In contract bridge, the principle of restricted choice states that play of a particular card decreases the probability its player holds any equivalent card. For example, South leads a low spade, West plays a low one, North plays the queen, East wins with the king. The ace and king are equivalent cards; East's play of the king decreases the probability East holds the ace – and increases the probability West holds the ace. The principle helps other players infer the locations of unobserved equivalent cards such as that spade ace after observing the king. The increase or decrease in probability is an example of Bayesian updating as evidence accumulates and particular applications of restricted choice are similar to the Monty Hall problem.
Jeff Rubens (1964, 457) stated the principle thus: "The play of a card which may have been selected as a choice of equal plays increases the chance that the player started with a holding in which his choice was restricted." Crucially, it helps play "in situations which used to be thought of as guesswork." In many of those situations the rule derived from the principle is to play for split honors. After observing one equivalent card, that is, one should continue play as if two equivalents were split between the opposing players, so that there was no choice about which one to play. Whoever played the first one doesn't have the other one.
When the number of equivalent cards is greater than two, the principle is complicated because their equivalence may not be manifest. When one partner holds ♣Q and ♣10, say, and the other holds ♣J, it is usually true that those three cards are equivalent but the one who holds two of them does not know it. Restricted choice is always introduced in terms of two touching cards – consecutive ranks in the same suit, such as ♥QJ or ♦KQ – where equivalence is manifest.
If there is no reason to prefer a specific card (for example to signal to partner), a player holding two or more equivalent cards should sometimes randomize their order of play (see the note on Nash equilibrium). The probability calculations in coverage of restricted choice often take uniform randomization for granted but that is problematic.
The principle of restricted choice even applies to an opponent's choice of an opening lead from equivalent suits. See Kelsey & Glauert (1980).
Read more about Principle Of Restricted Choice: Example, Better Calculation of Odds, Better Yet, Mathematic Theory
Famous quotes containing the words principle of, principle, restricted and/or choice:
“I sincerely believe ... that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale.”
—Thomas Jefferson (1743–1826)
“I often wish for the end of the wretched remnant of my life; and that wish is a rational one; but then the innate principle of self-preservation, wisely implanted in our natures, for obvious purposes, opposes that wish, and makes us endeavour to spin out our thread as long as we can, however decayed and rotten it may be.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)
“Growing up means letting go of the dearest megalomaniacal dreams of our childhood. Growing up means knowing they can’t be fulfilled. Growing up means gaining the wisdom and skills to get what we want within the limitations imposed by reality—a reality which consists of diminished powers, restricted freedoms and, with the people we love, imperfect connections.”
—Judith Viorst (20th century)
“Holofernes. He is too picked, too spruce, too affected, too odd as it were, too peregrinate as I may call it.
Sir Nathaniel. A most singular and choice epithet.”
—William Shakespeare (1564–1616)