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

Leading trump on defense - Natty's column

Expand Messages
  • Gerry Blue
    Natty s column Leading trump on defense dated 10/1/2004 has been uploaded to our files area. You can read it by clicking here. Gerry ... Do you Yahoo!?
    Message 1 of 8 , Oct 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment

      Natty's column "Leading trump on defense" dated 10/1/2004 has been uploaded to our files area.  You can read it by clicking here.

      Gerry


      Do you Yahoo!?
      vote.yahoo.com - Register online to vote today!
    • gdi_learn_2_fckn_play
      ... uploaded to our files area. You can read it by clicking here. ... This is an over simplified example of leading trump on defense, but none the less the
      Message 2 of 8 , Oct 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, Gerry Blue <gblue42@y...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Natty's column "Leading trump on defense" dated 10/1/2004 has been
        uploaded to our files area. You can read it by clicking here.
        >
        > Gerry



        This is an over simplified example of leading trump on defense, but
        none the less the right play.


        I don't think the author gives enough credit to leading trump on
        defense. He quickly points out that he has seen people do it too
        much and hence shoots themselves in the foot.

        In that same respect I see too many people over donating and "self"
        donating as noted in this recent article. In which case self
        donating is something that should be rarely...rarely used. But at a
        score of 3-2 and in the "situation" described with the hand played
        out differently and if he would happened to be in the dealers seat
        that hand he said he would have ordered up for his said and listed
        reasonings to self donate.

        With that said, I would have to say that would be clearly a case
        for "over" self-donating. It's the wrong place to donate and its the
        wrong score to donate and just because you have a bad hand doesn't
        really makes it a lock that your opponent will have that "feared"
        loner that you may suspect.


        I'm just pointing out the facts of the matter from how I see them.
        Others may not seem them that way or see it in a differnt light, but
        in the case of leading trump on defense, with a good partner and vs
        unspecting opponents leading trump can be very benificial for they
        are at a loss to how to "properly" play their hand when trump is
        lead at them. And in alot of cases a set is garnered out of it.
        Knowing when how and where to do it is key and is also sign of
        an "experienced" player.



        (Note: I am not here to rekindle the wars of yesteryears, just to
        give another opinion to the issues brought up)


        Ed
      • bimbert84
        Hi Ed, ... I m not sure what makes this example over-simplified, but this is one of the rare times I MIGHT advocate leading trump from a defensive seat. Even
        Message 3 of 8 , Oct 2, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi Ed,

          > This is an over simplified example of leading
          > trump on defense, but none the less the right play.

          I'm not sure what makes this example over-simplified, but this is one
          of the rare times I MIGHT advocate leading trump from a defensive
          seat. Even then, I'm not so sure it's the best play most of the time.

          The only reason it worked here is because 2nd ordered with the lone
          L, a questionable move to begin with. If 2nd had another trump, the
          trump lead would've served only to set up the L, and at the same time
          remove a trump from 3rd's hand.


          > I don't think the author gives enough credit to leading trump on
          > defense.

          I think leading trump on defense is usually a bad move. It will work
          from time to time, yes, but most of the time it will fail miserably
          where an alternative lead would've succeeded.


          > He quickly points out that he has seen people do it too
          > much and hence shoots themselves in the foot.

          As have I.


          > in the case of leading trump on defense, with a good
          > partner and vs unspecting opponents leading trump can
          > be very benificial for they are at a loss to how to
          > "properly" play their hand when trump is lead at them.

          Usually the maker is wanting a trump lead. That means leading trump
          is doing him a favor. Why would you want to do that? In the absence
          of other information, all the maker has to do is drop the R, and it's
          as if he led it himself.

          Again, I agree leading trump on defense CAN be beneficial. But most
          of the time it won't. And since its success will almost always
          depend on the (random) card distribution, you need to play the odds
          and go with the play most likely to succeed -- and that means NOT
          leading it.


          > Knowing when how and where to do it is key and
          > is also sign of an "experienced" player.

          It's far more dependent on card distribution than experience. So
          unless you're experienced in the pseudosciences of mind-reading and
          ESP, it'll almost certainly lose you more points than it will gain.


          > I am not here to rekindle the wars of yesteryears

          Ah, but you knew it would, didn't ya? ;)

          -- Rob
        • wdfover50
          ... one ... time. ... lone ... the ... time ... There are other times to lead trump on defense and that is sometimes after the first trick. I ve seen this
          Message 4 of 8 , Oct 2, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "bimbert84" <bimbert84@y...>
            wrote:
            >
            >
            > Hi Ed,
            >
            > > This is an over simplified example of leading
            > > trump on defense, but none the less the right play.
            >
            > I'm not sure what makes this example over-simplified, but this is
            one
            > of the rare times I MIGHT advocate leading trump from a defensive
            > seat. Even then, I'm not so sure it's the best play most of the
            time.
            >
            > The only reason it worked here is because 2nd ordered with the
            lone
            > L, a questionable move to begin with. If 2nd had another trump,
            the
            > trump lead would've served only to set up the L, and at the same
            time
            > remove a trump from 3rd's hand.

            There are other times to lead trump on defense and that is sometimes
            after the first trick. I've seen this happen numerous times, but
            people usually don't catch it that they should lead trump. I'll give
            you an example. I was in third. Dealer picked up an Ace. My p led
            and dealer trumped with the Ace. I thought to myself "Ah hah, he
            doesn't have a smaller trump or he'd have used it." I was correct.
            He didn't lead the right, but a small offsuit card looking for a
            trick from his p. I took the trick with the ace of that suit. I had
            two trump. Figuring dealer only had the right and hoping his p only
            had one, I led trump. Worked like a charm. They'd have made it if I
            hadn't led trump because they held the high trump.

            If I'm in first chair I only lead trump when I'm strong and want to
            pull dealer's possible only trump before leading out my aces. Natty
            took a risk, but I'd have probably led it in that situation as well.
            Maybe it won't work, but he had a good shot at it and it paid off.

            >
            >
            > > I don't think the author gives enough credit to leading trump on
            > > defense.
            >
            > I think leading trump on defense is usually a bad move. It will
            work
            > from time to time, yes, but most of the time it will fail
            miserably
            > where an alternative lead would've succeeded.
            >
            >
            > > He quickly points out that he has seen people do it too
            > > much and hence shoots themselves in the foot.
            >
            > As have I.
            >
            >
            > > in the case of leading trump on defense, with a good
            > > partner and vs unspecting opponents leading trump can
            > > be very benificial for they are at a loss to how to
            > > "properly" play their hand when trump is lead at them.
            >
            > Usually the maker is wanting a trump lead. That means leading
            trump
            > is doing him a favor. Why would you want to do that? In the
            absence
            > of other information, all the maker has to do is drop the R, and
            it's
            > as if he led it himself.
            >
            > Again, I agree leading trump on defense CAN be beneficial. But
            most
            > of the time it won't. And since its success will almost always
            > depend on the (random) card distribution, you need to play the
            odds
            > and go with the play most likely to succeed -- and that means NOT
            > leading it.
            >
            >
            > > Knowing when how and where to do it is key and
            > > is also sign of an "experienced" player.
            >
            > It's far more dependent on card distribution than experience. So
            > unless you're experienced in the pseudosciences of mind-reading
            and
            > ESP, it'll almost certainly lose you more points than it will gain.
            >
            >
            > > I am not here to rekindle the wars of yesteryears
            >
            > Ah, but you knew it would, didn't ya? ;)
            >
            > -- Rob
          • wdfover50
            ... one ... time. ... lone ... the ... time ... This is a pet peeve of mine when a p orders up a jack with only the left. I had this happen a couple of weeks
            Message 5 of 8 , Oct 2, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "bimbert84" <bimbert84@y...>
              wrote:
              >
              >
              > Hi Ed,
              >
              > > This is an over simplified example of leading
              > > trump on defense, but none the less the right play.
              >
              > I'm not sure what makes this example over-simplified, but this is
              one
              > of the rare times I MIGHT advocate leading trump from a defensive
              > seat. Even then, I'm not so sure it's the best play most of the
              time.
              >
              > The only reason it worked here is because 2nd ordered with the
              lone
              > L, a questionable move to begin with. If 2nd had another trump,
              the
              > trump lead would've served only to set up the L, and at the same
              time
              > remove a trump from 3rd's hand.

              This is a pet peeve of mine when a p orders up a jack with only the
              left. I had this happen a couple of weeks ago with a partner I did
              not know. I only had the right. The opps took the first two
              tricks. When my p didn't trump in on those two, I knew I was
              dealing with an idiot. I figured at that point he only had the left
              when LHO led and my p still couldn't take the trick. I took it with
              I think an Ace. Now, there I was with the right and a loser, having
              seen no trump at this point. Figuring my p only had the left I led
              my loser and let him take the trick with the left, naturally making
              my right good for final trick. If I'd led the right we'd have been
              euchred because RHO had the ace of trump protected. Although we made
              the point, I didn't play with him again.

              Patricia...


              >
              > > I don't think the author gives enough credit to leading trump on
              > > defense.
              >
              > I think leading trump on defense is usually a bad move. It will
              work
              > from time to time, yes, but most of the time it will fail
              miserably
              > where an alternative lead would've succeeded.
              >
              >
              > > He quickly points out that he has seen people do it too
              > > much and hence shoots themselves in the foot.
              >
              > As have I.
              >
              >
              > > in the case of leading trump on defense, with a good
              > > partner and vs unspecting opponents leading trump can
              > > be very benificial for they are at a loss to how to
              > > "properly" play their hand when trump is lead at them.
              >
              > Usually the maker is wanting a trump lead. That means leading
              trump
              > is doing him a favor. Why would you want to do that? In the
              absence
              > of other information, all the maker has to do is drop the R, and
              it's
              > as if he led it himself.
              >
              > Again, I agree leading trump on defense CAN be beneficial. But
              most
              > of the time it won't. And since its success will almost always
              > depend on the (random) card distribution, you need to play the
              odds
              > and go with the play most likely to succeed -- and that means NOT
              > leading it.
              >
              >
              > > Knowing when how and where to do it is key and
              > > is also sign of an "experienced" player.
              >
              > It's far more dependent on card distribution than experience. So
              > unless you're experienced in the pseudosciences of mind-reading
              and
              > ESP, it'll almost certainly lose you more points than it will gain.
              >
              >
              > > I am not here to rekindle the wars of yesteryears
              >
              > Ah, but you knew it would, didn't ya? ;)
              >
              > -- Rob
            • bimbert84
              Hi Ace, ... You make it sound like the maker will need therapy or something. ;) ... Absolutely. I agree one should not become predictable, but one must
              Message 6 of 8 , Oct 3, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Ace,

                > a trump lead can have a detrimental psychological
                > effect on an opponent, particularly a regular opponent.

                You make it sound like the maker will need therapy or something. ;)


                > Don't become a predictable player to your opponents.
                > Keep them honest so they can't exploit with total
                > confidence. Know what I mean?

                Absolutely. I agree one should not become predictable, but one must
                understand the cost of making plays that go against the odds.

                As an example, nearly every time I see a defender lead trump to my
                call, my immediate response is "thanks" -- I don't normally start
                scanning the yellow pages for psychiatrists. ;)

                -- Rob
              • Joseph J Cravero
                If I m in 2nd and have ordered up the A while holding a mere RT or R9, I dread a trump (esp K/Q) lead. It s a lot easier to get a point if the A and the 9 can
                Message 7 of 8 , Oct 4, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  If I'm in 2nd and have ordered up the A while holding a mere RT or
                  R9, I dread a trump (esp K/Q) lead. It's a lot easier to get a point
                  if the A and the 9 can be played on separate tricks. Usually I duck
                  if the upcard beats the lead card.

                  --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "bimbert84" <bimbert84@y...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Hi Ace,
                  >
                  > > a trump lead can have a detrimental psychological
                  > > effect on an opponent, particularly a regular opponent.
                  >
                  > You make it sound like the maker will need therapy or something. ;)
                  >
                  >
                  > > Don't become a predictable player to your opponents.
                  > > Keep them honest so they can't exploit with total
                  > > confidence. Know what I mean?
                  >
                  > Absolutely. I agree one should not become predictable, but one
                  must
                  > understand the cost of making plays that go against the odds.
                  >
                  > As an example, nearly every time I see a defender lead trump to my
                  > call, my immediate response is "thanks" -- I don't normally start
                  > scanning the yellow pages for psychiatrists. ;)
                  >
                  > -- Rob
                • bimbert84
                  Hi Joe, ... Well, your P is just as likely (76%) to have a 2nd trump as either opponent is to have just one. Even of the 1 in 4 times your P is broke, the
                  Message 8 of 8 , Oct 4, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi Joe,

                    > If I'm in 2nd and have ordered up the A while
                    > holding a mere RT or R9, I dread a trump (esp K/Q) lead.
                    > Usually I duck if the upcard beats the lead card.

                    Well, your P is just as likely (76%) to have a 2nd trump as either
                    opponent is to have just one.

                    Even of the 1 in 4 times your P is broke, the trump lead will draw
                    trump from BOTH opposing hands. That leaves only 2 outstanding, and
                    unless they're both out against you AND the opps have the right voids
                    (presumably with an order like that you'll have an outside ace), you
                    still have a damn good chance to score. In the unlikely case one
                    opponent holds both remaining trump, you were likely going to get
                    euchred despite the trump lead.

                    I agree a trump lead may make it more difficult for you in this case,
                    but only a small percentage of the time. Most of the time, a 2nd
                    trump in dealer's hand will be decisive for the offense.

                    -- Rob
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.