text:
In Ticket to Ride, do cities have to be connected in the same order as on the ticket?
Is the direction of the ticket important? Do cities have to be connected in the order shown on the ticket?
For example, if I am attempting to claim the Rostov-Erzurum ticket, can I connect Erzurum to Rostov instead of connecting Rostov to Erzurum?

How could you connect Erzurum to Rostov without connecting Rostov to Erzurum?

By building the majority of the route from Erzurum outwards, or by first connecting Erzurum to the network that eventually also connects to Rostov.

@Nij, I don't see how that gives any ordering to the connection. At some point, you place a single section of track that causes the 2 cities to be connected. Whether that final section is directly connected to Rostov, directly connected to Erzurum, or simply connected somewhere in the middle in between the two, makes no difference.

The idea of "to" implies a "from". If the network is already connected with one city, it cannot be going to that city, since no from exists. But add the last link, and the network has come from the first city to the second.

But a from does exist... every track segment connects A and B. The from just isn't one of your 2 destination cities yet. This is consistent with both the rules of the game and be way English works. If someone builds an actual road from one city to another; you could either say "this road goes from city A to city B" or "this road goes from city B to city A", and both would be equally correct.

@tttppp, That question isn't about Ticket to Ride: Europe. That said, I've edited the leading answer to mention Europe, so everything should be ok now.

It's a circular argument to say the rules make the from-to relationship commutative, ahem that is the point of the question itself. And if you wish to use an origin somewhere in the existing network, then both the cities will be from that origin. You cannot use directional statements to explain a non-directional situation. "From X to Y" is not the same thing as "from Y to X" and neither is the same thing as "a non-directed route exists between the unordered pair X, Y".

In both Ticket to Ride and Ticket to Ride: Europe, routes can be completed in any order, and there's no concept of direction of travel. All that matters is whether you can reach one of the cities from the other at the end of the game.

If, by the end of the game, a player has created a continuous path of his color plastic trains between the two cities named on a Destination Ticket he holds, he scores the additional points indicated by the Point Value on the Ticket. If he has failed to complete a continuous path between those cities, he deducts the Point Value on the Ticket from his total score.

A path between cities must be created. Nothing about traveling from one of the cities to the other city.
For example, you could satisfy a Rostov-Erzurum ticket by having built Erzurum-Sevastopol, Rostov-Sochi, and Sevastopol-Sochi in any order.

This is a related question about Train Stations in Ticket to Ride: Europe.

Did you mean to say "routes can be completed in any order"?

@BJ Myers, Indeed! Fixed.

Why do you specify US and Europe version? Do you mean it's different in any other version?

@Andreas, The OP tagged TtoR, but used a TtoR:E example. To avoid confusion, I specified the answer applies to both. I can't speak for other versions.

Ok! Got it. I thought you knew something I didn't

The direction of the connection doesn’t matter, just that the two cities are connected by a train path in your colour. It doesn’t even have to be the shortest route or the most direct route, as long as the path is uninterrupted between the two cities on the ticket.


text:
Does a player always has to have uncompleted destination tickets on-hand?
When you finish your routes, do you have to draw new ones?

No.
If you do complete all your routes, it is often a good idea to collect more since each route completed adds to your score, however this is very dependent on the current game situation (how many routes are free, how close it is to game end, how flexible your current rail system is) as you also risk drawing new cards that you can't complete and which would penalize you. However, there is nothing mandating that you always have tickets to complete: Since the contents of your tickets is not public information nobody should know that you've completed all your tickets until game end, so such a rule would be mostly unenforceable anyway.
According to the rules, the game turn consists of taking one (and only one) of the following four actions:

Draw Train Car Cards
Claim a Route
Draw Destination Tickets
Build a Train Station

However, there is absolutely nothing in the rules which tells you to take one of these actions over the others in any situation: It is entirely your choice as to which of the four actions to take.
Literally the only case I can conceive of where you'd be forced to collect more destination tickets (aside from the ones drawn during game setup) would be if the other three actions were, for whatever reason, unavailable to you. This would basically mean that there are (a) no train cards to draw, (b) you can't afford to claim any routes, and (c) you've already deployed your station. And if this does happen to you, you've probably already lost.

I wouldn't force a person to draw destination cards in that situation either.

@ikegami The rules specifically state that if no train cards are available to draw, the player must take one of the other three actions. I would assume from this that if building a station and claiming a route were not viable actions you would still have to perform the last possible action open to you: draw destinations. However I would consider it horrible sportsmanship if the other players were to hoard all the train cards just to force me to draw multiple unwanted destinations.

Yes, I know. And like I said, I wouldn't force a person to draw destination cards in that situation either. Rewarding someone for hogging all the cards can't possibly be what the designers envisioned. (All this is assuming it's actually possible to get into that situation, but that may be impossible.)

source: Stack Exchange

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

sort: votes


text:
In Gin-Rummy, what is the bonus points for Gin and Undercut?
In the traditional rules of Gin-Rummy:

Is going Gin worth 20 or 25 points?
Is undercutting worth 10 points?
If a player knocks and is undercut by their opponent and this opponent lays off and has no deadwood, do they get a Gin bonus of having no deadwood?

One variant of rules can be found here

It looks like you are asking multiple questions and it is best to split them up into separate questions so they can all get properly answered

Gin-Rummy has many scoring variantions.  As Andrew suggested in a comment, Paget is a good source for rules of card games.
From Paget:

Some people play that the bonus for going gin is 25 (rather than 20)
  and the bonus for an undercut is 20 (rather than 10). Some play that
  the bonus for an undercut, the bonus for going gin, and the box bonus
  for each game won are all 25 points.

The score on Wikipedia are 25 points per gin, undercut and box bonus.
Both Zinga's popular app Gin Rummy Plus, and cardgames.io use 25 points bonuses for undercuts, gin and box bonus.
For the third question, the answer is no, that player just get the undercut bonus.

all_licenses: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Jacoby transfer bid after responder bids
If my partner responds 2D to my 1NT opening bid. I have zero to 2 cards in Hearts.
What do I bid?

Why would you open 1NT with less than 2 cards in every suit? How can your 1NT opening have less than 2 hearts? Can you elaborate on that?

@steenbergh: It s not at all uncommon in top level play for 1NT openings to be made on a holding of stiff K in a suit, for example. At that level, it may be more important systemically on some awkward distributions to show point count and even distribution of strength. OP is unlikely to be that category of player, but you should not assume he is unaware of the possibility.

I have even attempted it myself a couple of times, with a partner who will understand if it goes wrong. one attempt was a flat result. On the other I had Joel Wooldridge completely fooled on defence for a 13 IMP swing, but partner lost faith and gave the even result  back to him.

tl;dr 2H
I think you need to understand the concept of Captaincy.
During the process of bidding, it is not always the case where both players are trying to exchange information on an even ground. Sometimes one player will become the Captain and await his partner to give him the information. In other words, the Captain has the say to this bidding sequence. His partner should follow and respect the Captain's decision.
In your scenario, whenever you open a natural 1NT, you immediately surrender your hand to his partner. Your partner will dictate how the bidding should go. If he decides a transfer should complete this bidding, you are obliged to accept this transfer.
There are two circumstances that you can have a say about the bidding:
1) When partner passes the ball back to you. Example: You open 1NT, letting your partner do whatever he likes. He now bids a natural 2NT as an invitation. Now he passes the ball to you and you will decide whether you should go game or settle for partscore.
2) When you like what your partner is doing and decide that a simple "I accept" response is not enough to allow partner make the correct decision. Example: You open 1NT, your partner bids 2D as a transfer to 2H. You hold massive (say 4-card) support and good controls, and you are afraid that a simple 2H response will make your partner ship miss a light game. You can refuse this transfer by bidding 3H, or some other bids that your partnership has agreed to.
You open 1NT thereby letting your partner be the captain. He asks you to bid 2H. He does not pass the decision to you and you actually dislike Hearts. You have no choice but to believe 2H is the correct bid. After all you are not sure what hand he has - he may have a massive hand wanting to bid some more after you accept the transfer, or he may have a Yarborough with only a string of Hearts and you definitely want to play in 2H. Your partner is the Captain and you better respect his decision.
As for why you would have a void in Hearts after opening 1NT, you will explain this to your partner. But even holding a void you should still accept this transfer: better play in 2H than some four-level nonsense doubled.

Where is my DOUBLE card? I want to up-vote this multiple times.

(Note that some unusual systems may behave differently, but I think I'm giving the right answer to all of the common systems employing transfers, including Standard American (and 2/1), Acol, SEF, and Precision.)
A 1NT opening bid promises a balanced hand (or sometimes a semibalanced hand) as well as the agreed point range.  This means you must have at least 2 cards in every suit to open 1NT.
If you have only 2 cards in hearts, you still bid 2H.  If partner has a weak hand, then playing in a 5-2 fit at the 2 level is still your best contract (and, in particular, better than 1NT or 2NT).  If partner has an invitational or better hand, you will have more chances to clarify whether you have only 2 or at least 3 cards in hearts.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/


text:
Bridge - 2 club opening (playing standard american) with shape and not HCP?
If I have say,
S: AKQ1098
H: A32
D: KQJ10
C: -

With a hand like this, could I open 2 clubs?
Could the opponents call the Tournament Director on me?
What else could I bid to ensure my partner wouldn't pass on me...

Your opponents can always call the director if he suspects any irregularities - it is your opponents' right to do so. However, whether the director will do anything at all... not likely in this case. After all you only have 3.5 losers. As long as your convention card clearly states your 2C opening shows strength in terms of either HCP, playing tricks or losers, you can always get away with that.

I don't understand your concern. Which regulation do you think you might be violating? As for bridge logic, surely 2c is the best opening. As you imply, anything else risks missing a cold game or even playing a good slam in a part-score. Picture partner with xx x xxxxxx xxxx.

Actually, the minimum acceptable hand for 2 clubs according to the ABL is something like AKQxxxxx JT9x x ---, which has 10 hcps, but will make ten tricks with "minimal" help (e.g. Q of hearts or any ace) from partner. Your hand is way above that.

This is a bit of a tough hand. I think that opening 2C is fine. You're not grossly distorting the strength of the hand (as you would be with e.g. AKQJxxxxx xx xx -void-). You'll rebid 2S; if partner supports then you can start cue-bidding and if not you can bid diamonds.
If you swapped your clubs and spades, you might open 1C, planning to reverse into diamonds, as 1C is unlikely to get passed out when you hold only 19 HCP.

If one holds a 0346 shape one should be very careful about opening 1C or 2C. True that 1C is rarely passed out, but more often is that you will find yourself bidding over your RHO's 4S when the board is passed back to you. The goal of this hand is to sneak past your opponents' Spade fit and still express your enormous strength. If your opponent are the more conservative players when competing against a string opening, a 2C opening is actually better than 1C  in the sense that it attracts less interference.

@petqwe: Well stated. Would you care to expand on any points I have made below?

When you make a 2C opener (other than with a balanced hand too strong for a 2NT opener) you are making two promises to your partner in addition to the advertised playing strength:

Partner can safely double any opposing contract that outbids your side, even and especially with a bust, as a means of denying interest in further bidding, confident that the opponents will be set multiple tricks.
That your hand can be further described in shape with a single call. If you will need more than a single bid to describe your hand then it is almost always better to open with one of a suit instead. Exceptions should be well above minimum for a 2C opener in both offense and defense.

The reason for the first is obvious - if you are going to advertise great strength before a fit is found with partner, you must be prepared to punish opponents who interfere.
The reason for the second is more subtle; because you are consuming so much space, it is necessary that partner be capable of making decisions on level and denomination. This can only happen if you can complete the description of your hand quickly.
Your given hand meets the basic requirements for a Strong 2C, and easily meets the first extra requirement above. (Since if opponents are competing in Clubs, you are going to bid on.)
However you are not meeting the second requirement above particularly well. It is easy to construct hand for partner such as:
S: x
H: xxxx
D: A97x
C: xxxx

that will play one or even two tricks better in diamonds than in Spades. You may not be able to find the excellent diamond fit after an auction such as:
2C  3C  *  5C
?

where partner's double of 3C states that he is not broke.
The auction
1S  3C  *  5C
5D

is not only very much easier for both you and partner to handle, but after the 1S opening it is less likely to have escalated to the 5 level on the first round.
I vastly prefer a 1S opening, especially against strong opponents so as to not lose the possibility of playing in a second suit.
However, against weak opponents you might open 2C in case they don't understand the reopening process.
You need have no qualms that a director might rule against you: You easily surpass the requirement for 8.5 playing tricks and 4 honour tricks, having 9.5 and 4 (or even 4.25, counting the diamond combination in a 4-card suit as 1.25) respectively.

I'm a bit surprised at your answer. I fear the danger that if partner has say, KQxx or KJxx in clubs, and the opponents each have 8-9 points, that the hand will be passed out, because suit overcalls need to be made at the two level. I would be much more inclined to agree if your long suit were hearts, because partner or opponents would likely bid 1S. Also, while partner's Axxx of diamonds could play a trick better in that suit than in spades, I don't see the merits of a 5D contract over a 4S contract. Again, switch opener's diamonds and hearts, and I'd agree with you.

@TomAu: Strong opponents don't bid so cautiously - only weak opponents do.

So there's a "trap" element in your 1S bid? If partner passes with KQxxx of clubs and no other honors, some opponent could reopen double with 8 hcps and 1-4-4-4, thinking that partner has 11-13 for an overcall, when s/he only has 8?

@TomAu: Not at all. There are 21 HCP and likely 5-6 distributional points distributed amongst the other three players, for an average of 7-9 points each and about 26 total. If partner has no Ace; no KQ in a suit; and < 6 points total, that is a hand where making 4S might actually be dicey; unless partner has >= 3 spades which then guarantees additional distributional points for the opponents and virtually ensures their ability to reenter. Opponent in fourth seat will be protecting against a trap-pass by opponent in second seat, and against strong opponents you can rely on it.

OK, I think I get it. The potential "trap" is with LHO, not with you, which is why RHO re-opens. But I believe that only two spades with partner makes you a favorite to drop the J (all opposing 3-2s, plus singleton jacks), plus the fact that partner may have the J himself, and make 4S.

@TomAu: Partner knows that either Jxx and Jx in Spades is a two point holding, so you are adding points to the deck and wondering why 1S won't get passed out? You have to find ways to minimized the total points in the deck, not maximize them, in order for 1S to get passed out.

The "best hand" that partner could pass with, measured as minimizing total points held by the opponents while maximizing our trick potential, is something like: xx Kxx xxx JTxxx, for about 5.5 total points. I find it difficult to improve this hand without it becoming an automatic response.

You can open 2 clubs. This particular bid says nothing about "clubs." You have a solid, playable standalone suit (spades), 19 points in high cards, and at least 24-25, counting your void and sixth spade. This is the only absolutely forcing opening bid (because it is artificial), and partner must respond, unless the opponents intervene.
Partner will likely respond 2 diamonds (waiting), unless s/he has something "positive" to say, and you will bid your "real" suit, 2 spades.
Neither partner nor opponents can "reasonably" get mad at you. "Two clubs" describes your hand (as in paragraph 1). Your high card points of 19 are "close enough" to the low twenties, and the unusually good distribution puts you firmly in the right zone for total points. (You would need another ace or king if your distribution were 5-3-3-2, but as it is, your void gives you enough strength.)
People used to (50-75 years ago) bid "two spades" with this hand, but nowadays, it would suggest a much weaker hand,e.g. AKQT98 of spades without the "side" honors.


text:
Bridge auction and play with a 5521 hand opposite 1255
Playing at a matchpoint Swiss pairs event yesterday, I played this hand as north.
Our auction went 1♤-2♢-2♡-3NT-4♡. I had difficulty choosing what to bid over 3NT. South could have bid the fourth suit to look for a major fit so I knew I would likely be playing in a seven card fit. What action would you take and why?
I also found the play interesting. East lead ♡10, Q - K - A. I then made a plan for the play: ♤ AK, ♤ ruff, ♧AK, ♧ruff high, ◇A,◇ruff low and then get a trick from ♡8x (since the lead makes it look like the Jack is onside). Roughly I need 4-3 spades, 4-2 diamonds, 4-3 or 2=5 clubs. Is there a better line of play?

You could pass 3NT. Your line of play looks pretty reasonable.

With your previous bids, you can go for 4NT (BlackWood ask for A) and then play 5NT.

@iBug Without a suit agreed I would suggest 4NT is a quantative invite to 6NT.  If 4NT was asking for aces, I can't sign off in 5NT as this is would ask for kings.

You could attack Diamonds before touching clubs, while the A♧ is still an entry to south. This sets up a long diamond, but it works only if the opp with short diamonds is also short in trump. On the actual lie, the long diamonds will be trumped.
You don't mention it, but on your line a diamond must have been discarded on the second club trick so that the second diamond can be trumped.
You also don't mention but in the 4-card ending when you hold ♤Tx ♡8x  in the north hand, (after the Diamond ruff) you must lead a spade so that the opponets will have to lead trump into your 8x. This works on the actual lie.
I don't see a celarly better line of play.
On bidding, I agree with the comment that you could stop in 3NT. But on the actual lie, i don't see a play for 9 tricks, with neither black suit breaking favorably.
And I don't see a good reason to try for slam over 3NT. It certainly doesn't work on the actual lie, but with no running suit and no more than 28 HCP between the hands, it is hard to see how slam is plausible. Also the 3NT bid seems to deny any slam inters.

Duck the HK on trick 1; smoooooothly.
The lead has revealed both that HJ is in West, and that West has the long trumps (as East would have lead a low Heart with length
West's options are now:

Continues a low Heart.
Win low, cash HA and lead a low Spade to the 9to set up a third Spade trick.
Continues HJ.
Win with HA, cash H8 and H9 and lead a low Spade to the 9, as above.
Lead a Club.
Win in Dummy and lead a low Diamond to the Q.
Lead a low Dimaond.
Win in hand, cash two clubs and lead a heart from Dummy for the finesse.
Lead Diamond King.
Win in Dummy and lead a low Heart for the finesse.
Lead a Spade.
Ride to the 9.

By retaining control of the Heart suit after the initial duck at Trick 1 you give opponents a tough time to determine a winning defense without the additional information of knowing what suit you are going to try and set up (Spades).
After the Duck you hope to establish 3 or 4 Hearts, 3 Spades, 2 Diamonds (since DK is onside) and 2 Clubs for 10 or 11 tricks.

On the bidding I see no issue with either passing 3NT or the actual call of 4H. A gross misfit is revealed - but it is more evident to both you and partner than to the opponents. Any further action will only raise the auction, reveal the extent of the misfit to opponents, entice a penalty double, and assist the defense in their play. Time to get out.

West's best play is a low heart, seems to me, which takes away the ruff in dummy and gives them a pretty straightforward route to 4 tricks (heart, diamond, two more black suit tricks).  You need that ruff in dummy for transportation to try and develop the Qd as a trick (which you can).  In fact, West likely gets a second heart trick - you're forced to win with the 8 after the lead, which means West has J6 around your A9, and you can't really do a ruffing finesse here, or at least not more than one, so you will likely lose a second heart as well - for down 2 or 3.

@Joe: No. Double Dummy is only 9 tricks for NS, so let's get those. Win heart return; cross to CA; rough small club; cross to DA; win CK; rough small club; cash SA & SK and exit small Spade with 8 tricks in and Heart A in hand for #9. Down 1, the double dummy result.

Double dummy, sure, but I don't think you do that in real play (and the question is not about double dummy play).


text:
BRIDGE - What to do with 5 or more trumps in my partners (opening) major?
While playing Standard American, If my partner opens 1 of a Major and I (as responder) have 5 cards in the same Major and 4/5 POINTS, what do I respond, 4 of the Major or something else ? Thanks.

It depends on a few things, but basically you have a choice between a simple raise to 2M or a jump to 4M. First, did partner open in first seat, or later? If partner opened in first seat, your LHO has not had a chance to enter the auction yet and opponents are more likely to have a game. This makes the jump to 4 of the major more attractive. If LHO has already passed, opponents are unlikely to have a game, so the preemptive value of 4M is less useful and partner may have some extras. When partner has moderate extras, you're propelling your side to a shaky contract at best while the opponents are unlikely to find a plus.
Next, what is the shape of your hand? If it's 5332, 4M is less attractive. If it's 5431 or shapelier, 4M is more attractive.
If you decide to bid 2M only, your plan is to bid 3M over opponent's part-score interference and then go away, and not to accept partner's game tries. If you bid 4M, you've essentially shown your hand and you're done in the auction unless partner makes some forcing bid (essentially a cue bid or blackwood).

i agree...I would probably bid 4M with the objective of keeping the opponents out of the contract.

In Standard American, the normal bid is to raise to two of the major.
You are a bit "light" in points for this raise, but you also have two extra trumps (over three) to compensate, so you can think of your hand as a bit "better" than 6-7 points. More, if the "two extra trumps" means that you have a singleton or void elsewhere in your hand.
It is under some alternate bidding systems, like the one proposed by Larry Cohen and Marty Bergen of "the Law of Total Tricks, that you should go directly to four of the major with your known ten card major fit. The reasons they give are as follows:
1) If you and your partner have 17 points and ten trumps between you, you should make nine tricks (down one).
2) If partner has "extras" (16-17 or more), you should make your contract with about 20 points and ten trumps in total.
3) If you and partner have 10 in one major, the opponents are likely to have 10 in the other major, and one (or both) partnerships will probably have the 20 points and ten trumps needed to make four of a major. And if your side has less than 20, your sacrifice in 1) may "head off" an opposing game.

This highly depends on the shape of the rest of your hand. Note that my answer (and my experience) doesn't come from the Standard American system.
When you know you have a fit with your partner, you can add points for distribution. As a rule of thumb:

One additional point for each trump over the eighth
Three points for a renonce/void
Two points for a singelton
One point for a doubleton

For instance, partner opened Spades (as a 5-card) and you hold
Kxxxx
Qxxx

xxxx

This hand shows 5 HCP, and 2 additional points for the trumps, and 3 points for the lack of diamonds for a total of 10. Bidding 3 Spades as a game invite is a serious option in this case.
However, a hand like this:
Kxxxx
Jx
xxx
xxx

has only 4 HCP, 2 extra trumps, but really no redeeming value in distribution. Your doubleton is worth only 1 additional point, but it also already holds a point in Hearts, so you can't count it for distribution as well. This hand shows about 6 points total, a limit raise to 2 Spades is the best call in this case.

I cannot imagine passing the second hand. Do you think the 4th seat will let the auction pass so peacefully?

@petqwe Edited, you're right about the pass.

Likewise, respond 4M with the first hand. The opponents may well have the greater strength total, perhaps even slam, so make them guess at the five level right away. Partner is very unlikely to get seriously hurt by that call.


text:
Acol Bridge card game
I am playing game in 4 hearts and get four.  The opponents revoke on the 12th trick. If they had not revoked they would of taken us down one trick.
Do we get our four hearts?
I know a revoke does not get a penalty with the last two tricks of a hand being played.

No penalty, but the revoke is still corrected.. See the answer by Fabian velow.

From the ACBL Rules:

Law 62.D is first applied:

On the 12th trick, a revoke, even if established, must be corrected if discovered before all four hands have been returned to the board.

In Switzerland we have the same ruling for a trick 12 Revoke.
So the revoke will be fully corrected without penalty and the hand is one down.

I think that's actually from the World Bridge Federation Laws, approved by the ACBL, the European Bridge Federation and - most important since OP specifed 'Acol Bridge' - the EBU.


text:
Different between Capsa, Big two and Daifugō
Is there any rule difference between Capsa (Indonesia), Big two (USA) and Daifugō (Japan)?
Can someone explain it to me?

According to Wikipedia, Cap Sa and Big Two are the same game while Daifugo has slightly different rules. I could scrutinize those pages and try to summarize the differences here, but I think there's no point: based on this list and my experience, there are so many variations of these games that you will likely never find two people who play by the same rules anyway. So while it helps to have a general idea of how this class of "shedding" games works, if you're playing with someone new you'll have to review all your rules or learn all theirs regardless of which game you are nominally playing.


text:
In UNO with card stacking rules, can you stack the opponents final card?
While playing UNO in the end only two players were left.
Player 1 had five cards and player 2 had two cards (both of them a 'Draw 2').

Player 2 puts down the first 'Draw 2' card, and calls UNO.
Player 1 stacks on it a 'Draw 2' card.
Player 2 puts down his last card that is a 'Draw 2'.
Player 1 again stacks on it a 'Draw 2' card.

Does that last 'Draw 2' apply to player 2 or has he won?

We have played with this house rule in our gaming group before and we resolved it in the same way we resolve MTG (Magic the Gathering) chains and that is the action must resolve upon the final valid play. So, if you are playing with the chain draw 2 house rule, in your scenario where there are two players remaining, the player who is unable to add another draw 2 into the chain is the one who gets stuck drawing as many cards as are in the stack.
If this results in one of the two players going out, that player wins. Otherwise, they draw more cards and the game continues.
The "As soon as one player goes out" rule as it was originally written for Uno did not take into effect this "chain stacking" house rule. In order to be the most correct, it must be interpreted to mean "As soon as one player goes out at the end of a play". In this case, the draw 2 chain is considered a single play as the draw 2 chain only stops (resolves) on the player that cannot place a draw 2 on the stack.
As a final note, we ultimately did away with Chain draw 2 combinations because of this exact argument we would have every time a new player arrived. If two players remain, player one has 5 cards, player two has 2 cards, player two gives player one a Draw 2, then player one draws 2 cards, then plays a Draw 2 back on Player two. No stacking or chaining is in effect, so Player two now has 3 cards and Player one has 6, and the game continues.

From what you describe with Magic I'm not sure if you mean people keep having a chance to add to the stack, or if you mean you fully resolve the stack before players lose. The second would be a house rule, since players lose when state-based actions are checked, which is in between resolving items on the stack.

What I was trying to describe is that if nobody has drawn any cards, the card is still "in play" waiting to resolve similar to the way instants work in MTG. So there is a big stack of draw 2 cards waiting to be applied to a single player. I apologize if there was confusion.

Since you are playing with (at least) two house rules that drastically change the game your question could be answered many ways. However since in the basic rules the game ends as soon as someone is out of cards I would say that in this case as soon as a player plays the last card they are removed from the game. Since there was only two players left that would end the game completely.

Out of interest, which two house rules? I can see one: Allowing a draw2 to be placed on a draw2 to "pass it along".

@Pod Chain draw two is a house rule as in the official rules your turn ends when a draw two card is played on you. Also as I mentioned the game ends when the first player runs out of cards.

As per the rules, the game would end when the cards count turns to be zero. But when the opponent places a draw-2 card, player 2 needs to stack up again.

No, because the official rules do not allow the second player to place a draw 2 card.

When a draw 2 card is placed by player 1, player 2 has an equal chance of placing a draw 2 card of any color.

Why not? When a player places draw 2 card, the opponent has an equal chance of placing another draw 2 card.

No, they don't. As JoeW has pointed out in this answer, the option for player 2 to respond with a Draw 2 is a house rule. It is not in the official rules.


text:
In Phase 10, can you draw any card from the discard pile or just the top card?
I am new to the Phase 10 game and still confused about the discard pile.
Can a player draw any card from the discard pile or just the top card?
Is the discard pile only one single stack?

You can only draw the top of the discard pile. From the rules:

On your turn, draw one card, either the top card from the draw pile or the top card from the discard pile, and add it to your hand. End your turn by discarding any one of your cards onto the top of the discard pile.

So the discard pile is 1 single stack, like the draw pile, with only the top card visible.


text:
What is the purpose of bonus points in Gin Rummy?
What purpose do the bonus points after a player wins a game of Gin Serve?
Let's say two players agree to play a game to 100 points. At the end of the game, the typical rules call for bonus points to be awarded: 25 points for each winning hand, 100 points to the winner, double points for a shutout...  Why?
If I was the player that reached 100 first, what good are even more points?
I'm assuming that this is a method for placing wagers on the game?
And how (if at all) do bonus points factor into games where the players agree to a "best of five games (e.g.) arrangement?

The most common way of betting money on Gin Rummy (according to this site) is to choose a rate per point (say $1) that the loser pays the winner - e.g. if you lose 70 to 220, you pay $150. When you're playing for money, there's probably an approximate stake you want to play for - smaller stakes will feel trivial (who wants to win one penny?) but larger stakes could be devastating if you lose. Without bonus points, a win could be anywhere from 1 point to ~150, and there may be no per-point rate which is non-trivial when multiplied by 1 yet non-devastating multiplied by 150. Bonus points - say 100 for winning - are a simple way to decrease this variance, since now spreads will be between 101 and ~250, so the worst possible loss is only ~2.5 times as bad (or good, for the other guy) as the closest possible spread.
As far as I can tell, best-of-5 matches tend to be played in settings where bonus points are not relevant, e.g. tournaments where all that matters is who wins the match.

Won't 100 for winning make the spread worse?  The winner is already ahead (definition of winning); now they get 100 for winning, 25 for each hand won, double for shutout, etc. -- all these things put the winner still further ahead.  IOW, you've got the bonus points backward.  Shutout -- you get 100 for the win, 25 for each hand played (since you won them all), and double for shutout, that looks like 500-600 points from a 100 point game.

The key idea is that what matters is the ratio between the biggest possible win and the smallest possible win. So if the win bonus were a thousand points, that would decrease the variance because you could play for a penny a point and find yourself paying almost exactly $10 for every loss. Whereas without any bonuses if you wanted to be playing for approximately $10, you'd have to set it at say 50 cents per point instead, and then sometimes you'd find yourself paying just 50 cents and sometimes shelling out $50, depending on the final spread.

Now I see what you're doing -- might want to include that level of information in the answer.


text:
Progressive Draw 2 and Draw 4 Uno
When playing with progressive Draw 2 and Draw 4 and (say that there are 2 players playing) and

Player 1 goes out with a Draw 2
Player 2 puts down a Draw 2

Does player 1 have to pick up 4 cards?

If you look at the base rules of the game it ends as soon as a player has no cards in their hand. Which means that the second player would not have a chance to play the draw 2 in response to the first players card.
Also should be noted that if you are playing in a situation where you want to continue playing till everyone but the last person runs out of cards it would be the same. As soon as a player plays their last card they would be out of the game and not impacted by any cards.
uno rules

Scoring: When a player no longer has any cards and the game ends, he/she receives points. All opponents’ cards are given to the winner and points are counted. All number cards are the same value as the number on the card (e.g. a 9 is 9 points). “Draw Two" – 20 Points, “Reverse" – 20 Points, “Skip" – 20 Points, “Wild" – 50 Points, and “Wild Draw Four" – 50 Points. The first player to attain 500 points wins the game.

I think its right answer for game 1st player have to pick up 4 cards because second player is also challenging again.than it will be more interesting.

This answer is being downvoted because a) it's difficult to read (not well formatted or in good grammatical English) and b) it appears to be completely your own opinion with no reference to any written rules.


text:
Opening bidder steals my bid
What do I bid when the opening bidder bids my bid?
E.g. bids 1NT and that is what I want to bid and I don't have a 5 card suit.

There are several common situations with different handlings:

Opener to your right bids your best suit and you have 12+ points:
Pass and hope partner can make a balancing double, which you can then convert to penalty by passing. Update The rationale in this case is that opponents, if partner is bust or close to it, actually have sufficient strength to bid game and perhaps make it. Let them discover for themselves that the breaks are bad and that you are end-playable, hopefully too late to salvage a plus.

Opener to your right opens a weak 1NT and you have the same hand:
Pass; unless partner can act in the balancing seat you are more likely to be plus by defending 1NT then by attempting to make a higher contract.

Opener to your right opens a strong NT and you have the same hand:
It is common to double with this hand though many experts prefer to Pass as above. It is not clear to me that either approach is better in the long term than the other. The increased points held by you and opener make it much less likely that partner can reopen, but you may be able to make 8 tricks in partner's longest suit even when he has only 5 or 6 points.

Opener to your left opens your best suit, you have 10+ points, and you are put in the balancing seat:
Partner with likely shortness in opener's suit could not act, and so is weak. Either the opponents have underbid, or they are in trouble; either way you are best to let the auction die. The hand is either a misfit for both sides or opponents have failed to find their fit.

Opener to your left opens 1NT (either weak or strong) and you have the same shape and announced range:
Pass, especially if you have methods allowing entry over a 1NT opening to show various unbalanced intermediate hands. Nobody is getting rich on this hand, except by doubling over-aggressive opponents. Take your Average Plus result.

The fastest way to improve your scores is to become a better defender - by practicing your hand counting, your leads, your defensive signalling, and finally by practice. There is often much room for error by both defenders an declarer on these balanced low part scores. Taking one trick more on defence than your peers will often get you a very good score. Enjoy the opportunity of practicing your honed skills.
If the opponents are halfways decent they will declare as often as you and your partner, so you will be defending twice as often as you declare. Repeat that thought; again. Practice your defence, and practice your defence again. Any delusion that you can win at this game through constant sacrificing against their contracts is just that - a delusion.


text:
Bridge: Is it a rule that you must announce the meaning of partners opening bid
Bridge Playing SAYC Is it a rule for partner to announce to the defenders what an opening bid (eg '1C minimum 3') means

I'm going to go just a bit stronger than Ruds here, assuming ACBL rules here.
Unless the ACBL alert chart mentions a specific announcement, you must not announce the meaning of partner's bid unless asked.  That is conveying information to your partner (conveying your interpretation of it), and is explicitly illegal, and may involve a penalty if a director is called.
Further, if it does call for an alert, you must only say "Alert" and no other information unless asked.  Again, providing that information also informs your partner.  (This may vary in high-level tournaments, where separate rooms or screens are used, or online, where "self-alerting" is the norm, and partner does not see the explanations.)
The specific announcements - 1NT range, 1♣ and 1♦ shortness, and transfers (a call that shows a specific suit that isn't the (last) bid suit) - are marked in blue on your convention card (indicating an announcement is appropriate).  Anything else - saying "Weak" after a weak 2, for example - is inappropriate.

Having said (and upvoted) this, it is a requirement to answer that question if asked (1), and if unusual enough or "there are two ways, this is how we play", it is encouraged that, when declaring, these things may be volunteered.  (1) There are cases (my classic is 1H "How many does that show?"(2)) where there is a concern that the question itself passes information to partner.  You must still answer the question, but IMHO you should call the director first. (2) The correct answer is "4+"; but the also correct answer is "fewer than you have."

Also, have edited for completeness and to match the new Alert Procedure.  Feel free to re-edit or revert, as the changes don't apply to the question specifically.

It depends on which organization's umbrella you're playing under. If you're playing duplicate bridge in the US, this is the ACBL, and you generally don't have to announce the meaning of the bid.
Exceptions:

For natural 1NT openings, announce the agreed point range.

For non-forcing 1C and 1D openings that do not promise at least 3 cards in the suit, announce "may be 2" (or 1, or 0, per your agreement).

Most conventional openings must be alerted (ie, you say "alert" when your partner makes the bid).

See the 2021 ACBL alert procedures for more details.
Edited to add: When it's an opponent's turn to bid or play, you must always truthfully answer questions about your agreements with partner about partner's bids.

To give a non-US example, the English Bridge Union's rules (from the Blue Book, chapter 4) are:

exchange system cards at beginning of round (which looks like this), the front page of which has:

General system description
1NT opening and responses
2-level openings and responses
Other Aspects of System which Opponents Should Note

Announce non-forcing 1m openings that could be on 2 or fewer cards "May be 2", "May be 1", "May be 2, could have 5 diamonds".
Announce range of 1NT and 2NT openings; "12-14", "15-17, may contain a singleton", "20-21".
Alert 1-level openings that are not natural, unless Announced.
Announce 4-card Stayman after 1NT-p and 2NT-p
Announce Transfers: 1NT-p-2H, "Spades".
Announce 2-level suit openings, if they are natural:

"Strong, forcing"
"Strong, not forcing"
"Intermediate"
"Weak"

Alert 1-level openings that are not natural, unless Announced.
Alert non-Announced 2-level suit openings.

They've made a really nice table of all the Alerting rules.  So, similar to the ACBL, but customized to suit their bridge population.
As explained, other Regulating Authorities have different rules, and you should follow the ones of the RA you play under.  For rubber bridge, it is common to have a fixed system, so there aren't any "announcements"; if you are permitted your own system with this partner, either the club will have rules for that, or people follow the duplicate rules in force in their area (out of habit, if nothing else).

As ruds says, it depends not on what system you play, but on where you are (strictly 'whose rules you play by'). But the important thing is any conventional bid must be alerted **, so that you are not misleading the opponents. If your 1C bid shows an opening hand with strength in clubs. it is not conventional, so need not be alerted.
** Unless it is announced, which is needlessly complex for this question, and doesn't apply here.

"announced" absolutely applies, as that's exactly what the question is referring to (that's the opposite of "may be short", and is not announced, but perhaps is said out of confusion with that announcement).

And - 1c opening hand with strength in clubs is not alertable, I don't believe, at least in the ACBL.  Natural bids (bids that show the suit mentioned) are almost never alerted, with only a few exceptions (and 1c is not one).


text:
5 card major/weak NT bidding systems
In the part of the UK where I live, a common set of conventions played at clubs and EBU tournaments is Acol based with 5 card majors, weak NT, weak jump overcalls/truscott (and often also Benji/reverse Benji: 2C 23+/9t, 2D 20-22/8t, 2H/S weak).
(Stayman, UNT/Michaels, and transfers are usual as well, but less relevant and more "stand alone", so I'm ignoring them here, and looking at the core of the bidding system.)
I'd like to be more clear how these work together and especially how to bid and interpret the "edge cases", but most books on 5 card major bidding seem to be based on other bidding systems so there's not really any clear guidance I can learn from.
Which would be the closest widely used 5 card major system to this, and what would the main adaptations be from it?

WJO and Truscott are generally separable from your system. They are part of your defense and are more like a "component" rather than a part of your system methodology.
Kaplan-Sheinwold (KS) adopts a 5-card Major approach with a weak No-trump opening, ranging from 12-14 HCP. However, its only strong opening is 2C, with 2D, 2H and 2S all being standard weak two bids. However, reverse Benji can be easily incorporated into KS without greatly changing the one-level openings and their continuations.

I would think that West-Coast (or Max Hardy) style 5-card majors is more prevalent than K-S - though both systems are more than adequate and I prefer the latter.

KS doesn't use transfers after 1N openings, but 1N openings are a rather separable part of the system as well.  (Just go with standard Modern Acol after 1N openings.)  But I definitely agree with the KS approach to opener's rebids after opening 1 of a minor.  Do keep in mind that 2-over-1 responses in KS are in line with Standard American and hence a shade stronger than Acol 2-over-1 responses.  Also, I would play 2-way NMF rather than the version of NMF (which is essentially Roudi 1 step higher) in KS - I think this is just because KS hasn't been updated in 20 years.

@ForgetIwaseverhere Unfortunately the more widely accepted 2/1 GF systems (both Hardy and Lawrence style) use a strong NT opening, otherwise I would definitely had suggested 2/1 GF, since it is a relatively more modern bidding system.

@petqwe: As I understand it an East Coast style built from K-S instead of Walsh/Hardy is still popular in the greater NYC area - just not widely written about. I doubt there are any differences in "modernity" between the two in practice.


text:
In Uno, can you play a Wild Draw 4 Card when you have another Wild Card in your hand?
My wife insists that if you have a Wild Card in your hand you cannot play the Wild Draw 4 Card because the first Wild Card constitutes having the same color card as the one on the Discard pile.
I say it does not as a Wild Card can be any color you choose when you play it.
Who is correct?

According to the rules sheet from Mattel:

You may only play this card when you do NOT have another card in your hand that matches the COLOR on the DISCARD pile (but it is acceptable to play this card if you have matching number or Action Cards).

Since Wild cards are classified as Action cards, you are legally allowed to play a Wild Draw Four when you have a Wild in hand.


text:
Does snapping reset the plusses (e.g +4) in uno?
I wanted to know if you snap a +4 or +2 does it reset the amount the person picks up?

My understanding was that in the original rules a draw2 or draw4 function as a skip in addition to making the following player draw cards. Since the player on the receiving end is being skipped they cannot prevent or respond to this.  So, if player 1 does a draw2, then player 2 loses their turn and draws two cards.  Later player 3 can also play a draw2 which will cause player 4 to lose their turn and draw two cards as well.

Are you looking for the original UNO rules or the most commonly played rules of the UNO stacking house rules?

Your question is unclear, the word "snap" does not appear in the rules. It is unclear whether Player 1 played +2, player 2 picked up 2, and player 3 now wants to play a +2; or whether player 1 played a blue +2, player 2 picked up 2, and now player 5 wants to "snap" by playing exactly the same card (blue +2) skipping player 3 and 4s turns - this would be a house rule, not an official one. It is also unclear whether you are playing the "stacking" rule or not.

Chaning/Snapping/Stacking draw cards does not reset the penalty amount. E.G Player 1 plays draw 2, player 2 plays another draw 2, player 3, having no draw 2 cards, must draw 4 cards.
From wikipedia as a part of the house rules:

Progressive Uno: If a draw card is played, and the following player
  has the same card, they can play that card and "stack" the penalty,
  which adds to the current penalty and passes it to the following
  player.

You should note that stacking draw cards is a house rule and is not part of the official rules.

doesn't matter as the question holder is aware of this but i've edited anyway

From reading the question it does not appear to be stated as a house rule and there have been questions before about how the rules change due to chaining draw cards where people did not realize that they where house rules.

fair, just seemed like an obvious i want to know this, i dont care if its housed

The wiki article linked does not specify that if following this house rule that the earlier functionality of draw2/draw4 is ignored, in particular the skipping aspect. Would it not be player1 plays a draw2, player 2 has his turn skipped and picks up two cards, then later player 3 also plays a draw2 followed by player 4 having to (as a result of the house rule) pick up 2+2 cards? How is it in your example that player 2 played a card? Or is it that with this house rule the recipient of a draw2 is given an opportunity to respond with another draw2 else gets skipped?

The player that gets targeted with a +2 can stack another +2 to lead the next player with a +4. link to the wiki gives the house rule in question


text:
Can I play a colored blank card in Uno?
I was playing Uno then someone played a yellow blank onto a yellow 7, is this allowed?

The blank cards in UNO can serve a couple purposes. Their main purpose is to serve as a replacement for lost cards, just write the number on it and your good to go.
Alternatively, they can be used for house rules. So long as they made it clear that the card was wild it would be valid. The rules suggest writing any house rule on the card to make it clear what it may be used for.


text:
What card game is this? 4 cards per player faced down
When I visited Bulgaria, someone taught me a game, he called “kabum” ( not sure if that's how you write it).

2 or more players.
each player receives 4 cards faced down and need to arrange them in a formation to last till the end of the game ( side by side...). Everyone can only look at 1 of their cards and then return it to the same position.

Each card has a value (A=0, 2=2...,J=-1,Q=12,K=1) and the objective of the game is to finish with the minimum amount of points. When you have 5 points or less you can say Kabum to start the last round.

When you buy a card you can either discard or substitute it with one of your own, placing it in the same position, that way you can start knowing your cards.
Some cards have some powers when you discard:

Cards with 7: You can look at one of your cards
Cards with 8: Look at one of your opponents cards
Cards with 9: Exchange cards with someone without looking
Cards with 10: Look at one card and change it

I believe these rules must vary.
But that the game:

Less points
Same position always faced down
Change cards

There are more rules but I believe this is enough to someone that knows the game to identify it.

It's an actual remake of "Golf" and it's name is Kabo!

Sound like a variant of the card game Golf, which has you using 6 cards to do about the same thing.  Everything else seem to line up.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golf_(card_game)

We know it by the name of COBO. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabo_(game)
Similar rules, difference is:
1. Every card has a value of the number written on the card.
2. Powers are in batches. Eg. 7-8 can be used to view your own card, 9-10: replacement without revealing, etc.

This sounds very similar to the game 'Beverbende': https://www.999games.nl/beverbende.html
This is a Dutch game, I'm unsure if there's any translated version of it. Reading your description, I think 'Beverbende' itself was derived from 'Kabol'.


text:
Why is there a "no man's land" between 1NT 15-17 and 2NT 20-21?
I cannot find any info online or by talking with experienced players about this issue. I assume Goren set this up? Wouldn't this be more logical:
1NT=15-17
2NT=18-19
3NT=20-21

Because the level of 3NT is too high to be supported by opener's values with only 20-21 HCP. Even 2NT is challenging if partner shows up with a bust opposite 20-21.
The appropriate way to show an 18-19 point hand using this style is to open 1 of a minor suit, and jump to 2NT over partner's response, as a forcing rebid.
Part of the challenge in bidding is that the space one might wish to use to describe one's hand also must remain low enough to allow a makeable contract to be reached and agreed.
This is actually a newer style than the original Goren System (or Culbertson), which used 2NT opening to show a balanced 22-24 HCP. The Europeans were the first to realize the advantages of reducing this range, which then was popularized in North America by players such as Edgar Kaplan and Alfred Sheinwold (Kaplan Sheinwold system) on the East Coast, and Richard Walsh on the West Coast (Two-Over-One Game Forcing system).
Another reason for the change to 2-point ranges above 17 HCP was that 3-point ranges had been found to be too wide for accurate assessment of total partnership value. When NT is first suggested at the 1-level it is possible for one partner to inquire on minimum/maximum in partner's hand by raising to 2 NT. However that option is not available if NT is first suggested at the 2-level. Empirically, it was found that 2-point ranges were both straightforward to implement in a bidding system, and much more accurate in both game and slam bidding.

Exactly! My partner and I always double "(2NT) - p - (p)" because it almost always goes down.

@Tvde1: Sound in Matchpoints and Board-a-match scoring; definitely unsound in Rubber, Chicago, and IMP scoring.  In the latter forms, the risk:benefit is too great over the long haul.

You mean "The risk to benefit ratio is too great over the long haul" not "the risk benefit," right?

@TomAu you miss the : (colon) in between, which clarifies that OP means what you said.

In addition to the fact that 20-21 points is insufficient to make 3NT, you have the additional concern that you want to preserve space in many of these point ranges.
When you have, say, 18 points, that means 22 points are left for the other 3; on average your partner might have 7-8 points, then, and so you are in the "game" point range.  But your partner might be just at 6, and you can only make a game with a favorable fit; or they might be at 12, and you can make a slam if you find the right fit.
Either of those requires having some back and forth, and if you start at 2NT immediately before any of that has happened, you lose the time to share information.
The 1m-(bid)-2NT pattern that shows 18-19 is valuable, thus, because it is able to show your partner your point range and distribution (just like above) while also finding out something about their hand.

1c-p-p-1s : Hmm, perhaps the game is not such a good idea
1d-p-2s!-p : Partner has (agreed point range) and (agreed long) spades (this can be weak or strong depending on the agreement, but either way you know a lot about their hand now)
1c-p-1s-p : Partner has game-ish points and 4+ spades; you have a lot of options now.

You have that room to find out which bucket partner fits in, and often you don't even bid 2nt - if you fit nicely with their 1-level bid you might bid other things to show that fit; if they weak jump you can decide if you like the idea of a short-point game in either their suit or NT (depending on your honors and length in their suit); if they strong jump you know you're thinking about a slam now; if they pass you know game is probably not happening.  And if they do none of those things:

1c-p-1d-p
1c-p-1h-p (but you have 2-3 hearts)

Then you just show your 2NT and are happy to have described your hand effectively.
All of that would go out the window with a 2NT opening; that's why 2NT is reserved for 20-21: where it's an exceptionally strong hand that it's more important to tell Partner that "even if you have a lousy 3 count, we could still have a game, so pay attention," and you can afford to skip the lower space as you know you are going to 3NT-4M-5m most likely.

By design, no trump bids are carefully limited in range to 2-3 points. E.g., 15-17 (1NT), 20-21 (2NT), and 25-27 (3NT). That's a wide range that requires five bids between 1NT and 3NT.
So we added two sets of bids for "1.5 NT" and "2.5 NT". These are not legal bids of course, so "workarounds" were created. The way to bid "1.5 NT" is one of a minor followed by 2NT. That covers the 18-19 point range. The way to bid "2.5 NT" is to bid 2 clubs, followed by 3NT to cover 22-24. You can even argue that 1 of a suit followed by 1NT is a "0.5 NT" with 12-14 points, that is a "weak" NT.
Now we have a full range:
1NT, 15-17 points.
"1.5 NT", 18-19 points.
2NT, 20-21 points.
"2.5 NT, 22-24 points.
3NT, 25-27 points.
There are two (interrelated) reasons.
1) You and partner need about 25 points to make 3NT (a bit more if partner is "short" in points).
2) You need to allow your partner some leeway for the times it takes more than 25 points total, because he is short of points for "transportation" purposes.
When you bid 1NT with 15-17 points, partner will have about 7-8 points on average. The two of you will have 23-24 "on average," which will allow you to make 2NT. If partner has MORE than 7-8 points s/he will raise to 3NT. If partner has "less" (4-5 points), you might not make 2NT, but you should still be able to make 1NT after partner passes, unless partner has "a lot" less (0-3) points. The last is uncommon enough that most people don't worry about it.


text:
Flexibility in Opening two in third seat with 8 points and seven card suit?
Is it against the rules to use your judgement as to whether to open two or three with a seven card suit?  Instance was third seat opening with a seven card suit, two of the top five, and 8 points with distribution - not vulnerable.  Playing with players that are very conservative in their bidding so opponents could easily had each held twelve points giving my partner a possible ten points if forth seat didn’t bid after my pre-empt.
Help - Opponants said I was going against the rules and had to open three with a seven card suit.  I can’t find any answer for this situation - unless it is obvious and you can never open two with a seven card suit.

You are, within certain constraints designed to prevent wholly destructive bidding systems, allowed to make any call that is:

any of a sufficient bid; a valid Double or Redouble; or Pass; and
not otherwise constrained by penalty under the Laws of Rubber Bridge consequent to a prior irregularity.

However your opponents are entitled to a full and complete description of the agreements and understandings between you and partner.
In particular, you are most definitely entitled to make a call based on your understanding of the opponents methods, in the context of the current auction. But if you make a habit of certain actions in common circumstances, such as a third hand opening following two passes as here, this must be added to the partnership agreements made known to the opponents.
Nothing you have stated in your post suggests to me that your opening bid is inappropriate. While not a call I would likely make myself, I see merit in your reasoning when playing against timid opponents.
It would seem that your opponents on this hand have conflated the rules of the announced bidding system (really just guidelines for improved play and partnership harmony) with the Laws of Rubber Bridge.

Thank you so much!  You have answered my question!  Since I posted my question, I found an excellent lesson on Preemptive Bidding on Richard Pavlicek’s website.  Within the lesson is an example of Pre-empt Opening 2 with a seven card suit when vulnerable and an hcp of 8 and a hand valued at six tricks.  It is explained how to value your hand for Playing Tricks and explains “In order to determine when and how high to preempt it is necessary to estimate how many tricks your hand will win if your long suit is trumps. “

My pleasure. Pavlicek's site is great; I'm glad you found it. P.S. You do know what the little grey check mark is for right?

What happened is that your opponents were citing the "rules" of bidding, as opposed to the laws of bridge.
The latter (laws of bridge) are inviolable. But you are basically allowed to make your own "rules of bidding." Unless you explicitly stated "two means six, three means seven," the "default condition is that "six can mean either two or three, and seven can mean either two or three.
Providing that they are disclosed, the ACBL allows wide latitude for conventions used by players. In your case, the difference between a two or three level opening with seven cards falls within that wide latitude. Also, it should be noted that partner may be as likely to have trouble telling the difference if you only bid two. Put another way, your opponents are not entitled to "full" information, only to "equal opportunity," vis-a-vis your partner.
Here are some examples as to how wide that latitude can be. Technically, a "strong" 2 club bid is supposed to represent s very strong hand. But the ACBL will allow a hand as weak as (s) AKQxxxxx (h) JT9x (d) x (c) ---. The theory is that this hand is good for about 9 tricks on its own, and can make game with "minimal" help from partner, (the Queen of hearts or a side ace). That's true even though the hypothetical hand is decidedly weaker, at least in high card points, than usual.
Also, the ACBL will allow "denial" bids of 1 diamond, following an opening one club, or 2 diamonds over 2 clubs, because the denial bid is only one level higher than the original bid. It would frown on denial bids of 1NT opposite one club or 2NT over 2 clubs, because they take away a lot of bidding space just to say, "I have nothing."

The wording "You have no duty to "fully" disclose your holdings to your opponents if your system does not fully disclose them to partner." is really really bad. Accept when bidding screens are in place, one never describes to the opponents the meaning of one's own call under the partnership agreements. And in your third paragraph you conflate HCP and Pts. Otherwise pretty good.

@ForgetIwaseverhere: OK. Made those two changes (deletions). Thanks for your help

In the convention card, me and my partner have, it states that 2 or 3 level can be preemptive with a 6+ cards and 4 level has to have at least a 7 card.
We do this so with a hand of e.g.
KJ9853
4
J10753
85

We can preempt (because this hand is nicer than a 6-3-2-2.

The question is explicitly about the Laws regarding such a bid - not about strategic concerns. Your example of a strategic concern thus fails to be an attempt at an answer to the question.


text:
Rummy version with a run of seven as last round
I've been trying to remember the details on a gin rummy game I played when I was younger. This game had the last round require a "run of seven" and a set of three.  Looking at Wikipedia I see Contract Rummy which is similar but doesn't have this requirement for the last round. Does anyone know what flavor of rummy was represented by this type of last round?

Sounds like you've already found the answer: it's a form of contract rummy, just with a different final contract than the one listed on the Wiki entry.
From the contract rummy entry on rummy-games.com :

The rules detailed below are representative of all Contract Rummy
  games, though there are numerous regional and local variations even
  among games with the same name.

Incidentally, that particular contract (7+3) appears as one of the contracts in Shanghai Rummy (but not the last).


text:
Are there any time limit per move in Ticket To Ride?
Is there a time limit for each person to make their move?
My wife (a scientist) is very analytical, always strategising (which is why she beats me most times) but she can take upwards of 4 minutes to make a single move (deciding what cards to take or what or where to build) and it drives me nuts!
Is there any rule or etiquette that says people should be quicker about their moves, say 60 seconds or less?

What you are describing is often called Analysis Paralysis and is a very controversial subject, particularly among those who have it.

My personal etiquette would be that nearly every turn in TTR should be less than 30 seconds, ideally even half that... that said it's a classic "gateway" game for folks new to strategy games, so I wouldn't push others unless they were quite egregious. Speed is part of the social contract and both playing too fast and playing too slow can deter people's enjoyment.

There is no time limit for each turn and etiquette for turn length depends on the group that you are playing in. The best suggestion that I can make for you is to remind your wife that she can start planning her next turn while others are playing. While things will change based on other players move not every action they take is going to impact her choice.
But one thing to remember that based on the game the actions of the previous player can drastically change what you are planning to do and games can last 1-2+ hours so this is not a quick game.

Whilst I agree that encouraging planning when its not your turn is good practice in all games I'm not sure I've ever known TTR go in at over 2 hours?

There's no time limits in the rules.
In the online version of the game, one can set an amount of time per player. Even 7 minutes per player (total, for the entire game including time spent choosing tickets) is sufficient for experienced players, and 15 minutes per player is quite comfortable. The whole game shouldn't take longer than that. If it does, and if it's not pleasant for you, maybe Interpersonal Skills Stack Exchange is the place for you to visit.

Don't think I have ever had a game with that little time spent per player

Tens of thousands do everyday on the digital version --one literally gets kicked out after the aloted time runs out-- and that's on par with my experience with the tabletop version

It's always clear when a turn is done, and most turns consist of taking two cards, an action taking seconds, and you get what... 40 turns? That gives you 14 one-minute turns, which is more than enough time for planning (especially since you can plan whole others are taking their turns too!) That's 40 minutes of just thinking (assuming 4+ players, and allowing for them not taking as long as you do).

I have never played multiplayer in the digital version and honestly I find games generally run faster in the digital versions then they do in the physical ones

Noone I know needs 40 minutes to think on the tabletop version either. If you're socializing instead of playing, fine, but you get the OP's problem if everyone's not on the same page about this. Thus both of our answer suggesting that this is an interpersonal problem.

40 minutes correct but most players i know take more then 15 minutes of play during the game.

Right, which means they spent more than 40 minutes thinking, or they weren't actually playing the game (like both of our answers say).

Have you considered a chess clock? (Multiplayer clocks/apps exist if you play more than 2 player).
Each player gets a fixed amount of time they are allowed to use per game. You can penalise them points for each minute they go over, so they have to evaluate using that extra time against the potential points swing.
Your wife may find this to be a fun extra rule in the game, however it could also ruin the game for her. But you could try...

I am not sure that just adding a clock would solve the underlying issues.

If there's more than two people in the game, a chess clock wouldn't work. But there's probably smart phone apps for multiplayer versions. Another issue would be whether to separate out decision time from action time (e.g. time placing your train cars).

It should also be noted that in a physical game the time it takes to play the trains on the board could be longer for some players causing them to have less overall time.

@JoeW I don't see why time taken to play trains will vary much between players. Everyone is trying to get rid of all their trains. I can't think of any scenario where it'd be better to save time and play fewer trains. Since everyone has to do it, it shouldn't really matter, unless someone has a physical disability that inhibits their ability to place trains.

@nuclearwang what I mean is based on seating position and where on the board the player is placing the trains it may take longer for some players. Also this is not accounting for anything else that would slow down the player.

As others have noted, there is no rule regarding turn times.  (Some people believe that, when the box says "60-90 minutes", that this is one of the rules of the game; but this is not an actual rule.)
Etiquette says that you should make the game fun for other players as well as yourself, and making your opponents sit there for several minutes while you debate the pros and cons of five different cards is not "making the game fun" for them.
This being your wife makes it a difficult situation.  There are people that I simply will not play games with any more.  Other times, I will break out my iPhone and play a game (yes, a game) of Gin Rummy or Cribbage while I'm waiting for my turn.  You need to find a polite way to express to your wife that, when the "whose turn it is" counter is 75%-25%, this stops being a fun endeavor for you.  And I wish you the best of luck in figuring out how to do that. :)

You should also remember that when someone is forced to take turns faster than what they would like to the game can become more stressful and less fun for them. It should be noted that there are plenty of games that force other players to wait for extended periods of time when it is not their turn so that is a mechanic that you can always avoid. Forcing someone else to make changes to improve your fun can ruin it for them.

You're right that it's a mechanic I can avoid, if I know the mechanic is part of the game.  This is Ticket to Ride.

This is a part of ticket to ride as each player needs to make choices on their turn that are directly impacted by the players before them and there is nothing to do when it is not your turn.


text:
Application of DOS Penalty vs. Definition of Victory in DOS
In the card game DOS, the sequel to UNO, there is a rule stating:

Going Out
If you ever have EXACTLY TWO CARDS in your hand, you must shout out "DOS!" (meaning "two"). If you forget to do so and another player calls out "DOS!" before you do, you must immediately draw two cards as a penalty. If this happens during your turn, do not add the penalty cards to your hand until the end of your turn.

There is another relevant rule:

Ending the Round
The round ends when one player goes out by getting rid of all the cards in his of her hand. That player earns points for the cards left in the other players' hands
(NOTE: If the player earned any Double Color Match Bonuses on the turn they went out, remember to have the other players draw cards before scoring).

If I forget to say "DOS!" and I'm caught by an opponent during my turn, I do not add the cards to my hand until the end of my turn.
If I then play all of my cards on that same turn, what happens?

Do I end my turn and take the two cards?
(And I must then also immediately say "DOS!" at risk of additional penalty)?

Or

Have I won the game?
(the rule never specifies that I must have gotten rid of the cards
after the end of my turn, so at one point I had zero cards)?

Do the rules allow playing more than 1 card on the same turn?

Yes, the action taken is completely legal.

According to the DOS rules:
You should take the two penalty cards at

the end of your turn.

not after the end of your turn.
This means that you now have two cards left and must immediately say "DOS!".
Official DOS Rules by Mattel

Good point, but my question is more about whether I ever had zero cards in my hand. Since by rule penalty cards should not enter my hand until the end of my turn, the point is that if I play all my cards before the end of my turn but was also caught not saying "DOS", aren't those penalty cards considered "not in my hand" for the purpose of winning the game?

Because the rule says not to add them to my hand until the end of my turn, and it also says I win when I get rid of all cards in my hand; the timing would suggest that the penalty cards aren't "in my hand" yet when I play all the other cards (it's not the end of my turn yet) and therefore win the game before they resolve.

No you don't win, you can not win until then end of your turn and then you don't have zero cards in your hand...

"You cannot win until the end of your turn" This is what I can't find any evidence to support.


text:
Ticket to Ride, Warehouses and Depots: How to collect train cards?
We have T2R Europe, and just tried out the 1912 Expansion pack which includes warehouses and depots.
To my knowledge one must put the first train card to any given players warehouse before drawing to themselves.
Each player also gets a free action, which is the option to take one or more depots and place them on the map, in their turn.
But here's where the rules are not clear enough. For us that is:
When one player uses their turn to put a new depot onto the map and they also claim a route. Is it then possible to put a depot to a city where they, in the same turn, are claiming that route to?
Here's an example:
You are in Paris, and it is your turn.
First you place a depot in Frankfurt (as a free action).
Then you claim that route: Paris - Frankfurt. When you do that, according to the rules regarding claiming a route into a city where there's a depot, you can "buy" the cards by discarding one of your own depots. But, can you do that in the same turn?
That's like 3 actions in one turn.
1. place depot
2. claim route
3. empty a warehouse
To me that feels a bit too much and a bit suspicious, but how is the rules to avoid such a scenario?

This is exactly how it works by the rules. Yes, you can clear your warehouse whenever you want, but by doing so you expend 2 out of 5 of your depots, so you probably also give up a bonus 10 points for having the most depots by the end of the game.
Compare this to claiming cards from already placed depot: you can still do that instantly just by connecting route there and spending 1 depot. It isn't that much different.


text:
A card game with a mat on the table and chips in the kitty
We used to play a card game with a mat on the table. We had to put chips in the kitty and also in 8 other piles on the mat.
Whoever won the hand got the kitty.
What's the name of this game?

We will likely need more information in order to identify this game.

My best guess is Tripoley. The main pictures on Board Game Geek show a plastic version, but this image shows a version with a mat. There is a Kitty pile, and 8 other piles. Each hand has a Hearts phase, a Poker phase, and a Rummy phase.

This was exactly my guess when I read it

We called it Rummy Royal, but same game (the BGG page lists it as an alternate name).

In a similar vein to Gregor, my best guess would be Rummoli.
Players of Rummoli commonly use a plastic mat (though nicer versions exist) that is separated into 8 sections with a kitty pile in the middle.
Play consists of a hand of cards being dealt to each of the 2-8 players, followed by a poker phase then a Rummoli phase. The First player to play all their cards in the Rummoli phase gets to take the kitty.
Rummoli Mat:

Vintage Rummoli Box:


text:
How can 7NT be played for this hand?
I played a deal online as South and ended up as 3NT +3 (490 points). The deal analysis page indicates that this deal can be played at 7NT.
I retried several times, went straight for 7NT, but all attempts ended up as 7NT -1. West's ♠K is a serious problem that I failed to avoid.
Anyone suggest how this deal can be done at 7NT, with South as the contractor and West plays ♣Q as the first hand?
Note: All other three players are robots and know all cards, so tricking them into thinking the wrong way is impossible.

There is a pentagonal squeeze on this hand. One line of play:
Win the club lead in dummy, cross to hand with the spade ace, take the diamond finesse, and play on diamonds, pitching spades. Eventually, west has to unguard a round suit to keep the spade control, and now you have a double squeeze, with west controlling spades and one round suit, and east controlling both round suits. Cash your hand's winner in the round suit controlled only by east, then return to dummy with the heart king. Now we've gotten to a standard double squeeze position; cash the last diamond, forcing east to unblock one suit, pitching the suit that east keeps. West will be forced to let go the last guard to one of your suits, and your thirteenth trick has materialized.
I've put together one possible play sequence.
(Thanks to Forget I was ever here for pointing out an error in my initial answer, and Mycroft for pointing out places that I had confused hand and dummy).

Here is the 6 card end position after winning ♣ Ace; coming to hand with ♠ Ace; and running ♢ after a successful finesse of ♢ Q:
         ♠ J
         ♡ K 7
         ♢ 3 2
         ♣ 7

 ♠ K            ♠ T
 ♡ Q 9 5        ♡ J T 6
 ♢ -            ♢ -
 ♣ J T          ♣ 9 8
         ♠ 5
         ♡ A 8 2
         ♢ -
         ♣ K 6

On the ♢ 3 East and South discard their last ♠ and West must unguard a round suit; establishing the double squeeze. Best defense is for West to pitch a
♡, as if South has ♡ J it's either doubleton, or West was always going to be victim of a successful ♠-♡ simple squeeze. (If West was dealt ♢ J or T instead of ♢ Q he should pitch a ♣ instead. Since South cannot see, or likely read, any of these cards, this option selection should be opaque to Declarer.)
On play of ♢ 2 East now discards ♣ 8 and South must guess the situation. If West is believed to be guarding ♣ (best above) then South must discard ♡ 2 and cash ♡ A and ♡ K in order to squeeze West in both black suits.
If West is believed to be guarding ♡ then South must discard ♣ 6 and cash ♣ K and ♡ K in order to complete the major suit squeeze on West.
Declarer's best bet for reading the situation is that East, whose ♣ attitude to the opening lead is known to all once Dummy comes down, probably gave an honest count signal in ♣'s at trick one. If East is astute enough to have seen the double squeeze coming that early, tip your hat to him as the better man/woman on this day.

In your example, how are the entries managed if West discards H9 instead of CJ at trick 10? That is to say, in that case which card does South play on Trick 11? I believe the play is more complex than you suggest here. The round K's must be preserved until after West has been squeezed once, so that the 4-card entry to South, either HA or CK, can be kept in the suit West does NOT release.

Oh, that's quite interesting. I'll have to think a bit longer, but I suppose you must avoid cashing round-suit winners (except the CA at trick 1) until the west has committed to the suit in the middle of the double.


text:
Can you owe a player in monopoly
A player lands into someone´s property and they are supposed to pay $1000, they don't have enough cash (only have $600) but have property and houses they can mortgage. Can the two players agree to say I owe you $400, will pay later when I get the money?

You are asking about house rules... house rules can entail anything you want, regardless of what the game's rules actually say... but I believe @kinnth has an answer that regards what the rules actually state...

I don't think you want the house rule tag, since house rules the answer is always "Yes, if the house rules are agreed to allow it, and no if they are agreed to not allow it" House rules are whatever the players agree on for the game as a modification of the game's base published rules.

You must do everything in your power as the debtor to pay off the debt

Count your cash
Sell houses
Mortgage properties

If you then still don't have enough you can ask other players to buy the mortgaged properties from you to raise enough cash.  This could come from the person you owe money to.  Otherwise, you are declared bankrupt.
In practical terms, not many players want to continue playing with no money and wholly mortgaged properties, therefore usually bankruptcy is the best option.

I personally think it's nicer to trade/sell an un-mortgaged property than try to sell a mortgaged property, especially if you just mortgaged it to try to pay your debt.  Remember that it takes an extra 10% to pay off the mortgage.

Of course it’s “nicer”... but why would you be nice to the person that just eliminated you from the game?

Yes and no. The rules state that if a player cannot pay what they owe, then they are bankrupt and out of the game.
However, any trades are allowed, so there is nothing stopping players from trading $5 for $1000 so that they have enough to pay, and promising to trade back on a later turn. But if they do this, there’s no way to enforce that future trade. The player could simply go back on his word and he would not be breaking any rules.

wow, is the player not supposed to settle what they owe before the game can move on? if you start having virtual money does it not disadvantage other players?

I’m not sure what you mean. The player does have to settle what they owe before the game moves on. And you can’t have “virtual money”. Which is why there basic answer is “no”. But there’s nothing preventing a player from trading to get the money they need.

thanks. I get it "The player does have to settle what they owe before the game moves on."

You can not trade $5 for $1000.  This is against the rule as it is the same as giving the other player $995.  You could sell the other player a get out of jail free card for  $995 or a property for $ 995 more then it's worth.

@MartinCharette I don't know of any rule that prevents giving away money for free - there's an explicit rule against loans, but not gifts. In practice, one player can always sell an asset to another for some price, and then buy it back at a higher/lower price, with the end result being identical to a gift of cash from one player to another.

Anything in Monopoly has value if another player ascribes value to it, and this can include non-tangible things. The only specific rule around loans (based on tournament rules) is that "Money can only be loaned to a player by the Bank and then only by mortgaging property" (page 10, Miscellaneous). That would seem to preclude "I will pay you back" and "IOUs" (except when the bank runs out of money). Whether that includes "Gifts" is another question entirely.
However, certain versions of Monopoly have introduced alternative "interests" that can be traded, which inherently gives them value (the value of which is determined by the other players, of course). On the Playstation 1 version of the game, for example, a player may offer instances of "Rent Immunity," whereby the owner of a property chooses not to collect rent the first X times the receiver lands on a certain property.
It's unclear whether that is officially allowed by tournament Monopoly rules ("loan" is not defined very well), but it demonstrates that there are more ways to resolve a debt than via Mortgages and Bankruptcy. It is presumably also at a player's discretion to accept less than the required amount of Rent. Likewise, a player could simply "forget to ask for rent." The tournament rules do specifically call out this scenario.

The owner may not collect his/her rent if he/she fails to ask for it before the second player following throws the dice. (page 8, Paying Rent)

In your case, if you did not want to eliminate the payer, you could simply "forget to ask" and have the next player take their turn, and the debt would be nullified.

While you could do that, it's also not binding. So it's entirely legal (and optimal) within the rules to offer "rent immunity" and then break that promise and still collect rent. That means if you're playing to win and you know your opponents are as well, it's best to stay away from any deal that consists of "I'll do X now if you do Y later".


text:
Exploding Kittens- Slap to get out of multiple turns
What I’m trying to find out is:

If you get slapped (let’s say triple),
And you play something in-between (you don’t currently have a slap in your hand),
e.g. an alter the future and put another slap on top,

Can you now play that slap to push the rest of your turns on to another player?
(now that the alter is between it no longer adds onto the previous slap).
Does that negate both your remaining turns and push the complete slap onto your chosen opponent? or
Do you remove one of those for the 3rd turn? or
Can you not do it at all?

You have been slapped thrice, so you now have 3 turns to complete.
If you have a slap card as return, you can shift all to another player. But if you don't have a slap card, you can not return.
But if you draw a slap card in an other turn, you can transfer all the remaining turns to another player. see The rules.

Double slap
End your turn without drawing a card and force any other  player to
take 2 turns in a row. This is not the same as drawing 2 cards in a
row! The target of this card should take their first turn (play cards
and/or draw). When their turn is over, it’s their turn again. If the
targeted player plays a Slap Card in return, they pick a player to
take ALL remaining turns (4 turns, then 6, and  so on). Play always
continues from the targeted player. If you draw and defuse an
Exploding Kitten during a series  of turns, you must continue taking
your remaining turns.

Example
You are targetted with a tripple slap and you have no slap to return. So you are forced to take the turn(s).

Turn 1, you draw a slap. You now have 2 turns to complete.
Turn 2, you play the slap. You target another player that gets the 2 turns of the card + your remaining turns (2nd and 3rd) for a total of 4.


text:
Winning strategy for NxN Tic-Tac-Toe
In a standard 3x3 Tic-Tac-Toe board, there is a strategy to win if the opponent makes a mistake. As far as I know, the strategy goes like:

Capture the centers
Capture the edges
Capture a square which can lead to multiple immediate wins
Be careful of immediate threats

I'm looking for a common strategy which works for all NxN board variants. Is there one?
EDIT:
The variant has the same rules as the standard one. All squares in a diagonal, row, or column occupied by a player is a win. And of course, if there isn't any moves to make, it's a tie.

On larger boards usually you need more than 3 in a row.  Do you mean 5 in a row on a NxN board?

Thanks for pointing it out! I have edited the question accordingly.

Optimal play on NxN boards where you need N in a row leads to a draw for all N > 2.
Contemporary Combinatorics, by Bela Bollobas has a proof of it.  Below is a summary of this.  The images below are from this book.
All board sizes 5x5 and up can be proven to be a draw by the second player employing a pairing strategy, namely where the second player plays a piece in a location next to or near the location of the first players move that most limits the options the first player has to play further.
For example, in the 5x5 game, optimal play for player 2 involves playing in the space with the same number as that played by player 1.  If player 1 goes in the center, or if the matching space is already occupied, player 2 can go anywhere.

Similarly, for 6x6:

3x3 tic-tac-toe can be proven a draw by brute force method, and 4x4 can be proven a draw by creating 3 different pairing strategies based on each of the three possible opening moves by player 1 (ignoring symmetry and rotation).
So, under optimal play, there is no winning strategy.
However, if you want to write a good strategy, it seems the thing you want to do in general would be to play pieces that give you as many options to win as possible.  This would be central locations at the beginning and locations that are part of multiple lines of your pieces in the mid-game and late-game.  Early game, I'd go for spaces on the optimal move chart where the blocking move is the furthest away.  Late game, I'd go for moves that win the game or block winning moves, and otherwise ones that give the most options in conjunction with existing pieces.

This video generalizes even further, also dealing with 3 or higher dimensional boards: https://youtu.be/FwJZa-helig

the link http://www.weijima.com/article-11-15.html is broken

@Cohensius Thanks.  I updated it to a different source and added more of the related content

There are several generalizations to tic-tac-toe. The most natural one (imho), is the m,n,k-game, which is the game of k-in-a-row played on an (m,n) board.
In (n,n,n) games, for n>2, the second player can force a draw.  See m,n,k-game for many other results.

If n<3, it's impossible for player 1 to lose, as they will always win on their nth turn no matter what plays are taken for an n,n,n game.


text:
In Uno H2O, what is the difference between these two cards?
Today I was playing Uno H2O and I found these two cards, but I'm not sure what is the difference between these?
One looks like a Wild Draw 4, but it doesn't have the +4 on it, so I'm confused about its purpose.

Those are both wild cards, just from two different printings.
The one on the left is the original 2004 design, and other from the end of 2005.
Matel updated the design for printing UNO H20 Splash, seemingly to avoid confusion with the Draw 4.