A restricted choice situation
#1
Posted 2013-February-23, 06:39
Qxx
Let's suppose no other relevant information. After A and Q, RHO played 10 on 2nd round.
I know the odds favor finesse now , but what's the ratio of finese to drop? Thanks in advance.
#2
Posted 2013-February-23, 06:59
Or, if we look at the spot we have seen on the right as specified, we have 2 Tack-x possibilities and 1 JTx possibility.
This all assumes we treat the play of the ten or the Jack as the play of an unidentified Tack. Correct, if our opponent plays either Tack indiscriminately.
These things can be tricky but at least at first thought this seems right.
#3
Posted 2013-February-23, 10:19
kenberg, on 2013-February-23, 06:59, said:
It's very close, but slightly less than 2 to 1, because an individual 3-3 break possibility is slightly more likely than an individual 4-2 possibility. So it's ~64.5% to 35.5%.
#4
Posted 2013-February-23, 11:33
- hrothgar
#5
Posted 2013-February-23, 11:40
han, on 2013-February-23, 11:33, said:
Let's suppose dummy had AK8x instead and on the first two rounds RHO played two of the J-T-9. Now I know the odds favor the finesse much more than in the original example but the empty spaces are still 10-11. So how can that logic be right? On the other hand you are han so I know it's right, but I don't understand why.
- billw55
#6
Posted 2013-February-23, 11:47
In your example there are three holdings (J10, J9, 109) where finessing works and one (J109) where dropping works. So we get 30-11.
- hrothgar
#7
Posted 2013-February-23, 12:08
- billw55
#8
Posted 2013-February-23, 13:36
It took him a while to convince him that the J would never blow a trick from Jx and that he was a fish. Anyways, it will probably work pretty frequently if you're not known as a tricky player or if the declarer is bad or if the declarer is good and thinks you're bad. Ofc usually they won't have KQ9x and it won't matter.
Another similar spot is when they have Ax opp Q9xxxx and they lead the ace and you have KJx onside and play the jack then low. This one so far has only worked once for me in my life but you gotta keep trying. It is probably more effective when Ax is in the dummy since you can't see the Q9xxxx and you are just hoping they have that.
#10
Posted 2013-February-25, 08:28
Stephen Tu, on 2013-February-23, 10:19, said:
Yes, right. I took the question to mean: Is it essentially the same as the standard restricted choice situation? And the answer is yes. Both are, approximately, 2:1. By standard situation I mean A234 opposite KT567, the play goes A-8-5-J then 2-9-?. I suppose the usually quoted 2:1 in favor of the finesse also needs a modest adjustment.
Dropping from 66.7 to 64.5 is more than I expected though. Nor had I thought though using empty spaces as Han did to make the adjustment. His 20-11 translates to a probability of 20/31= 0.64516
Anyway, yes, somewhat under 2:1. Mea culpa, sort of. I didn't take the question as asking for that level of precision.
#11
Posted 2013-February-25, 08:57
JLOGIC, on 2013-February-23, 13:36, said:
Does this happen to you often?
-gwnn
#12
Posted 2013-February-25, 10:02
#13
Posted 2013-February-25, 10:13
kenberg, on 2013-February-25, 08:28, said:
Dropping from 66.7 to 64.5 is more than I expected though. Nor had I thought though using empty spaces as Han did to make the adjustment. His 20-11 translates to a probability of 20/31= 0.64516 (approximately)
Anyway, yes, somewhat under 2:1. Mea culpa, sort of. I didn't take the question as asking for that level of precision.
fyp
#15
Posted 2013-February-26, 06:05
JLOGIC, on 2013-February-23, 13:36, said:
You need to add these to the falsecarding thread Justin!
#16
Posted 2013-February-26, 11:37
JLOGIC, on 2013-February-25, 10:02, said:
This happens to me often
Anywa the KJx position, just insta playing the jack at second trick often works for me.