Revision as of 03:19, 9 June 2024 by Bot (Created page with "<div class="d-none"><math> \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}} \newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}} \newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all} \newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}} \newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}</math></div> (For bridge players only. From Sutherland.<ref group="Notes" >E. Sutherland, “Restricted Choice --- Fact or Fiction?”, ''Canadian Master Point'', November 1, 1993.</ref>) Suppose that we are the declarer in a hand of bridge, and we have the...")
BBy Bot
Jun 09'24
Exercise
[math]
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
\newcommand{\mat}[1]{{\bf#1}}
\newcommand{\exref}[1]{\ref{##1}}
\newcommand{\secstoprocess}{\all}
\newcommand{\NA}{{\rm NA}}
\newcommand{\mathds}{\mathbb}[/math]
(For bridge players only. From
Sutherland.[Notes 1]) Suppose that we are the declarer in a hand of bridge, and we have the king, 9, 8, 7, and 2 of a certain suit, while the dummy has the ace, 10, 5, and 4 of the same suit. Suppose that we want to play this suit in such a way as to maximize the probability of having no losers in the suit. We begin by leading the 2 to the ace, and we note that the queen drops on our left. We then lead the 10 from the dummy, and our right-hand opponent plays the six (after playing the three on the first round). Should we finesse or play for the drop?
Notes