p*********6
发帖数: 679 | 1 N打5方片，你是W (叫牌EW无挣叫，NS打2/1，N庄家：1d-2d-3c-3s-4d-5c-5d）。
E/W拔了头2墩H，S将杀第3墩，现在出方片Q吊将。。。
S方片还剩：QJx。
你方片是：Kx，看来副牌没墩了。
你盖不盖？ | j*******e
发帖数: 2168 | 2 我不盖
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: N打5方片，你是W (叫牌EW无挣叫，NS打2/1，N庄家：1d-2d-3c-3s-4d-5c-5d）。
: E/W拔了头2墩H，S将杀第3墩，现在出方片Q吊将。。。
: S方片还剩：QJx。
: 你方片是：Kx，看来副牌没墩了。
: 你盖不盖？
| v**********e
发帖数: 1295 | 3 盖K只有在同伴是Txx是才有效，如果真是这样，则庄家的牌型是1345，看起来非常不像。
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: N打5方片，你是W (叫牌EW无挣叫，NS打2/1，N庄家：1d-2d-3c-3s-4d-5c-5d）。
: E/W拔了头2墩H，S将杀第3墩，现在出方片Q吊将。。。
: S方片还剩：QJx。
: 你方片是：Kx，看来副牌没墩了。
: 你盖不盖？
| p*********6
发帖数: 679 | 4 一点补充。E/W是一对新加坡国手，N是Giorgio Dubion，S是jec. 明手牌 AQ6 T4 QJ82
KT53 | m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 5 这个太有帮助了. 反正只有两个选择. 我选的肯定是错误的. 所以我反着出牌就一
定能成功. 我选择出K.
QJ82
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: 一点补充。E/W是一对新加坡国手，N是Giorgio Dubion，S是jec. 明手牌 AQ6 T4 QJ82
: KT53
| j*******e
发帖数: 2168 | 6 What's Dubion's bidding style?
QJ82
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: 一点补充。E/W是一对新加坡国手，N是Giorgio Dubion，S是jec. 明手牌 AQ6 T4 QJ82
: KT53
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 7 Jamie Cayne overbid a lot as it appears. Anyway, I don't see why you can't
cover DQ here, declare may hold Kx xxx Axxx AQJx, which is very consistent
with the bidding.
QJ82
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: 一点补充。E/W是一对新加坡国手，N是Giorgio Dubion，S是jec. 明手牌 AQ6 T4 QJ82
: KT53
| v**********e
发帖数: 1295 | 8 3C with this hand may not be a common choice.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: Jamie Cayne overbid a lot as it appears. Anyway, I don't see why you can't
: cover DQ here, declare may hold Kx xxx Axxx AQJx, which is very consistent
: with the bidding.
:
: QJ82
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 9 It's also possible that declarer has A9xx in diamonds, if you duck, declarer
has to guess on second round of trumps.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: Jamie Cayne overbid a lot as it appears. Anyway, I don't see why you can't
: cover DQ here, declare may hold Kx xxx Axxx AQJx, which is very consistent
: with the bidding.
:
: QJ82
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 10 I think you have to hope that declarer only has 4 diamonds and no D10. Then
ducking DK will work out more often:
1) When declarer has D9, ducking gives declarer a guess. If you cover, then
technically correct play for the declarer is to finesse partner's D10.
2) Even when partner holds T9x (which means that you *should* cover DK),
ducking may still work out OK, since partner should falsecard with D9 or D10
on first round of trump. So declarer may still guess wrong, not all is lost
. | | | m****r
发帖数: 6639 | 11 分析得真透彻.
Then
then
D10
lost
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: I think you have to hope that declarer only has 4 diamonds and no D10. Then
: ducking DK will work out more often:
: 1) When declarer has D9, ducking gives declarer a guess. If you cover, then
: technically correct play for the declarer is to finesse partner's D10.
: 2) Even when partner holds T9x (which means that you *should* cover DK),
: ducking may still work out OK, since partner should falsecard with D9 or D10
: on first round of trump. So declarer may still guess wrong, not all is lost
: .
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 12 Well, it's not clear at all. Even if you play DK, declarer is not clear
whether it is good to finesse DT or drop your DT if you knows you tend to
always duck with DKx. because in that case, he should usually play to drop
your DT if he knows your tendency. So it's really a matter of game theory,
to mix both plays for a certain percentage. Also, DK would always beat it
when partner holds DT9x.
Then
then
D10
lost
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: I think you have to hope that declarer only has 4 diamonds and no D10. Then
: ducking DK will work out more often:
: 1) When declarer has D9, ducking gives declarer a guess. If you cover, then
: technically correct play for the declarer is to finesse partner's D10.
: 2) Even when partner holds T9x (which means that you *should* cover DK),
: ducking may still work out OK, since partner should falsecard with D9 or D10
: on first round of trump. So declarer may still guess wrong, not all is lost
: .
| p*********6
发帖数: 679 | 13 W是没盖，结果悲剧了（E是T93，但垫的3）。Dubion飞快明手小D, A盖住K, 继续清光
将牌，打成kib以为必当之局。
看来是E打臭了(应该9/T，如bucky所言）？ 还是Kx就应该盖住，以免夜长梦多？ | p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 14 Against strong opps, you should often play for certain layouts that can
legitimately beat the contract.
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: W是没盖，结果悲剧了（E是T93，但垫的3）。Dubion飞快明手小D, A盖住K, 继续清光
: 将牌，打成kib以为必当之局。
: 看来是E打臭了(应该9/T，如bucky所言）？ 还是Kx就应该盖住，以免夜长梦多？
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 15 西家如果盖Ｋ当然就没事了。不过T9x里出9或10，这是mandatory falsecard，E没出肯
定是不对，不应该是这个层次上的选手该犯的错误。至于出了之后庄家是否仍然击落DK
，这个就没法说了。
【在 p*********6 的大作中提到】
: W是没盖，结果悲剧了（E是T93，但垫的3）。Dubion飞快明手小D, A盖住K, 继续清光
: 将牌，打成kib以为必当之局。
: 看来是E打臭了(应该9/T，如bucky所言）？ 还是Kx就应该盖住，以免夜长梦多？
| j*******e
发帖数: 2168 | 16 nod，Dubion能“飞快”明手小D，还不是因为E第一圈出了x，不然W是Kx还是Kxx，还真
不好说。
DK
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: 西家如果盖Ｋ当然就没事了。不过T9x里出9或10，这是mandatory falsecard，E没出肯
: 定是不对，不应该是这个层次上的选手该犯的错误。至于出了之后庄家是否仍然击落DK
: ，这个就没法说了。
| p***r
发帖数: 20570 | 17 If the declarer knows that east always play low with Kx or Kxx and west is
capable of playing T or 9 from T9x, he still should play low to Ace because
it is the percentage action. T9 is only one layout, T9x is two (for example
T93 vs. K2 or T92 vs K3, they are identical. This is another example for
restricted choices, since with K32, the guy can randomly play 2 or 3 here,
so the chance for this layout is half).
【在 j*******e 的大作中提到】
: nod，Dubion能“飞快”明手小D，还不是因为E第一圈出了x，不然W是Kx还是Kxx，还真
: 不好说。
:
: DK
| b***y
发帖数: 2804 | 18 Interesting analysis, but I think it is slightly flawed. The theory of
Restricted Choice assumes that the equal cards will be played out randomly,
this may be true when the cards involved are QJ, JT, etc., but majority of
players don't do it with 32. People just aren't aware that 3 and 2 are
important, many will just play 2 from K32, not 3. Also, being "capable" is
still different from "will". In the actual play, the East player is
certainly "capable" but slipped in this occasion. So on average T/9 from T9x
is slightly less likely than honest T9. Anyway, declarer still had a chance
to go wrong had East played T/9, but he failed to give declarer this losing
option.
【在 p***r 的大作中提到】
: If the declarer knows that east always play low with Kx or Kxx and west is
: capable of playing T or 9 from T9x, he still should play low to Ace because
: it is the percentage action. T9 is only one layout, T9x is two (for example
: T93 vs. K2 or T92 vs K3, they are identical. This is another example for
: restricted choices, since with K32, the guy can randomly play 2 or 3 here,
: so the chance for this layout is half).
| v**********e
发帖数: 1295 | 19 Actually, usually an expert player don't sort his cards, and all cards are
memorized. Every time he needs one, he just opens his hand and pick it up.
Since it's really random which card, 2 or 3, is found first, the
equiprobability assumption here is reasonable.
,
T9x
chance
losing
【在 b***y 的大作中提到】
: Interesting analysis, but I think it is slightly flawed. The theory of
: Restricted Choice assumes that the equal cards will be played out randomly,
: this may be true when the cards involved are QJ, JT, etc., but majority of
: players don't do it with 32. People just aren't aware that 3 and 2 are
: important, many will just play 2 from K32, not 3. Also, being "capable" is
: still different from "will". In the actual play, the East player is
: certainly "capable" but slipped in this occasion. So on average T/9 from T9x
: is slightly less likely than honest T9. Anyway, declarer still had a chance
: to go wrong had East played T/9, but he failed to give declarer this losing
: option.
| w****b
发帖数: 623 | 20 Now I've found the true distance between a real expert and me: I always
choose to sort my hand! -- to this topic, even when I sort my hand, I revoke
every once in a while.
To the original problem. If dummy has QJ9x, you would never cover. If dummy
has QJ8x or less, my opinion is you should cover. If you don't, and if oppo
has the 9, the half times oppo's guessed wrong is offset by the times you
hold KT tight, as now oppo know that they need to play the drop. Meanwhile,
if you don't cover and pd does have T9x, you've just turned a 100% play to a
50%, and we are not even in control. AND that 50% is assuming pd didn't
lose focus and do the correct mandatory falsecard, else it would be 0% as
the reality. |
|
