Some players might be tempted to throw the 2 of spades, figuring that they are holding a choice of 3-4-5 of clubs or three 4s; and depending on which they use, both the 5 of clubs and the 4 of spades appear to be good layoff cards on free gin rumy game. (Remember, my opponent picked up the 5 of spades at the beginning of the hand.) However, the fact should not be ignored that the 2 of spades offers fine possibilities for additional melds, and its low face value is of prime importance in a low knock hand. On the other hand, discarding the 8 of diamonds can give my opponent at best a three card run, since I hold the 10 and 6 of diamonds, and the 6 of diamonds would in that case serve as a layoff.
My opponent draws a 9 of hearts and throws it. I pull the 2 of hearts from the deck. The 6 of diamonds in my hand matches nothing, and many players would consider it an automatic discard. In terms of my hand this seems easy to excuse. If you drop the 6 of diamonds, there’s a chance the other player will drop a 6 of clubs on top of it as a “safe play” which you can then pick up and add to your 3-4-5 club run. This is where the non-alert player makes the error of playing his own hand only and not his opponent’s as well.
Study the previous steps in the hand and you will realize that Kings, Jacks, 10s, 9s, 8s, 4s, 3s, and 2s either are dead or have little chance of developing into any profitable combinations for the other player. Chances are he is depending on Aces, 6s, and perhaps 7s to fill his hand. Regarded in that light, the 6 of diamonds becomes a dan-gerous throw. I discard instead the 4 of hearts, which commits me to my 3-4-5 club run. My opponent can use the 4 of hearts only in a run, which makes my 2 of hearts a good layoff card.
My opponent draws from the deck and discards the 4 of diamonds. Aha! you are saying, if you had discarded the 6 of diamonds on the last play, you would now have a spread of three 4s. This is a long shot. My opponent may have been holding the 4 of diamonds for some time, and may finally have thrown it only because I had thrown the 4 of hearts.
I draw the 7 of spades. This discloses that since I also hold the 4 of spades, my opponent must have been filling in a spread of 5s when he picked up the original 5 of spades knock card. If he had established himself as a conservative player, there would be no question in my mind that the 4 of spades is a safe discard. Since I have already seen evidence that my opponent is a speculative player, I dwell upon this before making a decision. I could discard the 6 of diamonds or the 7 of spades, both of which are wild cards, but I might be lucky enough to snare a matching card to the 2 of hearts, 2 of spades, 4 of spades that I hold (either a third deuce or the 3 of spades).
In the end, I make the percentage play and discard the 4 of spades. My opponent promptly picks up the 4 of spades and discards the deuce of diamonds. I pick up the deuce of diamonds and choose to discard the 7 of spades rather than the 6 of diamonds. If my opponent picked up the 6 to make three 6s, it would eliminate the possibility of his discarding the 6 of clubs to add to my 3-4-5 run. On the other hand, it is now obvious that my opponent has a run in spades. Whether it is 3-4-5, 4-5-6, or 3-4-5-6 I’m not certain. My 7 of spades may add to the sequence. Yet I would rather give him one additional card to an existing run than risk handing him a spread of 6s independent of his 3-4-5 spade run.
This scenario can exist if you think your opponent has you under the cash, you emerge out of it reasonably unscathed and then your opponent offers you a draw. You heave a sigh of relief and you accept his offer only to find out later that you were winning!! I felt this way in the very recent game concerned.
Comments (1)