|
|
Bombs are a big part of Tichu. Some people love them, some people hate them. And so many people on BSW don't realize they have a bomb until that happy little button appears. Hands are played where people lost out to a bomb, and others say that they played in a certain way because they were afraid of bombs.
My house on BSW is known as the "House of Bombs" because they occur so often. Gregarius said, "there's more bombs here than Pearl Harbor!" I pass cards to optimize my potential of bombs, and pass cards to minimize the chance of my opponents getting a bomb. As I read what people write, I've noticed there's a severe lack of understanding around bombs. I hope to demystify them some with this post.
Most bombs can be detected through the card play through simple deductive logic.
4 of a Kind Bombs
First, let us consider 4 card bombs. Here's a listing of all the bomb possibilities:
AAAA
KKKK
QQQQ
JJJJ
TTTT
9999
8888
7777
6666
5555
4444
3333
2222
13 possible 4 card bombs.
First, any card you have in your hand is NOT a 4 card bomb. So if you hold: DAAKTT88854332, then you've eliminated 8 potential bombs. You need to watch the card play for a QJ976. If any of those get played, then you've eliminated another potential bomb threat.
Many players are adept at using straights during the card play. Straights are great to help in bomb detection, as they quickly eliminate 4 card bomb possibilities.
Once you get used to watching for at least 1 of all 13 ranked cards, you'll get used to eliminating 4 card bomb possibilities. If someone has a 4 card bomb, they typically avoid playing it until later in the game. So when you're a good way through, and you've seen all cards but a 4 and a 7, there's a possibility that one or both are bombs.
Also, you'll sometimes get a suspicion that there's a King bomb if a Queen wins the stack twice in a round. There may be an Ace bomb if Kings seem to win. Ace bombs get split often, whereas King bombs get split less so.
Notes for when you pass
When passing cards before play begins, passing one card from a pair in your hand will avoid a 4 card bomb for the opponent.
With 3322, it's possible to split your 2's OR pass a 3 to one opponent and the 2 to another. Even better if the 2-3 are of the same suit.
With my personal style, if I have a really bad hand, I won't worry about what combinations I have. I will accept being 4th out, as I won't have won any cards to protect. (I may get the dragon, but oh well.) That's when I will be more concerned with passing to minimize bombs or potential combinations.
Also, if you have 333222, call Tichu before the pass. Your changes of getting 1 bomb is high, and in a rare case you'll get a 2 and a 3 bomb.
Lastly, if you trade a single 3 and a get a single 3 back, then you can eliminate the possibility that you created a 3 bombs.
Straight Flush Bombs
When I first thought about how to tell if there was a straight flush bomb on the hand, I was a bit daunted. But then I created the Law of 6 and 10: Every straight flush bomb contains a 6, a 10, or both a 6 and a 10.
Here are the possible 5 card bombs:
AKQJT
KQJT9
QJT98
JT987
T9876
98765
87654
76543
65432
Nine possible combinations. However, these could appear in 4 different suits!!! So 36 possible bombs. That's a lot to keep track of. But apply the Law of 6 and 10. All you need to do is watch the 10's and the 6's to eliminate straight flush bombs.
That's 8 cards to watch. And most people watch 10's because they are point cards.
If you have any 6's and 10's, you can immediately eliminate those possibilities for straight flushes. Through the play, watch for the 6's and 10's. Stars, Pagodas, Jade, and Swords. Once you get used to watching for these key card, you'll quickly identify when there's no potential for a straight flush bomb.
Lastly, it doesn't matter if the bomb is longer than 5. It will still have a 6, a 10, or both a 6 and 10.
Notes for when you pass
Passing a 6 and a 10 is dangerous when you don't have a card above AND below in the same suit. For a 10, you need one card in AKQJ and one in 9876. That will guarantee no bomb. It's still stastically unlikely that the receiving player will get a completed straight flush. But there are no guarantees. For a 6, you'll need one higher in T987 and one lower in 5432.
Of course, if you're passing to your partner, passing a T or a 6 when you don't have either the higher or lower isn't a bad thing. I usually will pass a T over a KQJ if the T is a single and doesn't have a higher or lower card in the 5 card straight flush. I might as well maximize my partner's chances at a straight flush.
Watch the suits when you pass. You can at least guarantee and eliminate some bomb possibilities by your passing. You should always consider suits when passing. Same works for partner. There's no reason not to pass him a particular suited card if there's a chance to create a straight flush bomb.
Lastly, if your hand is incredibly low, why not maximize your chances for a straight flush bomb? If it works, your hand gets substantially better and you may hurt a Tichu call. If it doesn't work, you really didn't lose anything.
---
So there you have it! My thoughts on bombs. I really enjoy figuring out when there's a possible bomb. And when you eliminate the possibility of a bomb, it makes play less uncertain.
Good luck, and have fun searching for bombs!
|
|
|
Very good thread! You win a golden camel: 
|
|
|
Very interesting analysis. But how do you use the info? Would you ever play differently if you know there is or isn't a bomb?
|
|
|
Of course, Jim!
Say it's your lead, you've called a Tichu, and you have the Dog and the Dragon. You're worried about a bomb. Play the Dog, partner will play a single, and if they bomb, your last card is still the Dragon. You play safe. If you know there's no bomb, then play the Dragon, and end with the Dog. There's no reason to play it safe, because you know there is no bomb.
Also, it helps when it's obvious you're going to go out. If you know there's no bombs, playing AKQJT9 and keeping a 2 as your last card is very reasonable. It helps your partner by not giving the lead up to the opponents.
I don't always start with the 1 when I have it. Sometimes I can wish for a card I suspect is in a 4 card bomb later in the hand to force its play.
One last thing - if you think there's a bomb and an opponent called Tichu, it's pretty reasonable to think that player has the bomb. (If partner has it, woohoo! If other opponent has it, oh well!) At that point, it's probably not a good idea to be aggressively Tichu stopping. Let the opponent go out first and focus on stealing the points. Nothing says I love you more than seeing the opponents get 95 pts, while you've taken 105.
|
|
|
Good post. Personally I don't spend so much effort on bomb detection. Quote: Also, if you have 333222, call Tichu before the pass. Your changes of getting 1 bomb is high, and in a rare case you'll get a 2 and a 3 bomb. Calling Tichu before the pass is only going to increase your chances of getting the Dog, it's not going to make it more likely that you get the 2 or 3 that you want. (I do sometimes call Tichu before the pass when I've got an exceptionally strong hand, specifically to encourage the opponents to pass me the Dog). Quote: But then I created the Law of 6 and 10: Every straight flush bomb contains a 6, a 10, or both a 6 and a 10.
...
That's 8 cards to watch. And most people watch 10's because they are point cards. That's a neat observation about the 6s and 10s, but I'm already tracking the Aces, Kings, and Phoenix & Dragon. I'm not going to attempt to track 18 cards, and those other 10 are much more important than tracking bombs IMNSHO. I do pay attention to what I'm dealt to see if I'm short-suited on anything, and I do try to minimize the likelihood of passing bombs. One very common and effective technique you didn't mention is agreeing with your partner to pass an even card to the right and an odd card to the left as much as is feasible, in order to avoid passing 4-of-a-kind bombs.
|
|
|
Jonny5 wrote: I do pay attention to what I'm dealt to see if I'm short-suited on anything, and I do try to minimize the likelihood of passing bombs. One very common and effective technique you didn't mention is agreeing with your partner to pass an even card to the right and an odd card to the left as much as is feasible, in order to avoid passing 4-of-a-kind bombs. The Fuegi convention! Yes - that's an easy way to avoid passing the same card to the same people. Occasionally it still happens. --- Also, I play bridge. Tracking 18 things isn't really that big of a deal.
|
|
|
Jonny5 wrote: That's a neat observation about the 6s and 10s, but I'm already tracking the Aces, Kings, and Phoenix & Dragon. I'm not going to attempt to track 18 cards, and those other 10 are much more important than tracking bombs IMNSHO. While you may be happy counting your 10 cards some of us count several more. I always try to keep track of the Queens and Jacks in addition to the cards already mentioned. Often, especially towards the later part of the hand, you'll want to know if your pair of Jacks is stronger than if you split them. Knowing what's out is always to your benefit.
|
|
|
Quote: Knowing what's out is always to your benefit. Absolutely, that goes without saying. And I think it's entirely possible that I could track 26 cards - but at what point does it become a dry mental exercise rather than a fun game? Tracking 10 cards and 'going by feel' on the rest is my personal balance between wanting to win and wanting to enjoy myself.
|
|
|
This is quite simply an awesome analysis.
|
|
|
ekted wrote: Very interesting analysis. But how do you use the info? Would you ever play differently if you know there is or isn't a bomb? Of course you'd play differently if you KNOW there's a bomb. The question(s) of relevance, to me, are: 1. Do you play differently if you THINK (but don't know) there's a bomb, and, if so, 2. How often does your play adjustment to play cautious against a feared / calculated-possible bomb that isn't actually out there cost you a hand you'd have won if not for this conservatism? That's my concern about this analysis (and I've done it before - at least the ranks side of it, not so much the straights - and it's why I seldom bother to do it anymore). Sometimes you won't be able to rule out the possibility of a bomb (say, 2 of the other players holding matching pairs). When that happens, and you lose a hand because you played needlessly overcautious because of your suspicions from this analysis, you start to wonder if this analysis is really leaving you ahead of the game, or if it's just causing you to worry yourself into at least as many hand losses as it aids you in ascertaining wins.
|
|
|
thatmarkguy wrote:
That's my concern about this analysis (and I've done it before - at least the ranks side of it, not so much the straights - and it's why I seldom bother to do it anymore). Sometimes you won't be able to rule out the possibility of a bomb (say, 2 of the other players holding matching pairs). When that happens, and you lose a hand because you played needlessly overcautious because of your suspicions from this analysis, you start to wonder if this analysis is really leaving you ahead of the game, or if it's just causing you to worry yourself into at least as many hand losses as it aids you in ascertaining wins.
It doesn't cause me to lose hands... it just allows me to adjust my style so that I take safer choices. It's especially helpful for those hands where you decide to sit back and call Tichu about halfway through the hand. You get a lot of knowledge that your combinations will hold (because you've seen the high card sets), there's no bombs, and you can end in a way to end with a lead so your partner may get a jump on a 1-2. Again, it comes to playing style. Some people take greater risks than others. The best example is holding a Dog and a Dragon, and you have the lead. It's pretty common end position. If I know there's no bombs, I play Dragon and exit with the Dog. If there's still a possibility of a bomb, then it's safest to play the Dog first. You'll still have a great chance of going out first. You'll just be giving up a lead to partner for a 1-2. To answer your questions specifically: Q. Do you play differently if you THINK (but don't know) there's a bomb, and, if so, I play more conservatively at the start. If I'm thinking about a Tichu, I may intentionally pass to let others dump their hands out. This allows me to get a count and do a bomb check. Also, if someone else calls Tichu when I have a Tichu hand, I'll really look for a bomb. It may be best not to call Tichu against a Tichu. But if there was enough information to rule out a good majority of bombs, I'll take the risk and call Tichu against the opponents. It's playing probability. Q. and, if so, How often does your play adjustment to play cautious against a feared / calculated-possible bomb that isn't actually out there cost you a hand you'd have won if not for this conservatism? Not often. I've avoided letting the opponents go out 1-2 when I suspect there's a bomb, but may have sacrificed some points with this play. In those cases, my partner will go out last. But it's saved getting my control bombed, and watching the other opponent go out second. Sacrificing some points to avoid a 200 pt loss is worth it. In the cases where someone had a triple and the other had a straight with the 4th card, it doesn't affect the gameplay much by playing conservative. In some cases, you may sacrifice a 1-2 situation, but typically you gain a Tichu in those types of situations. Some people go for the glory based on gut feelings, but I like go for the sure +100 than the possible +300. So I may have lost out slightly more than I think, but the hands where one person calls Tichu and the partner goes out 1-2 is not as often as one of the other opponents is able to go out first. In a situation where there's no Tichu (yours or your opponents), then I'm more likely to risk the bomb anyway for a shot at 1-2. With no bonus on the line, my judgement will depend on which hands got most of the points. If we did, I go conservative. If they did, I go for the glory. The whole point is that the decision can't be made alone on whether or not there may be a bomb. It takes other information to make the call on a specific hand. But when there's a possibility of a bomb, it's one of the things that should temper your judgement.
|
|
Posted Fri Jan 4,2008 11:11 pm
