[han]

Kxx

A109x

Best play for 3 tricks.


Kxx

A108x

Best play for 3 tricks.

(again, no need to give exact percentages )

[Blofeld]

First one I'm going small to the king and then back to the 9 (and then the ten).

Not sure about the second one. I think I'll try low to the king and then play up to the 8.

[cherdano]

Here is the next one:
K32
A984

Best play for 3 tricks?

Arend

[Trpltrbl]

First one is K followed by small to the 9. And then small to the ten.
This will be well over 77% for 3 tricks.

Second one is small to the K, followed by small to the 8.
This will be slightly over 61% for 3 tricks.

GBB

[Trpltrbl]

cherdano, on Oct 16 2005, 02:35 AM, said:

Here is the next one:
K32
A984

Best play for 3 tricks?

Arend

You are pretty much for 3-3 with the small outside chance for doubleton honor somewhere.
Start with small to the K and if either the Q, J or T shows, you start taking the double finesse. If small you play small to the 8 followed by the Ace.

GBB

P.S Oh, for those of you wanting to know, 47% for 3 tricks.

[jillybean]

Please, please when you answer can you describe your thinking and the process, not just the answers.

thanks
jb

[kenrexford]

Here's a neat card combo. How do you play 9xx on dummy opposite Q7xx for one trick without losing three, in notrump, and even have a menace left over???

Suppose you lead small toward the Queen, and it goes 10-Q-K. Now what?

This layout came up in a real hand once. The key is to have the J-A crash. That is accomplished by having LHO, with an initial KJxx, hop up with the Jack when you lead small toward the nine. (This also establishes the 7 as a menace.)

How do you accomplish this?

You need to give LHO incorrect count of your hand (such that he thinks you have the Ace). It helps if he has enough tricks to set your contract if he gets in, and if the diamond 9 would be your ninth trick.

On the actual hand, Declarer used the last stopper in LHO's running suit to finesse the Queen in his hand, holding AKQ. This convinced LHO that his partner must hold the missing King. Taking these three points from Declarer "forced" Declarer to have the diamond Ace. With the diamond Ace, seeing the 10 from RHO, Declarer might lead small toward the 9, either with hope that LHO is snookered OR with a plan to duck this into the now stiff J.

The ruse worked.

The point? Percentages out of context are silliness, usually.

Another quick example. Qxx in dummy opposite A10. You need two tricks without giving up a trick (for slam). How to play it? (Suit contract; side suit.)

Small toward 10. If RHO has KJ, you win two ways. If he ducks, the 10 holds. If he sticks in the Jack, then cross back to dummy and lead small toward your stiff 10. Will RHO rise with the King, expecting a possible ruff or a possible trickery with only the stiff nine left? Maybe, maybe not. In real practice, the slam made when RHO stuck in the Jack and then ducked later.

[han]

Everybody can look up the correct play and percentages in a book or on some website. Although it is quite useful to remember the correct play and rough percentages to some of the most basic suit combinations, clearly nobody ever uses the exact percentages at the table. Looking up the play and percentages and posting them here is, in my opinion, absolutely useless.

I think that it is pclayton whose BBO profile says "Deep Finesse kills, use your noodle!", or something like that. I completely agree and I think the same applies to suit combinations. Trying to figure out the correct play yourself is a good exercise in visualization, counting and deduction.

Here is my answer to Arend's suit combination, I'll leave it to others to write down solutions to mine:

You can only ever make 3 tricks when the suit splits 3-3 or when one opponent has doubleton KQ, KJ or QJ or when LHO has stiff K, Q, or J. Suppose you start with cashing the king (clearly best). If no honor appears then you have to hope for a 3-3 split, cash the ace or play low next, it is irrelevant.

When LHO opponent plays an honor at the first trick you have 2 options: take the double finesse or cashing the ace. Taking the double finesse does better when LHO has a stiff honor, but loses when LHO has exactly KQJ (other positions are irrelevant). That's 3 possibilities for the finesse, and only 1 for cashing the ace, so clearly taking the double hook is better (even though each of the 5-1 split is slightly less likely than the 3-3 split).

[Trpltrbl]

Hannie, on Oct 16 2005, 12:51 PM, said:

I think that it is pclayton whose BBO profile says "Deep Finesse kills, use your noodle!", or something like that. I completely agree and I think the same applies to suit combinations. Trying to figure out the correct play yourself is a good exercise in visualization, counting and deduction.

Everybody that wants to be serious about bridge should use the basic bridge % plays. That's why people went through all the trouble to write them down.
If you don't know the basics, you just wasting time.
There are rules and guidelines in bridge that will help you play better.
Use them.
I agree, sometimes, because of bidding or other hints a % doesn't work.
But you have to start somewhere, and if it is asking questions here or on a club or buying a book, you learn from it.
"Deep Finesse" is a great program but it will play anti-percentage, because it plays double-dummy.
So for instance if you have AQJ10 opposite 2345, you have exactly 50 % chance of getting 4 tricks, either the finesse works or not.
If you are in a contract needing no losers in that suit combo, and K is stiff behind it, "Deep Finesse" will play the Ace, which is 2.8316% chance.
Even playing the % isn't always winning, unless it is a 100%.
Sometimes it just doesn't work, and that's when you know that about everybody else in the field played pretty much the same, especially at the high(est)
level.

GBB

[han]

Trpltrbl, on Oct 16 2005, 03:35 PM, said:

Hannie, on Oct 16 2005, 12:51 PM, said:

I think that it is pclayton whose BBO profile says "Deep Finesse kills, use your noodle!", or something like that. I completely agree and I think the same applies to suit combinations. Trying to figure out the correct play yourself is a good exercise in visualization, counting and deduction.

Everybody that wants to be serious about bridge should use the basic bridge % plays. That's why people went through all the trouble to write them down.
If you don't know the basics, you just wasting time.
There are rules and guidelines in bridge that will help you play better.
Use them.
I agree, sometimes, because of bidding or other hints a % doesn't work.
But you have to start somewhere, and if it is asking questions here or on a club or buying a book, you learn from it.
"Deep Finesse" is a great program but it will play anti-percentage, because it plays double-dummy.
So for instance if you have AQJ10 opposite 2345, you have exactly 50 % chance of getting 4 tricks, either the finesse works or not.
If you are in a contract needing no losers in that suit combo, and K is stiff behind it, "Deep Finesse" will play the Ace, which is 2.8316% chance.
Even playing the % isn't always winning, unless it is a 100%.
Sometimes it just doesn't work, and that's when you know that about everybody else in the field played pretty much the same, especially at the high(est)
level.

GBB

Knowing that the chance that the king is offside is 2.8316% is useless. Would you play any differently in any contract if you thought it was only 2.8305%? I don't think so.

However, being able to determine yourself which line is more likely to be succesful is very valuable. At the table this is often very hard because there are so many factors at work. It seems like a very good idea to practice on the easiest cases, suit combinations. It is not enough to remember the answers to the bridge basics, you need to learn from the solutions to apply them to the hard cases.


I think you have misunderstood why pclayton says that Deep Finesse is bad for you. It is not that Deep Finesse will give you the wrong answer because it is a double dummy solver, but it is because solving it yourself will make you a better bridge player. I am sure that you have already thought about all these suit combinations yourself Mike, but keep in mind that this is the beginner/intermediate forum. I didn't post them for your benefit.

[Trpltrbl]

Hannie, on Oct 16 2005, 04:03 PM, said:

Knowing that the chance that the king is offside is 2.8316% is useless. Would you play any differently in any contract if you thought it was only 2.8305%? I don't think so.

Stiff King

GBB

[TheoKole]

1st combination:

Small to the K and then small to the 9, followed up by small to the 10 (I assume that entries are not a problem)

2nd combination:

Small to the King and then small to the 8, later if 2 of the 3 outstanding honors have appeared on my left finesse the 10, if not then play the A

Theo

[Trpltrbl]

Jlall, on Oct 17 2005, 09:33 AM, said:

I guess I don't know the basics but of all the %ages you've written down I haven't known any of them. However I've always known the correct answer. The key is knowing how to solve the combinations. If you can memorize every a priori suit combo there is, fine, but most of us can't. However, if you know the process behind figuring out what the best play is you can figure out any suit combination, and you'll never even need to know the percentages.

Right !
You don't need to know the exact # as long as you know how too.
And as I said in other post the % chances also with the bidding and handpattern of the opps.
I wish I was smart enough to figure out all the exact # directly, or even remember them, but it takes me a while to figure them out. And I like to play with the # and see how things chance depending on different situations and even small cards.
Keeps me busy on them long cross-country flights

GBB