Main Forum | Post Reply
A hand that MIGHT take longer than 10 seconds
Play gin-rummy tournaments online
It's now:   Oct 13, 10:55am EST
A hand that MIGHT take longer than 10 seconds
Posted by calc_guy 15 Jun 2004 2:59am     


Someone recently posted the following comment: 'there is no way that it should take more than 10 seconds to play.' Here's a hand I had tonight:

2H 2C 3C 4C 4D 4S 5S 5H 6C 7C 7H

The game was straight gin, 150 10 loser deals. (Yes, it was a rated game.) The score was 3 to 0 in my favor. Essentially a new game. My worthy opponent had picked up the King of Diamonds for Kings. His last discard was the 8 of spades, and the stock had 23 cards left in it. The discards had a smattering of queens, jacks, tens and the 9 of spades in it. Nothing lower.

I admit I thought for about 20 full seconds before I made my discard -- and I'm still trying to decide now if I did the right thing! I think if you give this hand to 5 diffenent gin players, they will play it 7 different ways. And they'll all think they're right, and anyone who disagrees with them might as well have a bulleye painted on his derriere.

I'll leave you guys to haggle over the right answer. I'll be back Thursday morning to tell you how *I* screwed it up.

calc_guy

NEVER PLAY 'GIN ONLY'
Posted by (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 10:34am     


THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHY - GIN ONLY & OKLAHOMA AREN'T EVEN LEGIT GAMES - JUST INVENTED TO ATTRACT PLAYERS WHO CAN'T PLAY REGULAR GIN WITH THE 'BIG-DOGS' !!!
TY & GL

This is funny......
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 11:00am     


Your stating the hand you were dealt seems a bit familiar to my recent experiences against players with just such hands.

In much less than 10 seconds I would opt to discard the 6c.

My rationale is that this card offers the least number of possibilities for favorable outcomes.

Now that was a very quick decision and is similar what I would have done in real-time.

Could this be the reason for my recent frustrations over luck-draw versus skilled-played hands???

Sorry Calc_, I know your posting is meant to solicit input but, as you can see, there is a bit of frustration being experienced recently. This also prompted a posting by me that asked the question of random cards.

I've been on both sides......

What did you do?????

WHICH CARD?
Posted by (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 7:00pm     


The real answer to your question is the following... Who cares what you throw your playing for free.

DITTO
Posted by (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 9:07pm     


DITTO

Oh Specker.......
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 9:28pm     


Thanks for your insight. As usual it tells a story about its author.

As you probably know, I've made quite a few FORUM postings about cash versus non-cash play. But, and here's the butt, I also enjoy postings that have something to say and the Calc_ posting is very similar to the situation I faced the other night with yours' truly.

My point is that all of us have an equal opportunity to post and that includes cash and non-cash players. If I'm not mistaken, the prior postings by this same author generated well in excess of 25 replies and have split into numerous other FORUM issues.

I honor your opinion but I also support the right of others to discuss a logical point.

The 10 second issue is one you should address; if memory serves me correctly. You have quite a bit in common with this author.

Thanks for your reply.....oh yeas, what would your discard be and how long did it take you to make your decision?????


Max request
Posted by (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 9:43pm     


Can we limit the number of postings by one player to less than 100 per week?

Rachel......
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 15 Jun 2004 10:30pm     


Just like the argument for censorship of books, music, TV and speech.

If you don't want to read it.....don't


Awwwww
Posted by (VIP) 16 Jun 2004 12:36pm     


LOL Ed, its funny how you always preface your points. I enjoy reading the forum every so often. I just found it comical though that almost all posts had a reply from you

Hi Rachel
Posted by PEGASUS (VIP) 16 Jun 2004 2:28pm     


Better than no posts at all and Ed does provide a variety. For a long time the forum was DEAD, but now we have new posts every day..sure quite a few from Ed, but that's ok. I love posting myself, but I'm not too good at this debating stuff so stick mostly to posting in the Pegasus Column, which gets very few responses so I'm not sure if it's even read. Anybody can post there too... feel free!

MY DISCARD
Posted by (VIP) 16 Jun 2004 3:10pm     


OK Ed if u insist on an answer. I would have thrown the 5s, in about 1/10th of a second. Nobody plays faster than me. this discard is locked up if he takes it or gives me a somewhat safe discard with the other 5. If it gets by my 5 is baited. If you need any more 'tips' let me know.

LOL
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 16 Jun 2004 4:54pm     


Well put Specker. I might just take you up on your offer.....

This is terrific
Posted by calc_guy 17 Jun 2004 3:14am     


We have two players who would play the hand *very* differently, but both are proud they would make the move in nanoseconds. One goes for maximum safety, the other goes for maximum offense. Meanwhile we have money players who refuse to even offer an opinion. Why -- because they're AFRAID to put their thoughts on record, that's why!

I could make a very good case for throwing any of the following cards from this hand: 7H, 6C, 5H, 5S, 4D, 2C.

I did notice that the 6C gave up the fewest number of combinations, Ed, but note that my opponent had just thrown the 8S. I thought there was a strong chance he was breaking up a pair of 8s, at this point. That was his fourth turn, and I know this player isn't quite so reckless as to throw an unprotected 8 at this stage. So I decided to hold the 6C on the chance his next discard might be the 8C. Also note that the 6C was open to be taken for 6s or for 4-5-6 of clubs.

The 7H was fairly safe, (opponent is unlikely to have the 7S in hand, since he threw an 8S after the 9S was down, and he's also unlikely to have 9-8 of hearts, since the 9H would be a more logical throw from 8S 8H 9H), but I almost never break up a three or four way combo this early in the hand. For the same reason, I rejected the 5S SPECKER.

The 5H actually only gives up two chances for a meld, but it's also open three ways to be taken as a meld. Doesn't seem like a good risk/reward ratio. The 4D is a little better -- it's open 3 ways for a sequence, but you are giving up only two chances for a meld, and they are both sort of dead end chances, from a gin standpoint. Ie. You could get the ace of clubs or the four of hearts, but you're still a long way from gin.

The same goes for the 2H. Open three ways, and giving up two chances. But the two chances are for a meld of three twos. If you get three twos, you're committed to three fours, and the 5S loses power -- you can longer take 6S or 3S for a new meld. Also, three fours and three twos are easy to defend against, and don't make a good start for a gin hand.

I decided on the 2H as the most aggressive possible play. If it made a meld for opponent, it would reduce his hand than any other possible discard. It's just late enough in the hand to start thinking like that, instead of just throwing high cards to reduce. I also had some protection, in that if he made three twos, I had the fourth 2, and if he made a sequence, I had the 5H as a possible layoff.

The 2H didn't work out too well. Opponent took it and threw -- the 8 of hearts. I was right that he was breaking up a pair, but his other 8 was the wrong color (sniff). I drew the 6 of spades and threw the 4D, which opponent picked up for a low card and went down with:
AD AC AH 2H 3H 3D 4D KS KC KD
and got 16 points from the old calc_guy.

We see now this person played brilliantly. He had three aces, three kings and a pair of threes, but took the 2H as a sort of 'super low card.' It freed up the two aces so that instead of needing a three to go down, any five or less would do the trick. He thought a few seconds before taking the 2H. He might not have taken it, except he KNEW his next discard was going to be the 8H.

So I guess the moral is: don't throw a low card when you think opponent is breaking up a combination. Maybe if I could have just thought another 10 seconds -- maybe if I didn't feel SO pressured to play fast -- maybe I would have thrown the 4D FIRST.

calc_guy

Wow
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 12:06pm     


Now I understand your original point of the more than '10 seconds move'.

Aggressive is the correct term used.

Why on this good God's earth would you break up the deuces and play into a possible low knock scenario? This , coupled with the fishing expedition for the '8C' seems to be the worst possible choice.

Ouch, my scenario proved to be correct.

Good posting but the either the 6C or the 5H would have possibvly given you a better chance of winner the hand.

Specker, I didn't like the 5H since that would be a great fll-in card to lose, a would be the 6c, and would give up a few too many options.

This proves that there are many options when random deals are one of the variables.

Another point is the probability of losing a hand with a great number of points.

Calc_ and Specker, I have to conclude that my discard was still the best way to play. The results bear me out.

P.S. - If either of you needs advice .... don't hesitate to ask.....Just kidding....good posting

AGAIN - 'WHO CARES' ?
Posted by (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 11:57am     


As Specker said - 'Who Cares What You Would Throw, If You Would Throw, Why You Would Throw'!
If not playing for tickets (which help pay for this site) 'NOTHING REALLY COUNTS ANYWAY' - SO 'WHO CARES'!
TY & GL

My discard
Posted by (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 1:28pm     


Ed I have no doubt that my discard is the correct one and your isn't only because we played 2 games the other day and I won both. We have to look at the record. Anymore pointers let me know.

SEE CALC_
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 7:47pm     


The type of response from Specker is just about you'd expect from her.....

That's why she is dead wrong.....

And very lucky to boot.....

POOR ED
Posted by (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 9:31pm     


I', sorry that you don't seem to have much of a sense of humor. You take these postings much to serious. Lighten-up. It s all for fun.

PS. Sorry if that I beat you so fast.

YOU SEEM TO BE BAITING ME...
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 17 Jun 2004 10:57pm     


As soon as I finish the 11Pm tourney I'm going to posta MESSAGE that you should read....It will settle a very significant point.....

Error, Will Robinson, Error!
Posted by calc_guy 18 Jun 2004 2:46am     


I screwed up two important details in my analysis.

First, the 4D is out, as a discard, because it actually gives up FOUR chances for a new meld, not two. Once the 4D is gone, the following cards no longer make a new meld: AC 2D 2S 4H. In defence, I believe I knew this when I played the game, but got confused going back and forth between my notes and my 'terrific' post above.

Second, the 6C is NOT open for opponent to make 4-5-6 of clubs. The 4C was in my hand.

Overall, I still think I made the right decision. Ed, you must realize that the 6C WAS wilder than the 2H. First, the fact that no twos, or low hearts have shown up means nothing. People hold on to low cards. Opponent could have ONE other 2 or JUST the AH. (S)he was unlikely to have just ONE 6, disconnected from everything else. Such a card would have been pitched on the first or second turn. My point is, if (s)he has one six, (s)he probably has two. Second, like I said before, three twos reduces the hand a lot less than three sixes. Note that opponent actually DID use the 2H for a meld. If it had been three sixes instead, it would surely have been knock time -- immediately. Finally, like you said, I was on a 'fishing expedition.' I've gone on many in the past, and found it to be a profitable venture.

If anybody was holding out for the 7H I have some bad news for you. Opponent's face down discard, when he knocked, was the 6H. Thus he was holding the 6-8H when I was making this decision, and the 7H would have put him right down -- before I even filled the 4-5-6S meld.

the fact that I goofed up two important details -- and nobody noticed -- to me, underscores the value of THINKING in a thinking man's game.

As to who cares about all this, onBirdstone, I happen to know one money player (not me) who comes on under another handle to play for free for ratings. He just wants to see what the high rated players know, and wants to see how high he can get. If one person has admitted this to me, I imagine there are others.

But beyond that, can't you just PRETEND for a second that the situation took place in a money game? Have you NO INTEREST in gin rummy just for rummy's sake? In other words kid, pay attention, you might learn somp'in.

calc_guy

I Agree
Posted by Ed_Blue (VIP) 18 Jun 2004 12:36pm     


To your comment about 'thinking' that is.

'Speed' and 'thought' are not mutually exclusive; in my humble opinion. The real issue is the decsion making process. Without trying to send the wrong message, my work experience always put out me in front and on the line. I learned to dance and dance real quickly.

It doesn't mean I'm always right but my batting average is in the plus column. I appreciate the game, its players and the site and also know we all play a bit differently. That's what makes each match a challenge. I must admit that introspection has allowed me to quickly size up most of my opponents. This is why I choose who I play for higher stakes carefully and only jump in when I know I can win or at least be competitive.

Good posting




Main Forum | Post Reply
Bookmark and Share    ...and Earn Free Tickets!
Play gin-rummy tournaments online

At GameColony.com you can play games of skill only -- play for free or play for $prizes!. According to the statutes of most states in the United States, gambling is defined as: "risking something of value upon the outcome of a contest of chance". (Also see No Gambling!).   The skill (as opposed to chance) is predominant in games of skill. Playing games of skill for $prizes, therefore, has nothing to do with gambling as it is not a contest of chance -- the more skillful player will win far more often. The chance element of a 'gamble' is either insignificant or missing. When players compete in tournaments or games of skill for $prizes -- it is "competitive entertainment" rather then "gambling". The more skilled winner will always win more matches, tournaments and $prizes.
Affiliate Program

Copyright © 2024

Site map