IMO - One of the worst spots to be in...

[RunemPard]

You arrive at a 4M contract playing MPs that you are sure almost all will be in. You have many entries to both hands and ruffs do not appear to be an issue.

 

Your trump suits are...

 

AJ87

 

KT96

 

or

 

AT98

KJ76

 

ect...

 

 

Let's say you want to try for a top or a swing in a team match. Are players most likely to finesse into the hand with the top 2 of 3? Is there a way to "play with the field" in this spot?

 

 

I have no clue, but maybe some others with more experience have noticed a field tendency here?

[mr1303]

You lead the Jack and see if the next player hitches or not.

[mfa1010]

Don't like your approach to the problem...

 

I don't care what the field is doing. I came to play bridge and try to take as many tricks as possible, not to strive for average scores. If I am not trying to out-perform my competitors on this deal, when then?

 

There are virtually always clues from the bidding and/or the play so far, let's analyze those instead of playing meta-game.

[mike777]

Do any posters take an imp approach even at MP and still win?

 

I thought I read, many years ago, that bobby Levin stated he played imp style at mP

[32519]

You arrive at a 4M contract playing MPs that you are sure almost all will be in. You have many entries to both hands and ruffs do not appear to be an issue.

 

<snip>

 

Let's say you want to try for a top or a swing in a team match. oticed a field tendency here?

 

So how do you want to create a swing if all are in the same contract?

[awm]

Weak players seem to usually finesse by leading to the jack. If you're in a weak field, you may produce a swing simply by finessing the other way.

 

Good players will try to come up with some inference from the bidding/lead. If the lead looks like shortage, it may be worth playing that person for the trump length (for example). If there is not much else to go on they may play the opening leader for the queen since without it he might've lead a trump. If you're in a strong field, you can produce a swing by doing the opposite of this (but your odds of getting the hand right will be less than 50%).

[32519]

Weak players seem to usually finesse by leading to the jack. If you're in a weak field, you may produce a swing simply by finessing the other way.

 

Good players will try to come up with some inference from the bidding/lead. If the lead looks like shortage, it may be worth playing that person for the trump length (for example). If there is not much else to go on they may play the opening leader for the queen since without it he might've lead a trump. If you're in a strong field, you can produce a swing by doing the opposite of this (but your odds of getting the hand right will be less than 50%).

How about this?

 

Many players have their own little ways of deciding which way to finesse for a missing queen. Some play that the queen always lies over the jack; hungry players finesse toward the kitchen, romantic players finesse toward the bedroom and practical players finesse toward the bathroom.

[manudude03]

On the first, I'd usually run the ten to induce a cover and finesse the other way if not covered (especially if the KT9x hand is hidden- LHO may cover with Qx to promote a possible K9x in RHOs hand). On the second, I just go with my gut in deciding which way to play, but with no information at all, I guess I play RHO for the queen since finessing the other way and losing blocks the suit.

[billw55]

You lead the Jack and see if the next player hitches or not.

I like this one, it works well if the ten is not in dummy.

 

Weak players seem to usually finesse by leading to the jack. If you're in a weak field, you may produce a swing simply by finessing the other way.

 

Good players will try to come up with some inference from the bidding/lead. If the lead looks like shortage, it may be worth playing that person for the trump length (for example). If there is not much else to go on they may play the opening leader for the queen since without it he might've lead a trump. If you're in a strong field, you can produce a swing by doing the opposite of this (but your odds of getting the hand right will be less than 50%).

I was also thinking that in a weak field, the finesses are more likely to go toward the jack. As for other clues, of course we look for these. But I think the point of the OP was what to do if there aren't any other clues.

 

Last, if you really want to swing, play to drop Qx. It's odds against but not terribly so, and will gain against the field no matter which way people are finessing.

[RunemPard]

Don't like your approach to the problem...

 

I don't care what the field is doing. I came to play bridge and try to take as many tricks as possible, not to strive for average scores. If I am not trying to out-perform my competitors on this deal, when then?

 

There are virtually always clues from the bidding and/or the play so far, let's analyze those instead of playing meta-game.

 

The situation I am most thinking about is when the only true info you have is that trump was not led. Some opponents in weaker fields rarely, if ever, lead a trump so this isn't always going to help. Let's also assume trying to find honors in off suits may be a very risky move and the best option is to attack trump immediately.

 

I have to disagree with you on the not going for some avg scores though. The biggest killer at MPs is not 40-50% boards, the killer is 0-30s. Sometimes out playing the opponents, even at MPs, is to go for the safer 50% score when you are doing well, and go for that top when you are struggling. Of course I will obviously try and use all the information I have to make good decisions, but I cannot understand if you have never been in this spot and honestly had no clue which is the winning play.

[RunemPard]

I like this one, it works well if the ten is not in dummy.

 

 

I was also thinking that in a weak field, the finesses are more likely to go toward the jack. As for other clues, of course we look for these. But I think the point of the OP was what to do if there aren't any other clues.

 

Last, if you really want to swing, play to drop Qx. It's odds against but not terribly so, and will gain against the field no matter which way people are finessing.

 

Assuming the opponents will play a top honor from one hand before finessing, isn't this only working one way?

[RunemPard]

You lead the Jack and see if the next player hitches or not.

 

Depends on the opponents, but yes I didn't think of that when posting. Against opponents with a steady tempo in most situations this will just confuse me even more sometimes! :P

 

When I notice I got Qxx with a finesse behind me, I keep this in my mind throughout the hand and hold a good tempo as to not give any clues when they do try though.

[RunemPard]

So how do you want to create a swing if all are in the same contract?

 

 

I would like to nominate this for post of the year.

[chasetb]

Technically, if you have no idea leading to the Jack is the best way in a weak field (conversely, with 11 cards finessing for the King is also the best way in a weak field).

 

Barry Crane, who is considered the greatest MP player of all time, had a superstitious rule for this. Kerri Sanborn, his favorite partner, wrote this:

 

"When you are looking for a queen or jack, it is over the jack or ten in the minors.

 

KT9

AJx - play LHO for Q

 

KT9

Qxx - play RHO for J

 

In the majors this is reversed. This does not take precedence to knowledge of where length is.** It applies only in guessing situations. "

 

**Grant Baze disagreed on this point when playing with Barry Crane. He once had a two-way guess in Clubs in 7NT, and after finding out the exact distribution, finessed the person with 3 Clubs for the Queen (that opponent happened to lie UNDER the Jack, not over). When it went wrong, Barry went ballistic, chucked the next few boards, and then blamed Baze when they finished 2nd by half a MP.

[billw55]

**Grant Baze disagreed on this point when playing with Barry Crane. He once had a two-way guess in Clubs in 7NT, and after finding out the exact distribution, finessed the person with 3 Clubs for the Queen (that opponent happened to lie UNDER the Jack, not over). When it went wrong, Barry went ballistic, chucked the next few boards, and then blamed Baze when they finished 2nd by half a MP.

I have read many stories like this. I wonder what he would have accomplished if he hadn't gone on tilt so often. I also wonder how he kept partners, or got new ones.

[billw55]

Assuming the opponents will play a top honor from one hand before finessing, isn't this only working one way?

hmm .. if I drop Qx, I gain against declarers who hook into Qx, and tie those who hook the other way, regardless of cashing an honor first. So either way, I expect to get ave+ in a field that hooks both ways.

[mycroft]

Many players have their own little ways of deciding which way to finesse for a missing queen. Some play that the queen always lies over the jack; hungry players finesse toward the kitchen, romantic players finesse toward the bedroom and practical players finesse toward the bathroom.

Nah, you finesse against the player who will give you the most satisfaction if it works.

[barmar]

I also wonder how he kept partners, or got new ones.

Despite his quirks, he won lots of events.

[mfa1010]

The situation I am most thinking about is when the only true info you have is that trump was not led. Some opponents in weaker fields rarely, if ever, lead a trump so this isn't always going to help. Let's also assume trying to find honors in off suits may be a very risky move and the best option is to attack trump immediately.

 

I have to disagree with you on the not going for some avg scores though. The biggest killer at MPs is not 40-50% boards, the killer is 0-30s. Sometimes out playing the opponents, even at MPs, is to go for the safer 50% score when you are doing well, and go for that top when you are struggling. Of course I will obviously try and use all the information I have to make good decisions, but I cannot understand if you have never been in this spot and honestly had no clue which is the winning play.

You can have your philosophy, obviously, but I stated mine. I would never try to estimate how the field will be guessing. It is imo taking the eye off the ball.

If I have a 51-49 proposition, I'll go with the 51. But it is a rare board where it is impossible to deduce better odds than that. We already talked about the non-trump lead. Another common theme is handling issues with trumps 4-1.

[GreenMan]

Nah, you finesse against the player who will give you the most satisfaction if it works.

 

Finesse toward your spouse and through your ex-spouse.

[RunemPard]

You can have your philosophy, obviously, but I stated mine. I would never try to estimate how the field will be guessing. It is imo taking the eye off the ball.

If I have a 51-49 proposition, I'll go with the 51. But it is a rare board where it is impossible to deduce better odds than that. We already talked about the non-trump lead. Another common theme is handling issues with trumps 4-1.

 

 

Absolutely, I respect your opinion. One thing I find fascinating about MPs though is the meta-game tactics. Playing a safe line to go -1 in 3NT when you feel there is a low chance of making on the only line of play that may risk 2 back. Or the classic case of taking the finesse for the extra or risk giving the opponents a ruff if you fail it. In this case, it is just a matter of determining what, if anything, might get us a more even score either way. I like thinking about these kinds of things.

[mycroft]

Despite [barry Crane's] quirks, he won lots of events.

From Grant Baze:

Barry was a partner killer. At the Hawaii Nationals in the Spring of 1985 Barry played with Mike Passell in the Open Pairs. They had a fabulous last session and won the event easily, the umpteenth time that Barry won that event (he was particularly good against non-expert competition). Mike is a friend of mine; after the event I congratulated him on the win. Mike said, "Ah, I play with Barry once a year just to remind myself of how much I hate playing with him."

 

Jeff Meckstroth went one better. He played with Barry in a two session regional event just because he thought he should play at least once with "Mr. McKinney." At the end of the event Jeff tore their convention card into ribbons and threw the pieces at Barry, making it very clear that he would never play with Barry again.

Heh, oddly enough I conflated the two stories in my mind.

[mfa1010]

Any matchpoint thread kept alive long enough on a mostly american bridge forum will eventually degenerate into Barry Crane anecdotes...

[mfa1010]

Absolutely, I respect your opinion. One thing I find fascinating about MPs though is the meta-game tactics. Playing a safe line to go -1 in 3NT when you feel there is a low chance of making on the only line of play that may risk 2 back. Or the classic case of taking the finesse for the extra or risk giving the opponents a ruff if you fail it. In this case, it is just a matter of determining what, if anything, might get us a more even score either way. I like thinking about these kinds of things.

Sure. As long as you think about its limitations - meta-game tactics are often misused by many players to justify completely absurd plays. :)

[SimonFa]

I think it was in one of my Ron Klinger books, apologies if it was someone else, the advice in this situation was that in the last retort always finesse the same way to maintain 50% success.