By the way, the goal of a deep finesse (in contrast to a simple finesse) is really to set your holding up for 2nd and 3rd round control of the suit -- it really isn't a play designed to win the first trick. The idea is that you hope only one of the missing honors is to your left, this way you gain 2nd and 3rd round control. But hey, if both are to your right, even better!
You can apply the "rule of restricted choice" here as well. If your LHO plays the king on the first round, it is very unlikely that he also has the missing queen due to the law of restricted choice, so you can safely finesse on the next round. However, if your LHO plays the queen on that first round, now you have a guess/choice to make on the next round. It's almost like a bath coupe, by taking the deep finesse you get to gather more information for the next round of the suit.
I like finessing the jack sometimes as long as I can deduce that partner doesn't hold the king. After all, that's the real risk -- that partner could lose a 2nd round winner. This is why lead conventions are so important to my strategy.
For instance, we agree to lead lowest card from strength (Q32 lead the 2) and top-of-nothing from weakness (1062 lead the 10). One example of why this is good for me because if I hold AJx, I know it's a 50 50 shot when partner leads me the 2. Now it's not a 'deep finesse' because I know partner has a missing honor -- it is now a simple finesse. The lead of the jack tells me either that partner has support in that suit, or is short in that suit. Both occasions where I'd like to set my holding up for 2nd and 3rd round control and not surrender the ace easily.
You know it's really rare for me to see an opponent take 3rd seat finesses with the jack -- really really rare. In fact, it's so rare that I almost never split my KQ in second seat. I really don't. I can count the number of times on one hand that this has backfired.Galt wrote:My only question is about your estimate of 99.99 on the deep finesse. Common, its gotta be higher than 1 out of 10,000. Don't ya think that it's at least 2?
I think it's a good play, but I hardly ever see it applied. I honestly think it might be around 1/10000. I mean on Yahoo spades alone, they have several hundred thousand players. Out of those players, I'd guess less than 500 have read a book on card theory. And of those maybe 1/10 correctly apply the theories. Of course, among competitive play you'll see it more frequently -- maybe 1% in that case!