Psychics

[kenrexford]

I had yet another strange occurrence that often repeats itself, and it got me to thinking. I held AJ9xx in trumps, with Kxx in dummy. the opponents were silent throughout, in a way that told no stories. The opening lead was plausible from a number of different holdings. However, I "knew" that the reverse finesse was working (it was). I did not take the reverse finesse, because the mathematics were wrong. But, I had more than pessimistic expectations, almost visualizing the cards in the opponent's hands.

 

Sure, this might be simply a wild guess that turned out correct, or even a suspicion based upon subconscious clues, but my partners have noticed that I quite often turn a card down prematurely as lost on finesses that fail, but not on finesses that work.

 

So, I was wondering. Has anyone ever charted the success rate of what appear to be wild guess finesses, truly either-or, to determine if, over time, the masses more often find the queen than not?

 

Just a thought for the Twilight Zoners out there...

[Free]

I have a lot of these situations... A few weeks ago, I was playing in a 4-4 ♥ fit, and with reasoning I thought they split 1-4, probably the K stiff behind my Ace. However, I didn't play like this, I just followed the field and went down one. I have this a lot with similar situations, and I think it was Fred who once said you should just follow your feeling, and check out if it's right or not. When it's not, then stop it, but when it's right you found out about a new talent :)

[hotShot]

Communication experts say that 80% of any communication is non verbal.

This is why poker player try to develope a "pokerface" not to give information away.

Many bridge player don't have that kind of self control and submit information about their holding. A lot of he top player can use that information, it is called table presence.

[barmar]

And psychologists can tell you about a phenomenon called "confirmation bias". The mind is designed to find patterns, and it will often find them in ordinary coincidences. It's like when you call someone and they were "just thinking about you", so it seems like a psychic effect. The point is that you tend to notice the coincidences, and not notice all the times that the phone rang and you WEREN'T just thinking about the caller. The same thing with bridge guesses -- any time you guess right it reinforces your feeling that you have a knack for it, but you tend to ignore all the misguesses.

[kenrexford]

Of course, confirmation bias was suggested as a plausible explanation, as are subtle clues, etc. The cause of the "phenomenon" might be subsconscious observations and the like. It could be divine intervention, the chicken I usually kill before each game (kidding), or the like. Or, it might be perceived but not present.

 

My curiousity in the masses is to determine whether there is a reason to expect that the cumulative experience of, say, 1000 declarers, through intuition, intervention, or subconscious clues, increases noticably the success rate of two-way finesses. If it does, then what appears to be a 50-50 slam to one declarer might be, for example, a 55-45 slam for "the field."