A story from why to red thumb

[Sammy McSam]

*

*Moderation Edit: please do not use the Forums to call out specific tables or players by name, this is what the Moderation Reports are for. The Forums should remain a general discussion.

[Silene]

IMO, you were right on the content (they seem to have trouble understanding how to distinguish bluff from layered).
But I think they were nicer in the conversation than you were. Also you're crossing a line posting this here but it'll probaby be moderated out soon

[SchengW]

Its actually very simple to prove this is only a bluff: consider if Sammy doesn’t have b3 at all but only k5, can the clue giver mark b4 color to bluff k5 and is that a simple bluff with no more card layered? Yes it is and very valid.

And there was a way to give a valid layer hint.(we dont discuss here if its the best strategy though)
If he marked the b4 with number 4, then its layered. Because the b4 holder saw the b3 on slot 2 and he would be not sure if his 4 is k4 or b4 so he had to delay the play of the 4. And then Sammy knew k5 cannot connect b4 and the b4 was not played so he must have the real card to connect b4 which is b3 so b3 could be played the next round.

This is the similar situation like if someone has three 1s on finesse and you mark a number 2 of the same color of the third 1. Then all three 1 could be blind played and the 2 holder must wait until the last playable 1 played.

[Sammy McSam]

Thanks for letting me know Silene, I am unaware of any rule against posting a table discussion, but I've taken it down in case it's really a problem.

To be clear this is nothing to do with the rule of "challenging a moderation in Forum" since there is no moderation I am aware of.

Thanks for the feedback that you think they were nicer in the conversation.
I focused only on the moves of the game and the reasons for them and called out the lack of logic to their argument.
Yes I insisted that we not get into a discussion about a completely unrelated move in another game, but it really was irrelevant.
I was patient and trying to ask good questions to try to understand their reasoning. Studying another game or a Google search can't help me to understand.

[Romain672]

I have a pretty strong argument for b3. All table is master, so sensibility can be high, so that seem to work.
It's because 5 is stronger then blue on chouchoutuba.


Imagine ghost clue 5 to chochoutuba. What happen next?
5 call for b3+b4+b5.

First, let's look at Sammy's hand. He sees m1+m2+b4 on Tomi's hand, so he only need to play b3. So he plays k5.
Then we got others problems in between, but let's skip them for now. Others players will assume b3 is on Sammy, and will not interfere.
Then it's Sammy's turn again, and he plays b3.
Then Tomi will play m1+m2+b4 and chouchoutuba will play b5.
So outside of that problem, that work.

So now, when ghost decide to clue blue instead of 5 and do in purpose a worst clue by not getting m1+m2, that should call for something else => b3.


Now let's talk about that problem. Sammy plays k5, and now it's Chouchoutuba's turn. Tomi's hand is m1-m2-b4-k1.
Chouchoutuba can clue 1 to Tomi though, that will save k1, that should change the position of b4, and I think that should get m1 played?


I think if you don't care about complexity, the reasonning is really strong, I would love for you to break it or try to break it.
Now if you care about complexity, which you should, it's a risk of losing an unique b3 and that desynchronise the team. The clue is about 3 others players, so 3 players need to understand it. I don't like it.

[Travis Hall]

Its actually very simple to prove this is only a bluff: consider if Sammy doesn’t have b3 at all but only k5, can the clue giver mark b4 color to bluff k5 and is that a simple bluff with no more card layered? Yes it is and very valid.

That’s a pretty good way to explain the difference.

Unfortunately some players just expect telepathy.

And there was a way to give a valid layer hint.(we dont discuss here if its the best strategy though)
If he marked the b4 with number 4, then it’s layered. Because the b4 holder saw the b3 on slot 2 and he would be not sure if his 4 is k4 or b4 so he had to delay the play of the 4. And then Sammy knew k5 cannot connect b4 and the b4 was not played so he must have the real card to connect b4 which is b3 so b3 could be played the next round.

This is not actually a layered finesse, but a related technique known as clandestine finesse.

It doesn’t work well when clued to chouchoutuba, due to putting 5b on chop. But note that Tomi also holds 4b, so it can be clued to them, and 5b remains safe. Chouchoutuba will have to clue a play for Tomi to keep 1k safe (double finesse in multi being the obvious choice) but Sammy can recognise the clandestine based on the principle that the clue must be valid when given.