finesse the queen

[NickRW]

American English has a habit of leaving out prepositions in situations where British English uses them. eg "I'll write you" compared with "I'll write to you".

Maybe that's the reason why we're roughly 50/50 split on this one.

[kenberg]

I play towards the AQ, planning on finessing the Q or finessing against the king. The votes are about equal and I guess it's not clearly defined anywhere. My view would be that a finesse is a play, and I can only play my cards. So I finesse the queen. But I can try to win a trick with the queen while the king is out so I finesse the queen against the king.

 

I would not want my life to depend on the logic of this argument.

[gwnn]

the correct answer is number 1, thanks everyone for playing, see you next week!

[Little Kid]

I voted for the second although I've seen the first usage a lot too. You are playing for a position with a "finessable" honour, which is either onside or offside. Isn't it logical to refer to the card(s) of importance when you are describing a technique?

 

     AQ

xx       Kx

     xx

 

1) I finessed the Queen but it was offside.

2) I finessed the King but it was offside.

[Pict]

Perhaps 'I finessed the Queen and it lost'.

[bluejak]

I realise reading this that, although I voted immediately and confidently for the first option, in actual speech I almost never use finesse as a transitive verb.

 

I finesse against the king

I finesse through LHO

I take the spade finesse

 

For a suit such as AQ10xx low cards xxx if someone asked me how the play had gone, I simply wouldn't think to say "I finessed the 10", instead I say "I played to the 10", or "started with low to the 10"

 

Similarly with AQ10xx opposite J98 I don't finesse the jack, I run the jack.

 

Thinking of what other people say I'm not sure I ever hear it used transitively.

 

I've certainly never heard it used in the sense of the second option in the poll.

I use it occasionally, and in the first usage. But I agree it is more common not to use it transitively at all.

 

Agatha Christie [who played bridge herself] wrote a short story which involved a note which included the clause "need to finesse the king". The lady who allegedly received the note presumed that it meant avoiding her husband, who was at a fancy dress ball dressed as the king of hearts. So I presume Agatha would have understood the second interpretation.

 

I believe the first interpretation is now more common. However, the person who posted it as old-fashioned to use the second has something in my view: I think when I was younger the second interpretation was commoner.

 

In my copy of Watson's play of the hand there is a footnote on page 18:

 

`Writers on bridge have used the "finesse" very carelessly. So that there may be no misunderstanding, the reader should note the correct usage observed in this book, as follows. "To finesse a card" is to play that card; thus, in the example just given [AQ opposite 32], the Queen is finessed. The outstanding King is the card finessed "against", or the card the player hopes to capture by his finessing manoeuvre. Thus you finesse against a missing honor, but you finesse the card you yourself play, the card finessed being so played that it has a chance of winning against the higher card.'

 

Guess they were having the equivalent of this thread in 1934 too :unsure:

Nice to see an authority.

[blackshoe]

Nice to see an authority.

What, you didn't believe wikipedia? :P

[phil_20686]

Thinking of what other people say I'm not sure I ever hear it used transitively.

 

I've certainly never heard it used in the sense of the second option in the poll.

 

I would say I have never heard the first option. lol. And we are from the same country!! I usually say, play to the J, or hook the Queen (definitely meaning the second option). If I did say finesse, I use finesse intransitively when there is only one option. I cannot recall ever using finesse transitively.