On to the left-king. And once again we disagree. As I said earlier, there is no good way to signal one has left/ace. Playing the left gives a partner more information, playing the Ace leaves open the question of do they only have the ace? Or maybe ace/king or maybe ace/left. Playing the left and you have only 2 possibilities. Bare left or left/ace. K.I.S.

Dlan, Dlan, I covered this in my last comment, but I wanted to quote you on this as well. If you're concerned with giving your partner the most accurate information possible, then your example of whether playing the ace leaves your partner in confusion as to whether you could have the K or the left, is simply mistaken. Just as showing the left with a left/ace combo is false carding, so to would be showing the ace if you also held an A/K combo. Showing your partner a higher trump, while keeping a lower trump, can only serve to trick your partner into believing you may now be void, these are the sort of plays you would make to try and potentially trick your opponents, so they shouldn't be done to your partner as well.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

I KNOW I DO NOT WANT MY PARTNER, WHEN I MAKE TRUMP, FOOLING ME BY PLAYING THE HIGHER OF ANY DOUBLETON TRUMP COMBO. Play the lower one and sure and leave the question of the higher one unknown. In this hand, it is the most accurate information if the AC was played and it could have resulted in a Sweep if eldest leads QD on trick 4. Many games are won/lost by 1 point so it could have been a game changer as well.

Different if on Defense, fool the opponents.

Further, if you took a poll of higher skilled players I would lay odds they will agree, "player the lower trump card" and it gives better information. I think if I searched the old text on advise this would be covered??

And since this is a website to teach euchre, this issue should be left in question.

IRISHWOLF

If you and Edward didn't come in, clearing stating that S3 playing the Left out of a L-Ace combo on S1's Right bower lead is a bad play, I seriously would feel like I entered the Twilight Zone. I honestly still can't believe we're even discussion this. Excluding myself, there are 4 championship level players in my weekly tournament. If I played the Left before the the Ace in that spot, all of them would yell at me. Actually Edward wouldn't yell cuz I have never seen Edward mad in my life lol, but he'd say something. As you noted, expert players DO NOT like being deceived by their partner. They want it to be 100% certain that when their P plays the Left on their Right bower lead, their P is out of trump so they can adjust their strategy accordingly.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Wes, to me this is an interesting statement, because I genuinely feel as if playing euchre against other experts is easy, you know to a certain degree what experts are willing to call on, and aside from situations where you may try to bag a playable hand in order to bait S1 into calling next or try an uncharacteristic call, we're really all quite predictable. Compared to the almost complete unknown of dealing with amateurs, and trying to make the best plays for that unknown environment, playing against experts is a walk in the park. lol

I agree. The game is completely different when you have an expert P. 99% of the time I play euchre it's essentially 1 vs 3. It's very mentally taxing. But when I have a great P, then the game is like "a walk in the park". Now we're speaking the same language. Everything's simplified. So many things you had to worry about before you no loner have to worry about. It's a much easier game.

For example, say your team is up 9-7 and you are in the 3rd Seat. Say the dealer turns it down and S1 and S2 passes. If an expert is my P, I know he has all suits blocked, but with an amateur P I now have to donate just in case S4 is sitting on a 2nd rd loner. IOW With an amateur P I have to potentially cost my team a point. With an expert P I can safely pass in this spot if I have nothing.

Recently I was in this spot in my tournament. My P was the typical passing rec player always trying not to get euchred. It got to me in the 2nd rd and I called Next from 3rd with just T9, no aces, no voids, to make sure S4 couldn't win the game on a loner. WE GOT ALL 5 TRICKS LOL and it wasn't cuz she has some super euchre hand. I just luckily caught the suit she was supposed to call with.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Dlan, I covered this in my last comment, but I wanted to quote you on this as well. If you're concerned with giving your partner the most accurate information possible, then your example of whether playing the ace leaves your partner in confusion as to whether you could have the K or the left, is simply mistaken. Just as showing the left with a left/ace combo is false carding, so to would be showing the ace if you also held an A/K combo. Showing your partner a higher trump, while keeping a lower trump, can only serve to trick your partner into believing you may now be void, these are the sort of plays you would make to try and potentially trick your opponents, so they shouldn't be done to your partner as well.

Yep exactly.

[Wes (aka the legend)]

Also, I want to add that even while I was still an amateur, I understood that showing the left if you have left/ace is simply a bad play if your team are the maker's. When your partner only has the left bower, he will have to play it to your right lead, but if he has another trump, then he can play under instead, and save the highest remaining trump left in play. If you think that it doesn't matter which trump you show, because either one is now the highest left in play, this is a false assumption. That perspective only exists from your solitary view of the hand, this does not hold true from your partner's perspective.

The left still carries a greater value than the ace, and that is why showing the left to your partner on their right bower lead is a universal single that you are void in trump, for the same reason that you slog the left on your opponents call/right bower lead if you're also holding the ace. Showing your partner the left, so that they know it's out of play doesn't help at all, because the ace is still missing, all you have done is make them think you are now void of trump, and slogging the left when you hold a trump lower than the ace to show your partner where the left is doesn't make any sense, because now the opponents could be left with the ace, this is amateur logic.

The idea that showing an ace could mean your partner either has the king or the left is also false, it's the same exact situation. If you hold the A/K then you need to show your partner the K for the same reason you show the ace if you hold the left. If you show the ace and your partner does not have the K, then he should assume you are void or have the left. Plus, you simply can't have your partner throwing away the left to keep the ace, this means you have to wonder every time that your partner shows the left whether or not he is void, compared to this being a universal signal that he is void in trump, and there is no downside to not showing your partner the left.

Perfect. I no longer feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone

[jspectre]

If you and Edward didn't come in, clearing stating that S3 playing the Left out of a L-Ace combo on S1's Right bower lead is a bad play, I seriously would feel like I entered the Twilight Zone. I honestly still can't believe we're even discussion this. Excluding myself, there are 4 championship level players in my weekly tournament. If I played the Left before the the Ace in that spot, all of them would yell at me. Actually Edward wouldn't yell cuz I have never seen Edward mad in my life lol, but he'd say something. As you noted, expert players DO NOT like being deceived by their partner. They want it to be 100% certain that when their P plays the Left on their Right bower lead, their P is out of trump so they can adjust their strategy accordingly.

Precisely. I actually hadn't really thought about this until now, it has just been common sense for me to always show the lower of my connected trump suits to my partner, based on the same principle of showing the ace in a left/ace combo, but I didn't quite understand the importance of this with smaller trumps. By showing the lower of my connected pair, now my partner can assume that it is impossible for me to also hold the next lower suit.

Without this understanding, we would not be able to rule out the lower trump in a connected set. I'm not sure if I have been consciously applying this knowledge during our OE games. I have been playing the lower of my two connected trumps because it can never hurt, playing the higher of the two can potentially trick your partner, but I didn't quite realize this means on a right bower lead, that your partner can never have a lower trump than what they have shown. So, now you know they are either void or potentially possess a higher trump.

[irishwolf]

I did a quick search of Old Euchre books on this topic. None had this specific play did refer to False Carding in general. Quoting:

The Laws of Euchre, by H. C. Leeds and James Dwight 1888

Always be careful how you play your small cards, and never play false cards

Give all the information possible to your partner by your play;. . .

ANOTHER BUT MORE GENERAL COMMENT:

The Law and Practice of the Game of Euchre


Author: Meehan, Charles Henry Wharton, 1862 THE PROFESSOR

A few more illustrative hints — to each and
every player, in a general way — we hope may
be taken, as we offer them, in the very spirit
of kindness.

Always play to benefit your partner — in
every possible way you can with fairness and
good order — and to balk your antagonists
by masking your hand, for in Euchre, as in
Love and in "War, all maneuvers are admissi-
ble.

IRISH

[Dlan]

Unlike leading a king before the ace, playing the left from a left/ace trump set is not something that I just made up. I had seen it used others use it and as I said, it takes a partner that understands the concept.

No matter if you play the ace or the left, it’s now up to the maker to try and figure out what, if any trump you still have. That is no easy task, especially on the first lead as above. Playing the left shows where that card is. That is something most players want to know.

To quote from the above post by Irishwolf
" Give all the information possible to your partner by your play;. . ."
I believe this method those that.

It is also consistent with how other connecting sets are played on your partner lead. Knowing where the boss cards are makes it easier for the maker to control the hand.

False carding would be where one leads the lower card from a connecting set. Here you are responding to your partner's lead. They are two different things.

Now I do agree that this is should not be done on an opponent’s play.

[Tbolt65]

Unlike leading a king before the ace, playing the left from a left/ace trump set is not something that I just made up. I had seen it used others use it and as I said, it takes a partner that understands the concept.

No matter if you play the ace or the left, it’s now up to the maker to try and figure out what, if any trump you still have. That is no easy task, especially on the first lead as above. Playing the left shows where that card is. That is something most players want to know.

To quote from the above post by Irishwolf
" Give all the information possible to your partner by your play;. . ."
I believe this method those that.

It is also consistent with how other connecting sets are played on your partner lead. Knowing where the boss cards are makes it easier for the maker to control the hand.

False carding would be where one leads the lower card from a connecting set. Here you are responding to your partner's lead. They are two different things.

Now I do agree that this is should not be done on an opponent’s play.

I understand with what your saying about an agreed upon play.... of what is meant by certain play. When there is nuances like that you need to be sure your partner understands that expected nuances. Sometimes thats through trial and error. Other times by before hand discussion.

Keep in mind that every card has meaning as do every play. You want to trick your opponents and let your partner deduce that by counting trump and by your actions they can play their hand accordingly. They will see this as a possibility if they are paying attention. You ideally dont want to be playing this same way with your partner as you would do against your opponents. Without them knowing of what your trying to do in said situation. Otherwise they will misinterpret your play and in turn they will not play optimally or accordingly.

Play cards reasonably so a proper understanding is had by said play. To use a poker term. Don't get too tricky with your teams calls. Basically don't over complicate things for you and your partner.

Tbolt65
Edward

[jspectre]

RETRACTED

[irishwolf]

More ridiculous comments, no jspectre has drank the koolaid too:

Unlike leading a king before the ace, playing the left from a left/ace trump set is not something that I just made up. I had seen it used others use it and as I said, it takes a partner that understands the concept. Any way you verbalize it, it FALSE CARDING YOUR PARTNER. YOU PLAY THE LOWEST CARD OF A SEQUENCE BECAUSE IT GIVES YOUR PARTNER MORE INFORMATION. !

No matter if you play the ace or the left, it’s now up to the maker to try and figure out what, if any trump you still have. That is no easy task, especially on the first lead as above.

jspectre said, "Plus, I want to emphasize that whether your partner shows you low or high out of a connected set, the end result is the same in terms of information gained, NO THE END RESULT IS NOT THE SAME - LOOK AT WHAT THIS HAND CAUSED S1 TO DO AND THEY FAILED TO GET A SWEEP BECAUSE S3 FALSE CARDED HIS PARTNER! because whether the A or K is potentially still in play, both of them will have the same respective value,. . . "

And yes I am done too commenting on stupid!

IRISHWOLF

[jspectre]

NO THE END RESULT IS NOT THE SAME - LOOK AT WHAT THIS HAND CAUSED S1 TO DO AND THEY FAILED TO GET A SWEEP BECAUSE S3 FALSE CARDED HIS PARTNER!

Settle down, Irish!

You're starting to make a habit of misunderstanding what I'm saying. The statement you quoted has absolutely nothing to do with connected non-trump suits, so your point is irrelevant. Also, two things. First, the reason for any potential mix-up is that S3 falsely showed they were void, not that S1 showed his K instead of his A from his A/K set and second, they did still get a sweep, 3rd had to follow suit on the K, and when S1 correctly led trump on 4th street, S3 still had a winner to lead on 5th street.

[Dlan]

It seems we have two different trains of thought here.

Which one gives your partner more information? My way is best or it has always been done this way does little to advance ones euchre knowledge.

A better approach would have one team showing the higher card to his partner while the other team shows the lower. Of course, both members of a team would need to be on the same page.

Over a series of hands, it should be possible to determine the best outcome.

[Tbolt65]

I'm not sure if its been said but 1 time where it would be correct to show the left if seat 2 orders up the ace of trump to the dealer. Then showing the left by seat 4/dealer is advantageous and tells your partner what they want to see and shows where the left is. In a non assist scenarios, like jspectre said. Playing the left at s3 to a s1 call is ambiguous and potentially can hurt the teams chances at point or even a march. Which it did in the scenario we are discussing.


Tbolt65
Edward