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

My KINGS were squeezed - Natty's column

Expand Messages
  • Gerry Blue
    Natty s column My KINGS were squeezed dated 7/2/2004 has been uploaded to our files area. You can read it by going to
    Message 1 of 8 , Jul 2, 2004
      Natty's column "My KINGS were squeezed" dated 7/2/2004 has been uploaded to our files area.  You can read it by going to http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/EuchreScience/files/Natty/2004/Natty_2004_07_02.html
       
      Gerry

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com

    • blake
      well from my understanding, u should very well have set this hand. You had done perfectly up until trick 4, u had 2 guarded ks and u had made 1 of them boss, u
      Message 2 of 8 , Jul 2, 2004
        well from my understanding, u should very well have set this hand.
        You had done perfectly up until trick 4, u had 2 guarded ks and u had
        made 1 of them boss, u must stick with that 1 and u will either live
        or die by that. Your clubs were key, but thats hindsight, lest see
        why u should have stuck by them without using hindsight. Firstly on
        trick 3 u did fine by throwing ths small spade and unguarding yur K
        of spades, ur whole point in leading the low club was to set yur k as
        boss, and this u achieved. But on trick 4 u abandon it and save the
        k of spades. You played the numbers game and got burned by it,
        because the numbers game isnt the only game that applies here, in my
        opinion.

        1. Yur k of clubs was boss, yur k of spades was not, u saved k of
        spades which is very likely to be a losing card and in doing so u
        threw a boss?

        2. You played the numbers game, and saved spades cos u had seen clubs
        tabled. Well i would only save the spade k if i had seen every other
        club tabled, making my k the useless boss of nothing,

        3. You have good reason to believe that 1st is at the very least void
        in 1 suit, since he has called a very thin next! You had seen that
        he had clubs, and both red, he was 3 suited and spades was his void.
        This is not hindsight.

        4. You had to weigh the math with other factors - which cannot be
        assigned a numerical value, like the propensity that 1st has of being
        3 suited on a next call that thin. You had made yur club a trick you
        just had to stick with it.


        --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, Gerry Blue <gblue42@y...> wrote:
        > Natty's column "My KINGS were squeezed" dated 7/2/2004 has been
        uploaded to our files area. You can read it by going to
        http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/EuchreScience/files/Natty/2004/Nat
        ty_2004_07_02.html
        >
        > Gerry
        >
        > __________________________________________________
        > Do You Yahoo!?
        > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
        > http://mail.yahoo.com
      • Natty Bumppo
        Good point, and thank you. Saving the king of clubs after seeing the ace take the jack fits also the minimum suits hypothesis: A trump maker -- even one
        Message 3 of 8 , Jul 4, 2004
          Good point, and thank you. Saving
          the king of clubs after seeing the
          ace take the jack fits also the
          minimum suits hypothesis: A trump
          maker -- even one going next -- is
          more likely to have two or three
          suits than four, and already we
          have seen three; so we can reckon
          another club more likely than a
          spade.

          Just for fun, swap the maker's ten
          of clubs for your partner's queen.
          The result is not pretty.

          For even more fun, bury the ace of
          clubs and give the maker the queen
          and the ten (and your partner the
          nine, replacing it with the ten of
          diamonds in the maker's partner's
          hand). In this scenario it's not so clear. It still makes sense to
          keep the king of clubs by the minimum suits hypothesis (but if the
          maker's remaining club is the ace and not the ten, the jig is up).
          And the argument for saving the king of SPADES (this is hindsight) is
          that the maker's partner DOES have the QUEEN of spades.

          See what I'm doing? In keeping with the principle "Never apologize,"
          I am looking for a way to blame my partner! (And the reason I am
          allowing myself so many scenarios is that I do not recall the exact
          holdings of this hand, besides my own; I was trying to reconstruct
          them.)

          Setting up a king, by the way, is a tactic that will work on occasion;
          but leading the jack of clubs to set up the king was not the "whole
          point" in this hand. Setting up a king works most often leading
          THROUGH strength, not leading TO strength (unless you have a
          king-queen to lead from). I led the jack of clubs not just to set
          up the king but also in hope that ONE of the black kings would fly --
          e.g., the maker himself might have set up my king of spades by leading
          the ace on third trick (or it might have been boss all day as, in the
          initial scenario given, it was -- once trump were gone).

          "blake" <jat70@u...> wrote:

          > well from my understanding, u should very well have set this hand.
          > You had done perfectly up until trick 4, u had 2 guarded ks and u
          > had made 1 of them boss, u must stick with that 1 and u will either
          > live or die by that. . . . ur whole point in leading the low club
          > was to set yur k as boss, and this u achieved. But on trick 4 u
          > abandon it . . . .
        • Joseph J Cravero
          Natty, You had seen 9JQA of clubs and hold Kc at trick 3 s lead, leaving only Tc. For your decision to even matter at trick 3, 1st must hold a black card, and
          Message 4 of 8 , Jul 6, 2004
            Natty,

            You had seen 9JQA of clubs and hold Kc at trick 3's lead, leaving
            only Tc. For your decision to even matter at trick 3, 1st must hold
            a black card, and not the singleton As. Is it 9TQs (with you having
            seen only the J), or is it Tc?

            So caller must be 4-suited for your Ks to win, but there is a 3-to-1
            count of beatable cards for that Ks.

            Note that if you had led the Kc at trick 2, you would still be in
            this position. At trick 3, do you keep the Ks guarded, or do you
            keep the Jc which can only beat the Tc?

            And I wouldn't necessarily fault your P for leading the Qd. Maybe
            you have another trump and a diamond void... it would likely
            overtake 1st's low ruff or make her Ace of trump boss (since she
            doesn't know it already is).

            Just because 2nd has the Jh doesn't mean the diamond would have been
            ordered to her if 2nd has a tall diamond. In fact if I were 2nd and
            held JJK in black with Left-Ace in diamonds, I would have passed a
            diamond for sure. Holding the R in next with an off Ace (granted it
            is the weaksuit, but...) is good defense and I would try my black
            loner with JJK.

            Joe
            --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, Gerry Blue <gblue42@y...> wrote:
            > Natty's column "My KINGS were squeezed" dated 7/2/2004 has been
            uploaded to our files area. You can read it by going to
            http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/EuchreScience/files/Natty/2004/Nat
            ty_2004_07_02.html
            >
            > Gerry
            >
            > __________________________________________________
            > Do You Yahoo!?
            > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
            > http://mail.yahoo.com
          • blake
            Well, i believe that was the exact reason why natty did save the spade and threw the club - it didnt work. Now that dosent necessarily mean it was the wrong
            Message 5 of 8 , Jul 6, 2004
              Well, i believe that was the exact reason why natty did save the
              spade and threw the club - it didnt work. Now that dosent
              necessarily mean it was the wrong play. Well obviously it was cos it
              didnt work, but that is as i said hind sight. My point was that the
              3v1 spades to clubs or the 'numbers game' was not the only
              consideration here for this scenario. Firstly if he saves the spade
              so what? its not even boss, if the ace is with 3rd (caller's p), or
              with natty's p, then certainly the club would be the better card to
              keep. As i said i would be figuring the caller has only 3 suits -
              and i would assume that until i had seen every club tabled - at which
              point i would abandon my useless club, which is still boss but only
              of itself. BTW what would have been wrong with nattly leading the
              spade K after taking trick 1 with the right? I usually dont like to
              unguard a K because there is a decent chance that the k may be top
              dog already. I prefer to have that suit lead to me, i know this was
              not possible here, but what do u prefer, to lead low or lead the
              k?

              --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Joseph J Cravero"
              <joeelf@y...> wrote:
              > Natty,
              >
              > You had seen 9JQA of clubs and hold Kc at trick 3's lead, leaving
              > only Tc. For your decision to even matter at trick 3, 1st must
              hold
              > a black card, and not the singleton As. Is it 9TQs (with you
              having
              > seen only the J), or is it Tc?
              >
              > So caller must be 4-suited for your Ks to win, but there is a 3-to-
              1
              > count of beatable cards for that Ks.
              >
              > Note that if you had led the Kc at trick 2, you would still be in
              > this position. At trick 3, do you keep the Ks guarded, or do you
              > keep the Jc which can only beat the Tc?
              >
              > And I wouldn't necessarily fault your P for leading the Qd. Maybe
              > you have another trump and a diamond void... it would likely
              > overtake 1st's low ruff or make her Ace of trump boss (since she
              > doesn't know it already is).
              >
              > Just because 2nd has the Jh doesn't mean the diamond would have
              been
              > ordered to her if 2nd has a tall diamond. In fact if I were 2nd
              and
              > held JJK in black with Left-Ace in diamonds, I would have passed a
              > diamond for sure. Holding the R in next with an off Ace (granted
              it
              > is the weaksuit, but...) is good defense and I would try my black
              > loner with JJK.
              >
              > Joe
              > --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, Gerry Blue <gblue42@y...>
              wrote:
              > > Natty's column "My KINGS were squeezed" dated 7/2/2004 has been
              > uploaded to our files area. You can read it by going to
              >
              http://games.groups.yahoo.com/group/EuchreScience/files/Natty/2004/Nat
              > ty_2004_07_02.html
              > >
              > > Gerry
              > >
              > > __________________________________________________
              > > Do You Yahoo!?
              > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
              > > http://mail.yahoo.com
            • bimbert84
              ... As I see it, the squeeze actually came about on trick 2, when it was time to decide what to lead from KJc KJs. At that point you re pretty much
              Message 6 of 8 , Jul 7, 2004
                > BTW what would have been wrong with nattly
                > leading the spade K after taking trick 1 with
                > the right? I usually dont like to unguard a K
                > because there is a decent chance that the k
                > may be top dog already. I prefer to have that
                > suit lead to me, i know this was not possible
                > here, but what do u prefer, to lead low or lead
                > the k?

                As I see it, the "squeeze" actually came about on trick 2, when it
                was time to decide what to lead from KJc KJs. At that point you're
                pretty much committed.

                If one intends to stick with clubs all the way, I think a better
                strategy is to try Ks now. After all, if Ks doesn't take a trick
                now, it won't later, either, because your commitment to clubs will
                probably require you to toss Ks.

                Besides, the difference between leading Js vs. Ks here is only Qs.
                Leading Js is advantageous only if:

                1) Someone has QXs (if not, Js will be boss after the Ks lead); AND
                2) Someone else has the As.

                Leading Ks is advantageous if:

                3) As is buried.

                In all other holdings I can think of, the two leads are equivalent.

                Originally, I would have led Js, too, but after giving it some
                thought, I think #3 is more likely than both #1 AND #2, implying Ks
                is the better lead.

                -- Rob
              • blake
                I think i agree that the k lead would be better than the j, in the long run. If one intends to stick with clubs all the way, I think a better strategy is to
                Message 7 of 8 , Jul 7, 2004
                  I think i agree that the k lead would be better than the j, in the
                  long run.

                  "If one intends to stick with clubs all the way, I think a better
                  strategy is to try Ks now."

                  Thats the thing, at trick 2 we dont know what suit we want to stick
                  with, its a crapshoot either way, except once the club j pulls the
                  ace and sets up the k, thats when we should know which way to go.


                  --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "bimbert84" <bimbert84@y...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > > BTW what would have been wrong with nattly
                  > > leading the spade K after taking trick 1 with
                  > > the right? I usually dont like to unguard a K
                  > > because there is a decent chance that the k
                  > > may be top dog already. I prefer to have that
                  > > suit lead to me, i know this was not possible
                  > > here, but what do u prefer, to lead low or lead
                  > > the k?
                  >
                  > As I see it, the "squeeze" actually came about on trick 2, when it
                  > was time to decide what to lead from KJc KJs. At that point you're
                  > pretty much committed.
                  >
                  > If one intends to stick with clubs all the way, I think a better
                  > strategy is to try Ks now. After all, if Ks doesn't take a trick
                  > now, it won't later, either, because your commitment to clubs will
                  > probably require you to toss Ks.
                  >
                  > Besides, the difference between leading Js vs. Ks here is only Qs.
                  > Leading Js is advantageous only if:
                  >
                  > 1) Someone has QXs (if not, Js will be boss after the Ks lead); AND
                  > 2) Someone else has the As.
                  >
                  > Leading Ks is advantageous if:
                  >
                  > 3) As is buried.
                  >
                  > In all other holdings I can think of, the two leads are equivalent.
                  >
                  > Originally, I would have led Js, too, but after giving it some
                  > thought, I think #3 is more likely than both #1 AND #2, implying Ks
                  > is the better lead.
                  >
                  > -- Rob
                • Natty Bumppo
                  ... Won t work. Gets trumped. Allows maker to take a trump trick, which he otherwise would not. Then he gets to cash his ace of clubs and king of diamonds
                  Message 8 of 8 , Jul 7, 2004
                    "blake" wrote:

                    > . . . BTW what would have been
                    > wrong with . . . leading the spade
                    > K after taking trick 1 with the
                    > right? . . . .

                    Won't work. Gets trumped. Allows
                    maker to take a trump trick, which
                    he otherwise would not. Then he
                    gets to cash his ace of clubs and
                    king of diamonds for the point.

                    King of clubs would fare no better
                    if the maker had your partner's
                    queen, and it would fare no better
                    in the scenario given unless you
                    sacrificed both your jack and king
                    of spades in favor of your jack of
                    clubs (your JACKS would be squeezed
                    at trick 3).

                    OK, that's all hindsight. Guilty.

                    But in post No. 4908 you said, "You had done perfectly up until trick
                    4, you had two guarded kings and you had made one of them boss ...."
                    I'll accept that; and I'll stick with a jack lead, thank you.
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.