Yes Jelby, you assume an 'out of position bluff', like myself.
But now, check that situation (ignore the context):
Bob: x-x-x-(m1) - Bob has negative green on his whole hand. He got clued a multi card by Donald.
Cathy: r1-x-x-x
Donald: x-g2-x-x-x
Alice clue green to Donald.
Here we should be in a similar situation than Blacktango's example.
For simplicity let's ignore pass bluff (you just got the same problem with Bob's finesse position next turn instead).
Utf106 would just play his slot 1 as Bob.
On the other hand, I would assume the clue is on Cathy, and play m1.
The problem is that in the following turn, Cathy (and Emily) can assume it was layered, and play their finesse position/second finesse position as g1. To not do that, you need like Jelby said:
- the out of position bluff to be played immediately (and it should in nearly all cases)
- see that the bluff was for g2 (if nothing else is going on, which is usually the case)
- see that Bob got negative green in his whole hand
- fully understand the concept of 'bluff seat'
And it's even worst than that, since regularly, if one bomb is occuring from that, some players can still not understand the bomb and bomb again. You don't know why the bomb is occuring. Two bombs is enough in maybe half of cases though. And Alice need to not miss per example a 5-save.
.
I suppose I'm unfair about this move becase h-group deleted it, but they deleted it for a good reason it seem after this post.
At one point if you want to increase complexity of conventions, you need really great player which does really few mistakes, since this kind of move which require the whole table to be agree on can often become the only source of a defeat.
But now, check that situation (ignore the context):
Bob: x-x-x-(m1) - Bob has negative green on his whole hand. He got clued a multi card by Donald.
Cathy: r1-x-x-x
Donald: x-g2-x-x-x
Alice clue green to Donald.
Here we should be in a similar situation than Blacktango's example.
For simplicity let's ignore pass bluff (you just got the same problem with Bob's finesse position next turn instead).
Utf106 would just play his slot 1 as Bob.
On the other hand, I would assume the clue is on Cathy, and play m1.
The problem is that in the following turn, Cathy (and Emily) can assume it was layered, and play their finesse position/second finesse position as g1. To not do that, you need like Jelby said:
- the out of position bluff to be played immediately (and it should in nearly all cases)
- see that the bluff was for g2 (if nothing else is going on, which is usually the case)
- see that Bob got negative green in his whole hand
- fully understand the concept of 'bluff seat'
And it's even worst than that, since regularly, if one bomb is occuring from that, some players can still not understand the bomb and bomb again. You don't know why the bomb is occuring. Two bombs is enough in maybe half of cases though. And Alice need to not miss per example a 5-save.
.
I suppose I'm unfair about this move becase h-group deleted it, but they deleted it for a good reason it seem after this post.
At one point if you want to increase complexity of conventions, you need really great player which does really few mistakes, since this kind of move which require the whole table to be agree on can often become the only source of a defeat.
