Sets, trips and shocks

Which is kind of a back handed reference to “Eats, shoots and leaves”. I originally learned that joke in a rather ruder version concerning either a quokka or a kiwi (depending on whether it was being told by an Australian, or a ... um ... kiwi) to which the punchline was “Eats, roots, shoots and leaves.” And you can do your own web searches to sort that one out!

But on to today's main topic. I feel perhaps that I'm being an academic pedant here -- no, I know that I'm being an academic pedant here, but I think that thedistinction between sets and trips is both sensible and useful. The latest, otherwise exemplary blogger, who has offended in this regard is none other than the Hammer Player himself.

So what is this supposed distinction?

• Set: Three cards of the same rank, two hidden in hand, and one on the board.


• Trips: Three cards of the same rank, one hidden in hand, and two exposed on the board.

And why is it useful? Well mainly because the two situations often play very differently. A set is more hidden and less vulnerable since the board need not be paired, and if the board does pair it gives you a boat or DQB. But sometimes, especially with big sets like aces, it's actually harder to make money from them -- people are scared of a board with one ace, being worried about top pair, but somehow less scared of one with two. There's some justification for this in probability of course, at least without further information.

However, as Dorothy Hayden Truscott is reported to have said (about bridge, and before the advent of online play) “One twitch of an opponent's eyebrows is worth two degrees in mathematics.”