August 12, 2017
44% | |||||
25% | |||||
7% | |||||
6% | |||||
5% | |||||
4% | |||||
1% | |||||
1% | |||||
1% | |||||
1% | |||||
Total votes: 134 |
james500 3894 votes Joined: June 2013 |
    Saturday 3:13 AM
I'll keep the three card run and the 3 to lead with. Only cuts of an A,Q or K will not improve the value of my hand (12/46). |
Rosemarie44 2051 votes Joined: March 2016 |
    Saturday 3:27 AM
Believe it is between tossing 3-6 or 2-6 to dealer. I cannot hold a hand worth 5 points and toss 2-3 valued at 7.52 points to opponent!
Tossing 3-6 or 2-6 have identical statistics: min of 3 and max of 8 points, exp. average hand of 5.20 points; combined value hand minus crib .39 points and .41 points respectively. the difference is in the value of the crib toss: 4.81 points and 4.79 points, respectively. If I am correct, tossing 3-6 to dealer gives us one more cut in the hand for improvement over tossing 2-6. |
dec 6326 votes Joined: April 2008 |
    Saturday 3:58 AM
In constructing a hand my peggers have some consideration. Three for a check play. As far as a five cut I hope most of the X/5 cards are left out of their hand and remain in the deck. dec |
BigFoot Bob 624 votes Joined: April 2016 |
    Saturday 5:42 AM
Even tossing the valuable 2-3, I need ever point I can get keeping the 6 for a extra 2 points with a run. |
glmccuskey 4074 votes Joined: April 2011 |
    Saturday 6:11 AM
See no reason for defense. I'm in a desperate spot and need to take chances. Lead the six. |
jmath714 1290 votes Joined: January 2012 |
    Saturday 7:49 AM
Agreed, have to attack here. I might consider the 8 lead instead of the 6. |
Inushtuk1 1463 votes Joined: July 2016 |
    Saturday 8:19 AM
Great puzzle smugly. To me there is no way Dealer will get my (2-3). But do I keep the 3, and cover my 3 lead, but have one less chance for improvement? Or do I go for the keep with the slightly higher average hand. I will go with the latter. The (3-6) needs another 6 to make a (15-2). There are only three 6's remaining. The (2-6) requires a 7 to do the same. There are four of those floating around out there somewhere. I'll lead my 2 to keep the run intact, but maybe the 8 lead is best. But Dealer usually comes out ahead when Pone leads a mid-card. Inushtuk1 says: I forgot to mention that if you were dealing in this position would you pair my opening 3 lead? Probably not. So keeping the 3 in order to cover your play may not be worth the small sacrifice in average hand value. Also it seems counter-intuitive that (3-6) should have a lower crib average than (2-6). After all the (3-6) chould connect with a (4-5) from Dealer. But there's that factor of only three sixes as opposed to *four* sevens thing again. Rosemarie44 says: Inushtuk1, our votes are in the 3% bracket. Great puzzle smugly. |
spin121 299 votes Joined: March 2016 |
Saturday 10:56 AM
Game is half over for dealer who is leading by 12 pts. So as much as it pains me to do so, I'm giving up the dangerous discard. Offense spin121 says: 6 8 9 10 keep |
Ras2829 5124 votes Joined: November 2008 |
    Saturday 12:50 PM
Rosemarie44 says most of what I want to say. Can't toss 2-3 to opponent and hold five points. So will choose optimal strategy shaded towards offense. Like the 2-3-6-9 playing an optimal strategy. Lead the 6, if paired score 15-2, if a nine played, pair the 9 for count of 24. Still have 2-3 intact which might allow pairs or pick up a lone Ace for a run of three. Sometimes on the right count pick off a lone 4 and close the count with 31-5. From this keep, if playing defense would lead the trey. Only a five and 8 spot add no value to hand. At this posting, I'm with the 8% group. Very instructional puzzle smugly as it does seem that such discard dilemmas often confront the non-dealer whereas dealer seldom has that problem as discard counts on dealer side of ledger. BTW opening deal has many advantages in a game other than the extra deal, extra pegs, extra crib, etc. This is just one of many. Can you think of other advantages for first dealer as game unfolds? Ras2829 says: BTW am often asked "what difference does opening deal make?" In my case , winning percentage in live games of which RAS had first deal tally 67%. Games in which I do not have the first deal, I win 52%. Have asked other quality players who have tracked this over the years and the advantage to having first deal in those cases has been stated to be from 13-16%. My figures are based on 1,000 games. If looking at such information over a small number of games, no accurate assessment is possible. If playing electronically with one of Hal Mueller's tutorial programs, it becomes relatively easy to look at blocks of 1,000 games. When I hit 1,000 with Cribbage Prof, establish a new ID, and start over. This is much easier than trying to keep track in live play. Your statistics will never be impacted by a player of poor quality; so the margins will tend to be less than those I've shown above for live encounters. The cribbot in any of those programs (Halscrib, REX, or Cribbage Prof) is superior to the highest level of Grass Roots or tournament play. Guest says: is it standard to cut for deal in western region qualifying tourneys? logic? dec Guest says: Some tourneys in the Midwest will play the person twice, once he deals, next I deal to eliminate that advantage Ras2829 says: Hi dec: Although what you say is correct as to cutting for the deal in west and more likely alternate deals in east, don't think there is any evidence to support that the qualifying scores look different. Think the qualifying scores fall out in the same nearly predictable pattern. High qualifying score in a tournament of 100 whether cut for deal or alternate deals will be about 35. Occasionally we see an exceptional score of 39 or more and the lower end of the scale with rarity may be 26 although have been to two tournaments where some 25 scores qualified. Both of those were cut for deal. Am always anxious to see if somebody has tracked this and what their accumulated data suggests? Ras2829 says: Since I brought up the subject think this is an interesting observation.In my present series of 1,000 games with the Cribbage Prof, we've completed 804 games with alternate deals. That means that RAS has dealt 402 games of which I've won 239 for 60% as dealer. As non-dealer have won 175 for 44%. The spread between dealer and non-dealer win percentage is 16 points though both percentages are much lower than the results from live play. Might be some interest in that! jethrotulll says: Of more interesting notes there is no where in the ACC rules that allows for alternate deal. In fact, just the opposite is true. Cutting for deal is mentioned in 5 separate rules and is also included in the Code of Ethics. Muggins is THE ONLY alternate rule. There is no mention of an alternate format being allowed in tournament play (or Grass Roots which follow the ACC rules). While this continues to be a bone of contention W vs. E, until such time as it is specifically allowed in the rules, the practice should be discontinued. I will be bringing this up at BOD on 4 weeks. jethrotulll says: P.S. For those that think, "let's just let them do whatever..." Then I want to play lowball...or with jokers...or maybe top 33% make it into the playoffs instead of 25%. Tournament directors and organizers can do whatever they want in NON-sanctioned play. Sanctioned play needs to be consistent whether you are playing in Oregon, Alberta or New Hampshire. This includes blind draws, rotation around a table and also cutting for deal. All of these rules are addressed, but yet seemingly left up to regional or local directors, some of whom are on the BOD. How can that be? Ras2829 says: HI jethrotulll: Very good points made as to the reasons to "cut for deal". Wish you well in addressing this issue at ACC BOD. If they support alternate deals, they should amend the rule book first to accomodate. |
HalscribCLX 5296 votes Joined: February 2008 |
    Saturday 2:06 PM
At 48-60* playing an Offense strategy the dynamic expected averages and Win/Loss %s are:
_______________Our Offense___Hand_Pegs__Crib___Total___W4 %___W5 % 2-8-9-10__5.24+1.20+(-4.39)=2.05____0.5____6.1 2-3-6-9___4.91+1.83+(-4.70)=2.04____0.6____6.7 3-8-9-10__5.20+1.39+(-4.57)=2.02____0.5____6.3 2-3-9-10__5.20+1.67+(-5.36)=1.51____0.6____6.2 3-6-8-9___4.11+1.41+(-4.40)=1.12____0.4____5.3 2-3-8-9___3.41+1.87+(-4.19)=1.09____0.4____5.1 2-6-8-9___4.20+1.26+(-4.46)=1.00____0.4____5.3 6-8-9-10__7.15+1.33+(-7.48)=1.00____0.9____7.9 Offense______L4 %___L5 % 2-8-9-10_____12.5___61.3 2-3-6-9______14.0___63.3 3-8-9-10_____12.7___61.8 2-3-9-10_____15.6___64.0 3-6-8-9______12.7___62.6 2-3-8-9______12.6___62.4 2-6-8-9______13.1___63.1 6-8-9-10_____20.1___69.8 2-8-9-10 is only 0.01pt better than 2-3-6-9 for expected averages and although 6-8-9-10 is best for Win %s it is 1.05pt lower for expected averages and very much worst for Loss %s because of the risky 2-3 discard. I think the best compromise is 2-8-9-10 as it is lowest for Loss %s, slightly best for expected averages and a close fourth best for Win %s. So I'll select 3-6 to discard. After the 10 cut I'll lead the 2 and play Offense: Lead_______Our Pegging Pts. 2________________1.24 8________________1.22 9________________1.18 10_______________1.17 |
Coeurdelion 5573 votes Joined: October 2007 |
    Saturday 4:21 PM
I don't think 6-8-9-10 (2-3) comes into it but I'll compare it to 3-8-9-10 (2-6), 2-8-9-10 3-6) and 2-3-6-9 (8-10):
Potential: 6-8-9-10: 5pts - 7½pts (Schell: 7.33) = -2½pts 3-8-9-10: 3pts - 5pts (Schell: 4.97) = -2pts 2-8-9-10: 3pts - 5pts (Schell: 4.87) = -2pts 2-3-6-9: 2pts - 4¾pts (Schell: 5.10) = -2¾pts 6-8-9-10: Improves with AAAA, 5555, 666, 7777, 888, 999, 101010, JJJJ = 28 cuts = 28/46 = 60.9% up to 9/10/12pts with 666, 7777, 888, 999, 101010 = 16 cuts. 3-8-9-10: Improves with 222, 333, 4444, 5555, 666, 7777, 888, 999, 101010, JJJJ = 34 cuts = 34/46 = 73.9% up to 8pts with 888, 999, 101010 = 9 cuts. 2-8-9-10: Improves with 222, 333, 4444, 5555, 666, 7777, 888, 999, 101010, JJJJ = 34 cuts = 34/46 = 73.9% up to 8pts with 888, 999, 101010 = 9 cuts. 2-3-6-9: Improves with AAAA, 222, 333, 4444, 666, 7777, 999 + 15xXs = 39 cuts = 39/46 = 84.8% up to 6/7/8pts with AAAA, 4444, 666, 999 = 14 cuts. Pegging: I think 2-3-6-9 will peg the best of these 4 hands. Position: We're way behind and opponent will reach 3rd street par-hole and beyond as Pone next deeal (probably!). So I'll play Offense to try to catch up. Summary: 2-8-9-10 and 3-8-9-10 have the best starting value with 34 cuts for improvement and 9 cuts for a reasonable hand. 2-3-6-9 starts with ¾pt less but has more cuts for improvement and although the maximum is less its a big improvement over 2pts. Even so I'll go with starting with 3pts. With 3-8-9-10 we gain with a cut of 333 for 7pts but with 5555 and 2-8-9-10 we also score 7pts so I don't think there will be much difference in the hand expected average. With the crib Schell puts 3-6 at 0.10pt lower for expected because the 3-6 combination only has 666 for a 15 while 2-6 has 7777. As we hold a 9 both crib averages will suffer negative delta so I'll throw 3-6 as I think it will be slightly better. |