Re: New situationist on the block
- Hi Natty,
> > To me the decision to donate isSurely you agree the likelihood of an opposing loner is greater when
> > not black-and-white but different
> > shades of gray. . . .
> The pip of the card turned has no
> virtual bearing on a "coup." The
> right bower you don't see is the one
> that will crush you. And nothing
> is easier to hide than a left bower.
a J is turned up instead of a 9. As I said, neither guarantees
anything, but the shade of gray gets a lot darker (for you) when the
turnup is a J.
> And what else does one need to know aboutWell, I spelled that out in my last post. The whole point is that I
> what is held?
do recognize a potential loner can lose the game right now. But the
likelihood of such a loner being successful certainly depends on the
cards we hold. There is a risk in passing and there is a risk in
ordering. It's not enough to look at the worst-case scenario (i.e.
we might lose right now) -- the relative risks must be weighed
against each other. Three aces in my hand, coupled with a good
chance to score myself in another suit, coupled with a low turnup
card, is enough for me to take the risk and pass.
Now I did mention that if one of my non-ace cards was of the upsuit,
I'd likely order with offensive expectations. But assuming this is
not the case, we're looking at a donation.
> > Finally, you need to look at the score. . . .Yes, and that was my point. Donating keeps you in the game, but at a
> That was given. It was 6 to 6. Bite the bullet.
significant cost. 9-6, I'll donate. But 6-6, with all the above
factors added in? Not me. I think my chances of recovering from
being down 8-6 are much worse than losing on a loner here. Again,
this is assuming I have something viable to call if the dealer should
turn it down.
> Who knows, maybe your partner has the missing trump.If my P has the missing trump, there is no danger of a loner. I can
safely pass and call on my own strength if dealer turns it down.