Played my first GERMAN game yesterday. Went down 3 times. Two of the losses were due to the "No Even Bids" rule. i.e. On hand two, a player bid 2 holding a King of Trump and a Wizard. I held 2 small off suits but could not bid zero. ???
Rules are only made to serve a meaningful purpose. The only rationale for the "No Even Bids" rule is to ensure that at least one player breaks on each hand.
This rationale makes no sense when it forces a player to make a senseless bid.
Despite this the German game remains very popular. Can someone explain this anomaly to me?

Ken-- I feel your pain. I will give you my spin, and will start by saying that the german "version" is a twist, just like delayed reveal or hidden bid, that forces different thinking. If in regular bid two people before you bid 1 on the first hand, even if you are holding ace of trump or a wizard, you would probably bid zero--- but in hidden or delayed, you don't KNOW what they bid and you bid one so probably miss your bid. Those versions make for odd bidding situations also.

In german, when I do a host, I almost always want to play with 5 people-- that is because with 10 hands, everyone then is "forced" to have the uneven bid handicap twice. In a 6 person game, because the first bid can be even, 3 will have the handicap twice and 3 will have it once, which seems unfair to me. Same thing happens with 4 player game-- not the same number of times getting that handicap. And when all the bids are even in a regular game, in some cases, it works to people's advantage to "play nice" so everyone makes their bids. You can't do that in german. It can become more cut-throat and it makes for more anxious moments-- wondering if the dealer had to bid zero even if they had a wizard they hoped to dump--- making you maybe play your wizard before you would have if you knew that person bid zero.

I would make the argument that at least in german version, everyone has the same disadvantage but in canadian rule, the only person disadvantaged (granted in very few instances, but disadvantaged nontheless) is the leader when THEY are forced to bid 0 with a wizard for instance as the last hand would have to be uneven.

In any case, always with 10 hands. Always uneven bids. Practice for international world championship. Different experience. Change of pace. All valid reasons why people could like that version.

BUT BEST OF ALL IS THE FACT THAT THIS WONDERFUL GAME YOU INVENTED HAS VARIOUS WAYS IT CAN BE PLAYED AND ENJOYED. IGNORE HULKAMUNDO AND GLOW IN THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE HUNDREDS OF PLAYERS CURRENTLY WHO LOVE YOUR GAME. THOUSANDS WHO HAVE PLAYED ON THE SITE DURING ITS EXISTENCE AND MILLIONS WHO HAVE PLAYED IT IN PERSON SINCE YOU BROUGHT IT TO THE PUBLIC.

I remain greatly appreciative of all that you have done, and continue to do for all of us.

Tim

Thanks for your comments and your rationale. The central question I posed was to ask why the "No Even Bid" rule is popular when it makes no sense. I can provide a rationale for any rule in any of the versions of Regular Wizard.
Regarding the current "Canadian Rule" the leader, if last on the final hand is NEVER placed in the position of making an impossible bid. Holding a Wizard on the final hand (with at least 9 other cards) the choice may be between bidding Zero or Two. Both of these options are viable. The player is never placed in the position of making an illogical bid. The question remains, "Why have a rule that forces a player to bid against his/her common sense?"
CORRECTION: The player is placed in the position of making an illogical bid if holding 4 Wizards and is not able to bid 4.

I found out the Wizard game in 2011, with the German deck. I learned to play with the "No Even Bids" rule, and I always played with that rule, until I discovered the original game, with the regular deck, at wizardcards.com, just a year ago.
I think not being able “Even Bids” adds a point of interest to the game strategy.
For example, it does not allow good play, in some cases, for everyone to live up to their prediction when even bids have been asked. And in every round at least one player must fail.
On the other hand, it is true that it seems an anomalous rule in some cases. Especially with few cards in play. You may not be able to request a bid with a very secure card, or you may be forced to bid for one without a card capable of winning.
This happens relatively rarely in a high number of plays, and always randomly affects one player or another, but never the same, statistically.
I believe that this so-called anomaly should be considered as a vicissitude of playing, of chance, of luck.
Luck that sometimes gives you very easy or very difficult cards to play, or luck that gives you (or deprives you) of a bad move from a rival.
If we seek the perfection of the rule in its spirit of justice, I might agree that there is an anomaly.
But I think the added value that this rule provides to the game, the fact that you can’t “Even Bids” and that at least one player always fails, is a minimum price that can be paid.
Thanks for the post. The basic premise used to devise the original rules was to eliminate as much "Luck" as possible and to imbue as much "Skill" as possible. The "No Even Bids" rule violates this principle.
Even bids do not encourage good play? There is no better time for a player with a strong and flexible hand to decimate opponents. By ensuring that an opponent does not make his/her bid at least 2 players go down.
The Luck factor infused into the "No Even Bids" game results in the regular game favoring the skilled player. Hence a top player will be more successful when playing the regular game than when playing the German game.
I agree with what you say. But in my experience, since I play alternating regular game and German deck games, I can say that in general I find it easier to hit the bids in regular game (which doesn't mean winning games), than when I play with German deck, precisely because someone has to fail necessarily, which always forces me to play with more tension, and optimize game control to ensure success.

I avoid the German version -- mostly because I can't distinguish the colors well enough - especially the green and blue. Could the colors be more distinct? That would certainly help.
FYI -- I have played wizard games regularly with 7 or 8 people. One weekend 2 summers ago - we have an 11 person game. You can't afford to go set in those games. They were definitely fun. Thanks, Ken for this game - in all its versions.
The colors are problematic but reprogramming them is expensive. It is on a future list of things to do.

I have been in very many German games
I have been in games where the first 8 hands the dealer, when forced to uneven, missed their bids.
The German game if you don't have a jester you're likely to not make your bid. The other disadvantage with uneven bids, is you lose the ability to have an even bid and make 2 people miss in the same hand. In an even bid, if you can take a winning card away from a player, they will likely not make their bid which means, another player will get an extra. In a German game when the level of skill is high, you will only get 1 player to miss per round.
Ken is also correct, too often I've been in a tournament where you have nothing in your hand and are forced to bid, or you have something in your hand and forced to try to bury it.
I have found that the German game depends more on the cards you have then the skill you have.
Every hand you sit there and say to yourself - ok if it's underbid do I have the ability to dump these cards or if it's an over bid do I have the ability to win with these cards. You are never really bidding based on the cards you have - you are guessing if it's going to be over or under.
Thanks for the input.