[Sigi_BC84]

42, on Mar 17 2006, 06:47 PM, said:

Quote

Caren, you missed two things: You should compare this list with the list of successes of the direct finesse. Also, some of these layouts are really several layouts, because there are several ways the small cards can be distributed.
Arend

UAAAAARRRGGHHHHHHHHH That drives me crazy, I know again why I am only secretary for and no mathematician myself....
For the small cards: why do they matter since I cover them all?

The point Arend was making is the following:

If you enumerate holdings and write, for example, AJxx x, then actually you have just specified more than one specific holding. It becomes clearer if you pick real spot cards for the 'x'es or pick distinct variable names, as in:

"AJab c" -- now a, b and c are three different cards (for example "AJ73 5", but this looks as if the values of the spots did matter).

Now consider just the three small cards: they can be distributed as "ab c", "ac b" and "bc a". So when writing "AJxx x" you have to count 3 hands, not one...

This fact is hidden when writing "x" for any spot card, because that looks at first sight as if all the xes are equal, in which case ordering would not matter.

--Sigi

[Cascade]

hatchett, on Mar 18 2006, 04:31 AM, said:

Quote

Fred says lead to the King and then to the Queen in one of the BridgeMaster deals. This concurs with SuitPlay but Rudinesco seems to say finesse the ten then the nine.

I have looked at Roudinesco and he does not say this! He says finesse the 10 and 9 if the hand under the KQT9xx is presumed to have length. With no length presumption Roudinesco starts off with low to the K and his next play if it wins depends on who you think the strong side is.

You are right. I misinterpreted the "& East = PLS" and I missed the "( N 5 ..." solution higher in his text.

What he says is

"( N 5 Lead to the queen. If it loses (2) Finesse the ten. If it holds, either (2) Lead to the King (East = P Str S) or (2) Finesse the ten (West P Str S)."

This is still different than Fred and SuitPlay who both say play to the King and then to the Queen if the King holds.

[Fluffy]

That is probably because leading to the K and Q is better in theory, but in practice against any kind of defender, the % changes and low to the 10 becomes better (the only differencec between the 2, I think is one pitches AJ, and the other bare A, but since chance of 1 case of 3-2 is a little bit higher than 4-1 K, then Q is better only in theory).

SuitPlay thinks of defenders to play 100% perfect. Probably Roudinesco assumes they don't (and he is correct IMO )

[Stephen Tu]

Roudinesco in fact mentions the Suitplay line, under "var 2". Basically low to K then low to Q is best if the defender will always duck with Ax behind it, best defense. If there are clues from the auction, or the defender isn't that good, consider something else ...