Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Interesting Scenario

Expand Messages
  • Joseph J Cravero
    Score: 0-0 Upcard: Qc 1st: AKTd, KQs 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts Trick 1: Ad, 9d,
    Message 1 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
      Score: 0-0
      Upcard: Qc

      1st: AKTd, KQs
      2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
      3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
      Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh

      6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts

      Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.

      If I throw away my Tc, we get the euchre if 2nd trumps the Kd at
      trick 2 or if 3rd discards the Ac on trick 2.
      If I trump with Th, they score no matter what.

      Primary question:
      Is this just an anomoly, or should I discard to play after the maker
      with such a strong hand?

      Secondary questions:
      If you were 2nd, would you have ordered up the Qc?
      If you were 4th, would you pick up to play QTc with 2 Aces and no
      defense against S?
      If you were 1st, would you have donated, or called D or S?


      Joe
    • bimbert84
      Hi Joe, ... I d say you re looking at a rare circumstance. Something as simple as the the Kh and Qh being reversed in 2nd and 3rd s hands will change
      Message 2 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
        Hi Joe,

        > Score: 0-0
        > Upcard: Qc
        >
        > 1st: AKTd, KQs
        > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
        > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
        > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
        >
        > 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts
        >
        > Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.
        >
        > If I throw away my Tc, we get the euchre if 2nd
        > trumps the Kd at trick 2 or if 3rd discards the
        > Ac on trick 2. If I trump with Th, they score
        > no matter what.
        >
        > Primary question:
        > Is this just an anomoly, or should I discard to
        > play after the maker with such a strong hand?

        I'd say you're looking at a rare circumstance. Something as simple
        as the the Kh and Qh being reversed in 2nd and 3rd's hands will
        change everything.

        Giving 1st a free trick while allowing 3rd to ditch a loser just
        seems like a very bad idea. I'd hit it with the Th, and either lead
        back the As looking for 3rd to be 2-suited; or the little club,
        looking for a trick from my P.


        > Secondary questions:
        > If you were 2nd, would you have ordered up the Qc?

        No. Even with 3 trump, my 4-suitedness will probably prevent me from
        scoring anything but the R.


        > If you were 4th, would you pick up to play QTc with
        > 2 Aces and no defense against S?

        I'd certainly consider it, and given the score, I probably would (and
        in this case, it'll score a march).


        > If you were 1st, would you have donated, or called D or S?

        I would not have donated, but the second time around I would've
        called diamonds and led Td (which in this case, will score a point).

        -- Rob
      • Brian Lee
        ... (and ... Hi Rob, I tend to agree with your choice here, but I think it is important to point out that this call should depend on the style of play of your
        Message 3 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
          --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "bimbert84" <bimbert84@y...>
          wrote:

          > > If you were 4th, would you pick up to play QTc with
          > > 2 Aces and no defense against S?
          >
          > I'd certainly consider it, and given the score, I probably would
          (and
          > in this case, it'll score a march).

          Hi Rob,

          I tend to agree with your choice here, but I think it is important
          to point out that this call should depend on the style of play of
          your partner. There are a lot of players online that love to order
          with a weak hand, something like AK or LT. If I know that my
          partner likes to order weak I would pass here. If I know he does
          not order weak or this is the first time I've played with him I
          would pick it up. I also agree with your answers to the other two
          questions that Joe asked.

          --Brian
        • wdfover50
          ... maker ... I would have ordered up the queen from second chair. (Risky, but at that score, who cares?) I would not have picked it up from fourth. I would
          Message 4 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
            --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph J Cravero"
            <joeelf@y...> wrote:
            > Score: 0-0
            > Upcard: Qc
            >
            > 1st: AKTd, KQs
            > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
            > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
            > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
            >
            > 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts
            >
            > Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.
            >
            > If I throw away my Tc, we get the euchre if 2nd trumps the Kd at
            > trick 2 or if 3rd discards the Ac on trick 2.
            > If I trump with Th, they score no matter what.
            >
            > Primary question:
            > Is this just an anomoly, or should I discard to play after the
            maker
            > with such a strong hand?
            >
            > Secondary questions:
            > If you were 2nd, would you have ordered up the Qc?
            > If you were 4th, would you pick up to play QTc with 2 Aces and no
            > defense against S?
            > If you were 1st, would you have donated, or called D or S?
            >
            >
            > Joe

            I would have ordered up the queen from second chair. (Risky, but at
            that score, who cares?)

            I would not have picked it up from fourth.

            I would have called diamonds from first.

            I would have trumped with the 10 of hearts.

            Patricia . . .
          • Joseph J Cravero
            Patricia, It played out originally just like you laid out and 3rd scores her point. It was Hoyle Cards (wife needed the phone so Yahoo was out) so I hit
            Message 5 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
              Patricia,

              It played out originally just like you laid out and 3rd scores her
              point.

              It was Hoyle Cards (wife needed the phone so Yahoo was out) so I hit
              replay.

              1st cashes the Ad after 3rd and I threw off.

              Then 1st led Ks which 2nd follows, 3rd THREW OFF her Ac, I take with
              my As. I lead the left and score the 2.


              Is there any reason whatsoever for 3rd to throw the Ac instead of
              9h ?

              (Aside from crappy programming - another example: If I have L9 and
              lead the L to P's RT call at 3rd, my P will play the R and we get
              euch'd by opps w/KQ and 2 aces... I no longer lead the L)

              Joe
              --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "wdfover50" <wdfover50@h...>
              wrote:
              > --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph J Cravero"
              > <joeelf@y...> wrote:
              > > Score: 0-0
              > > Upcard: Qc
              > >
              > > 1st: AKTd, KQs
              > > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
              > > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
              > > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
              > >
              > > 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts
              > >
              > > Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.
              > >
              > > If I throw away my Tc, we get the euchre if 2nd trumps the Kd at
              > > trick 2 or if 3rd discards the Ac on trick 2.
              > > If I trump with Th, they score no matter what.
              > >
              > > Primary question:
              > > Is this just an anomoly, or should I discard to play after the
              > maker
              > > with such a strong hand?
              > >
              > > Secondary questions:
              > > If you were 2nd, would you have ordered up the Qc?
              > > If you were 4th, would you pick up to play QTc with 2 Aces and no
              > > defense against S?
              > > If you were 1st, would you have donated, or called D or S?
              > >
              > >
              > > Joe
              >
              > I would have ordered up the queen from second chair. (Risky, but at
              > that score, who cares?)
              >
              > I would not have picked it up from fourth.
              >
              > I would have called diamonds from first.
              >
              > I would have trumped with the 10 of hearts.
              >
              > Patricia . . .
            • Natty Bumppo
              Fluke (funny way to spell anomaly): First should have called spades ( next ) when the queen of clubs went down. And led them.
              Message 6 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
                Fluke (funny way to spell anomaly):

                First should have called spades
                ("next") when the queen of clubs
                went down. And led them.

                "Joseph J Cravero" wrote:

                > Score: 0-0
                > Upcard: Qc
                >
                > 1st: AKTd, KQs
                > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
                > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
                > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
                >
                > 6 passes . . .
                >
                > Secondary questions: . . .
                >
                > If you were 1st, would you have . . . called . . . S?
              • wdfover50
                In this case I d call diamonds. Why? Because I ve been keeping mental track of when next works and when not. Have been doing this for several months now.
                Message 7 of 15 , Apr 1, 2004
                  In this case I'd call diamonds. Why? Because I've been keeping
                  mental track of when next works and when not. Have been doing this
                  for several months now. Next seems to have no significance when the
                  card turned down is lower than an Ace. I will agree that a diamonds
                  call is risky, and depending on the score, I might pass with this
                  hand. I will qualify my statement by saying that when defying the
                  obvious next call, you have to be stronger than usual. This may
                  sound somewhat contradictory after I just said that anything below
                  an Ace you can ignore next. Without knowing any of the other cards
                  except the queen of clubs which was turned down, I would still call
                  diamonds but lead a spade. Maybe I just have a convoluted way of
                  thinking, but this makes perfect sense to me.

                  I'd like to add an addendum here. I've also noticed that many
                  euchre players online should have picked the card up and calling
                  next can get you in trouble big time. Others are bright enough (very
                  few) to know you're going to call next so they bag.

                  IMHO, second should have ordered it and it should never have gone
                  that far anyway.

                  Patricia . . .

                  --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Natty Bumppo" <borf@b...>
                  wrote:
                  > Fluke (funny way to spell anomaly):
                  >
                  > First should have called spades
                  > ("next") when the queen of clubs
                  > went down. And led them.
                  >
                  > "Joseph J Cravero" wrote:
                  >
                  > > Score: 0-0
                  > > Upcard: Qc
                  > >
                  > > 1st: AKTd, KQs
                  > > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
                  > > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
                  > > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
                  > >
                  > > 6 passes . . .
                  > >
                  > > Secondary questions: . . .
                  > >
                  > > If you were 1st, would you have . . . called . . . S?
                • julie212@att.net
                  ... If first seat plays this hand correctly, 4th seat play is not an issue. This should be an easy point. A second diamond lead to your p s void from a 3-card
                  Message 8 of 15 , Jul 28, 2013
                    I found this thread from 2004 and thought it deserved a second look:


                    > Score: 0-0
                    > Upcard: Qc
                    >
                    > 1st: AKTd, KQs
                    > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
                    > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
                    > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
                    >
                    > 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts
                    >
                    > Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.
                    >
                    > If I throw away my Tc, we get the euchre if 2nd trumps the Kd at
                    > trick 2 or if 3rd discards the Ac on trick 2.
                    > If I trump with Th, they score no matter what.
                    >
                    > Primary question:
                    > Is this just an anomoly, or should I discard to play after the maker
                    > with such a strong hand?
                    >


                    If first seat plays this hand correctly, 4th seat play is not an issue. This should be an easy point.

                    A second diamond lead to your p's void from a 3-card suit is a perfect recipe for a euchre. Switch to a spade and the point is solid.

                    A second lead of a suit is almost always wrong when your p makes trump, especially when the maker is in third seat and your suit is the same color as trump. Your trump void means there could be 4 trump cards arranged against your p. Maker is vulnerable from both 2nd seat and dealer. Leading your suit a second time is like playing for the other team.

                    Moral: When your p makes trump, wait for trump to be pulled before leading your suit a second time.

                    -Julie

                    P.S. There are a couple of (rare) exceptions to this rule, but this scenario is not one of them.
                  • Perry Romanowski
                    What do you think needs revisiting? Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?
                    Message 9 of 15 , Jul 28, 2013
                      What do you think needs revisiting?  Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?

                    • kmaxm2001
                      Julie, The Great Euchre Earl and I talked this one over and what we think needs revisited is second seat s decision to pass in the first round. Now I m aware
                      Message 10 of 15 , Jul 29, 2013
                        Julie,

                        The Great Euchre Earl and I talked this one over and what we think needs revisited is second seat's decision to pass in the first round. Now I'm aware that many of you, perhaps a majority, believe that second should be reluctant to order their partner, a strategy that I happen to disagree with. Look back at close games that you have lost and try to remember a pivotal hand that had it played out differently would have been enough to turn the loss into a win. Let's look at this hand specifically.

                        At the games most insignificant score 0-0 second, with clubs being his best holding, refuses to order his partner. They also have the advantage of the discard. Barring a colossal error this hand results in a march. The march or the probable subsequent point by the opponents constitutes a 3 point swing in the first hand, enough to change the outcome of many games. The pass by first after dealer passes is also mystifying. First most likely scores in either diamonds or spades, but we'll leave that for another time.

                        It would be my guess that most of you would order at 9-9 so why not 0-0? The majority of the time it's better to play in your best holding and not the opps. This hand is a good example.


                        kmaxm2001
                      • robin neill
                        Perry,   From Perry s comment (quoting, see below and speaking in general terms ), you imply never to lead a second time when your partner orders which is
                        Message 11 of 15 , Jul 29, 2013
                          Perry,
                           
                          From Perry's comment (quoting, see below and speaking in general terms ), you imply never to lead a second time when your partner orders which is not good euchre.  Leading twice all depends on many things. Does your partner assist with a weak hand or strong hand, for example. What do you hold, what tricks have been won and by whom? There are times that a second lead of trump may be the best approach. Say second seat won the first trick, then led trump and the right bower was the upcard, dealer has a small trump and two off suit aces. A second of trump may be the best course of action unless your partner is an idiot to order thin with the right bower up.
                           
                          I think we can say, in general, two leads of trump is excessive and not recommend. However, certainly its not 100% of the time as your statement seems to suggest. Each situation has to be judged on its own merits.
                           
                          ~Robin 
                           
                          What do you think needs revisiting?  Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?"
                           
                           
                          From: Perry Romanowski <thejoggler@...>
                          To: EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2013 6:31 PM
                          Subject: Re: [EuchreScience] Re: Interesting Scenario
                           
                          What do you think needs revisiting?  Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?

                        • Perry Romanowski
                          Robin, I asked a question. It was not meant to imply anything. I do not believe there is any strategy in euchre that is correct for every single situation.
                          Message 12 of 15 , Jul 30, 2013
                            Robin,

                            I asked a question.  It was not meant to imply anything.  I do not believe there is any strategy in euchre that is correct for every single situation.

                            Perry, 44

                            On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:14 PM, robin neill <rhyme_n_reason47@...> wrote:
                             

                            Perry,
                             
                            From Perry's comment (quoting, see below and speaking in general terms ), you imply never to lead a second time when your partner orders which is not good euchre.  Leading twice all depends on many things. Does your partner assist with a weak hand or strong hand, for example. What do you hold, what tricks have been won and by whom? There are times that a second lead of trump may be the best approach. Say second seat won the first trick, then led trump and the right bower was the upcard, dealer has a small trump and two off suit aces. A second of trump may be the best course of action unless your partner is an idiot to order thin with the right bower up.
                             
                            I think we can say, in general, two leads of trump is excessive and not recommend. However, certainly its not 100% of the time as your statement seems to suggest. Each situation has to be judged on its own merits.
                             
                            ~Robin 
                             
                            What do you think needs revisiting?  Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?"
                             
                          • robin neill
                            I am in agreement! ________________________________ From: Perry Romanowski To: EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, July 30,
                            Message 13 of 15 , Jul 30, 2013
                              I am in agreement!

                              From: Perry Romanowski <thejoggler@...>
                              To: EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 8:48 AM
                              Subject: Re: [EuchreScience] Re: Interesting Scenario
                               
                              Robin,

                              I asked a question.  It was not meant to imply anything.  I do not believe there is any strategy in euchre that is correct for every single situation.

                              Perry, 44
                              On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:14 PM, robin neill <rhyme_n_reason47@...> wrote:
                               
                              Perry,
                               
                              From Perry's comment (quoting, see below and speaking in general terms ), you imply never to lead a second time when your partner orders which is not good euchre.  Leading twice all depends on many things. Does your partner assist with a weak hand or strong hand, for example. What do you hold, what tricks have been won and by whom? There are times that a second lead of trump may be the best approach. Say second seat won the first trick, then led trump and the right bower was the upcard, dealer has a small trump and two off suit aces. A second of trump may be the best course of action unless your partner is an idiot to order thin with the right bower up.
                               
                              I think we can say, in general, two leads of trump is excessive and not recommend. However, certainly its not 100% of the time as your statement seems to suggest. Each situation has to be judged on its own merits.
                               
                              ~Robin 
                               
                              What do you think needs revisiting?  Do you disagree with the advice to not lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?"
                               
                            • julie212@att.net
                              Hi Perry, The comments about not leading a suit a second time were mine. You can tell because they don t have the little arrow thingies next to them. -Julie
                              Message 14 of 15 , Jul 30, 2013
                                Hi Perry,

                                The comments about not leading a suit a second time were mine. You can tell because they don't have the little arrow thingies next to them.

                                -Julie

                                --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, Perry Romanowski <thejoggler@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > What do you think needs revisiting? Do you disagree with the advice to not
                                > lead a suit a second time when your partner orders trump?
                                >
                              • julie212@att.net
                                Hello Kmaxm2001, I m in agreement with you and the Great Euchre Earl and would have ordered from second seat at 0-0. This hand has a number of possible threads
                                Message 15 of 15 , Jul 30, 2013
                                  Hello Kmaxm2001,

                                  I'm in agreement with you and the Great Euchre Earl and would have ordered from second seat at 0-0. This hand has a number of possible threads for discussion, some of which were mentioned in the original post (I edited them out because I wanted to focus on the most egregious).

                                  Here's the hand again:

                                  > Score: 0-0
                                  > Upcard: Qc
                                  >
                                  > 1st: AKTd, KQs
                                  > 2nd: J9c, 9d, Ts, Kh
                                  > 3rd: Ac, 9s, JQ9h
                                  > Me: Tc, Jd, As, ATh
                                  >
                                  > 6 passes, 3rd calls Hearts
                                  >
                                  > Trick 1: Ad, 9d, 9s.

                                  It's always interesting to hear what the Great Euchre Earl has to say.

                                  -Julie





                                  --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "kmaxm2001" <kcmartin@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Julie,
                                  >
                                  > The Great Euchre Earl and I talked this one over and what we think needs revisited is second seat's decision to pass in the first round. Now I'm aware that many of you, perhaps a majority, believe that second should be reluctant to order their partner, a strategy that I happen to disagree with. Look back at close games that you have lost and try to remember a pivotal hand that had it played out differently would have been enough to turn the loss into a win. Let's look at this hand specifically.
                                  >
                                  > At the games most insignificant score 0-0 second, with clubs being his best holding, refuses to order his partner. They also have the advantage of the discard. Barring a colossal error this hand results in a march. The march or the probable subsequent point by the opponents constitutes a 3 point swing in the first hand, enough to change the outcome of many games. The pass by first after dealer passes is also mystifying. First most likely scores in either diamonds or spades, but we'll leave that for another time.
                                  >
                                  > It would be my guess that most of you would order at 9-9 so why not 0-0? The majority of the time it's better to play in your best holding and not the opps. This hand is a good example.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > kmaxm2001
                                  >
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.