quote:

---

Originally posted by rjstewar
Fair enough that there is a cost to make the change and mine is only one of many requests but I have to say I couldn't disagree more on your assessment of the "luck factor".

In my experience, if the bids are always even, players can "play it safe" and only make bets they are confident in making. In my experience, in a game with all good players, the player who is able to bid the highest number of tricks (determined almost completely by luck) will most often prevail with this rule. It is very difficult for those in behind to bring down a leader when there is little tension for tricks. In a game with "never even" bids - there is always tension in each round (there being too few or too many to go around at all times). This tension forces players always to be at odds with their opponents and prevents leaders from "playing it safe". I have always found that the "never even" rule allows players with superior strategy and adaptability to succeed most often (rather than players with superior cards). Sure, the "Canadian Rule" takes us part way there, but still allows the leader to relax when he or she is not the dealer or has hand that let's them bid zero.

I agree that in the early rounds of the game, the "next to impossible" bid situation does come up, but in rounds after the second or third a superior player should be adaptable enough to roll with a bid one above or below what is most convenient with his or her hand, and the challenge of making an off-hand is passed around equally with the deal anyway.

Just one opinion, but one I felt I should submit.

---

Fair enough that there is a cost to make the change and mine is only one of many requests but I have to say I couldn't disagree more on your assessment of the "luck factor".

In my experience, if the bids are always even, players can "play it safe" and only make bets they are confident in making. In my experience, in a game with all good players, the player who is able to bid the highest number of tricks (determined almost completely by luck) will most often prevail with this rule. It is very difficult for those in behind to bring down a leader when there is little tension for tricks. In a game with "never even" bids - there is always tension in each round (there being too few or too many to go around at all times). This tension forces players always to be at odds with their opponents and prevents leaders from "playing it safe". I have always found that the "never even" rule allows players with superior strategy and adaptability to succeed most often (rather than players with superior cards). Sure, the "Canadian Rule" takes us part way there, but still allows the leader to relax when he or she is not the dealer or has hand that let's them bid zero.

I agree that in the early rounds of the game, the "next to impossible" bid situation does come up, but in rounds after the second or third a superior player should be adaptable enough to roll with a bid one above or below what is most convenient with his or her hand, and the challenge of making an off-hand is passed around equally with the deal anyway.

Just one opinion, but one I felt I should submit.

I'd like to see some other rule options.
Specifically, the ability to play with no "even" bids allowed (dealer also has to make it over or under).

wizard reply: Yes, I understand. However there are so many other variations that it would be hard to provide all of them. See VARIATIONS under Bulletin Boards for a small sample.
It is true that the variation that you mention is one of the most common but each change in the program costs money and requires a new download by players.
The other problem that I have with the NEVER EVEN bid system is that it often results in a player having to make a next-to-impossibe bid. This reduces the skill level of the game and increases the luck level.