[jtfanclub]

jdonn, on May 29 2008, 05:21 PM, said:

Interesting that AKQx fares so much better than AKQJ. Partner has five cards in the suit that often??

Now that I look more, how could AKQT fare so much worse than both AKQx and AKQJ? That makes no sense at all, I think something here is flawed.

It's just a small sample size....

Do keep in mind, though, that this is cross IMPs vs. ALL other suits. So if the whole hands were....

AKQx
Jxx
xx
xxxx

vs.

AKQJ
xxx
xx
xxxx

you would expect a spade lead to score better on the first hand not because the spades do better, but because underleading the Jxx is more likely to give up a trick than xxx.

[Cascade]

jtfanclub, on May 30 2008, 10:12 AM, said:

Cascade, on May 29 2008, 03:43 PM, said:

KQxx         103      -124     -1.20     10.64   26
Axxx         100      -121     -1.21     10.13   27
KJTx         100      -144     -1.44     13.12   28
AKxx         100      -144     -1.44     11.98   28
AQxx         100      -176     -1.76     11.38   30
AQJx         100      -288     -2.88     13.59   31

I'm curious, if you don't mind, how the bottom 6 did with the opposite-from-standard lead. For example, if the standard lead from AKxx is the king, how did it do if you led low?

Good question.

For a number of honour combinations I have wondered how a different 'standard' lead might do.

One day I will do this.

[Cascade]

jdonn, on May 30 2008, 10:21 AM, said:

Interesting that AKQx fares so much better than AKQJ. Partner has five cards in the suit that often??

Now that I look more, how could AKQT fare so much worse than both AKQx and AKQJ? That makes no sense at all, I think something here is flawed.

I think almost all of the discrepancy is based on the size of the sample.

100 hands i quite a small sample.

However given in the simulation I did all one up to five card suits - I have only shown the result for four-card suits above - which is 111 one hundred hand simulations from memory. Each hand is played four times. So we are talking about 40000 hands. These are played single dummy. Depending on the settings GIB plays a hand a little faster than the average face to face human game but a comparable amount of time. This means that we are talking weeks of computer effort to do this sort of simulation.