[Quartic]

---

Do you finesse North for the ♣Q or play for the drop?

[Statto]

Finesse. South has no reason to lead a stiff ♣ with ♠J109x, so their lead doesn't in any way imply anything. But vacant spaces (South with 4 ♠ has less space for a 2nd ♣) I think means it's more likely North has 3 ♣. And North didn't pitch a ♣ which may mean they are trying to protect their ♣Qxx (though they should not pitch a ♣ regardless).

[JLOGIC]

Statto, on 2012-March-14, 19:49, said:

Finesse. South has no reason to lead a stiff ♣ with ♠J109x, so their lead doesn't in any way imply anything. But vacant spaces (South with 4 ♠ has less space for a 2nd ♣) I think means it's more likely North has 3 ♣. And North didn't pitch a ♣ which may mean they are trying to protect their ♣Qxx (though they should not pitch a ♣ regardless).

Definitely nailed it with the first 2 sentences.

[BunnyGo]

Statto, on 2012-March-14, 19:49, said:

Finesse. South has no reason to lead a stiff ♣ with ♠J109x, so their lead doesn't in any way imply anything. But vacant spaces (South with 4 ♠ has less space for a 2nd ♣) I think means it's more likely North has 3 ♣. And North didn't pitch a ♣ which may mean they are trying to protect their ♣Qxx (though they should not pitch a ♣ regardless).

And if your partner reams you out by saying, "9 NEVER!" just nod and say, "next hand."

[Quartic]

At the table I played for the drop, though I was tempted to finesse. North did have Qxx, so I went off one instead of making.

[BunnyGo]

Quartic, on 2012-March-15, 08:19, said:

At the table I played for the drop, though I was tempted to finesse. North did have Qxx, so I went off one instead of making.

The difference in odds is close enough that "table feel" is not a bad reason to go anti-percentage.

[Quartic]

BunnyGo, on 2012-March-15, 09:49, said:

The difference in odds is close enough that "table feel" is not a bad reason to go anti-percentage.

Is the finesse still anti-percentage now South has shown up with 4 spades?

[mgoetze]

Quartic, on 2012-March-15, 10:35, said:

Is the finesse still anti-percentage now South has shown up with 4 spades?

http://www.rpbridge.net/xsb2.htm

After we've played the ace, LHO has 7 spaces (13-4!s-1!d-1!c), RHO has 10 spaces (13-1!s-1!d-1!c), and there are 2 cards missing.

We get:

25.74% Q 6
25.74% 6 Q
15.44% Q6 -
33.09% - Q6

Low to the Jack wins 25.74% + 33.09% of the time.
Low to the King wins 25.74% + 25.74% of the time.

I'm not sure this is entirely valid - we may only be allowed to gives spaces based on completely known suits (spades). In this case we enter 4 missing cards, 9 spaces for LHO and 12 spaces for RHO. We get

Break Specific Total
2-2   6.62%    39.70%
3-1   4.21%    16.84%
1-3   8.27%    33.08%
4-0   2.11%     2.11%
0-4   8.27%     8.27%

Low to the Jack wins when it started

96  Q5   6.62%
9   Q65  8.27%

Low to the King wins when it started

Q9  65   6.62%
96  Q5   6.62%

The answer to your question, therefore, is "no".

[wyman]

I think Ben meant that it's ok to play for the drop (anti-percentage) if something at the table gave you a reason to. I don't think he was suggesting that the finesse was anti-%.

[nigel_k]

Also, if clubs are 2-2, North passed with 10 red cards, green against red, including some values as South didn't lead a sequence. We didn't make it particularly easy for him to enter the auction but people often do anyway.

[BunnyGo]

Quartic, on 2012-March-15, 10:35, said:

Is the finesse still anti-percentage now South has shown up with 4 spades?

Sorry I was unclear. The finesse here was the percentage play, and actually I was surprised to see that the drop was 8% better--I thought it'd be less. I was suggesting (as wyman said) that the drop is not so bad that if you think there's a reason (LHO has a twitch or something) to try it, then ok. As long as you know what the "correct" play is.