text:
Bridge Scoring and sacrifice optimization against slam bids?
Suppose North and South go through Blackwood and decide on 6 Spades making a Slam of 980 points. Their opponents decide to optimize the points. So suppose East decides that he has 6 Clubs including King of Clubs and calls 7 Clubs. Even after Double if they manage to make 5 tricks, North and South get only 800 points. However it does not happen in tournaments. Why is that?
Kindly note that I am not too good with Bridge Scoring so I might be wrong above in the counts. And thanks for your time.

In duplicate bridge, 6 spades making 6 is 980 not vulnerable, and 7 clubs doubled down 8 not vulnerable (5 tricks made out of 13 contracted) is -2000. With nobody vulnerable, you'd have to make 9 tricks to come out ahead bidding 7 over 6, scoring -800 for down 4.
Not vulnerable, doubled undertricks score accordingly:

-1: -100
-2: -300
-3: -500
-4: -800
-5: -1100
-6: -1400
-7: -1700
-8: -2000

with additional undertricks being worth -300 each.

As well as the two good answers already posted, you have to consider the 'phantom sacrifice' phenomenon. Just because N-S have bid 6 Spades, that doesn't mean they will score 980 points; they may go down on a misguess or a bad split. In that case, East's bid has converted a score of +50 to -800 even if he manages to make 9 tricks.

Yes we have faced the situation many times...but it is time to incorporate the original rules for down.

@ArghyaChakraborty: I have literally no idea what you mean.  Was that comment misplaced? It may help to say that 4 down doubled non-vulnerable used to score -700, and is now -800.

What I meant was that many times say we bid 6 Clubs and they bid 6 Spades knowing they would go down. After the game we realize that our 6 Clubs would also have failed...just as you said in your answer.

As the other answers mention, sacrifices, especially NV sacrifices against Vulnerable slams, are common, for exactly this reason - 800 beats 1430.  Because at IMPs the difference matters, it's more likely that they'll take the sacrifice when they expect it will be 800 into 1430 (1400 into 1430 gains 1 IMP, but if they're wrong and it's 1700 instead, it loses 7).  At matchpoints, where 1400 can be almost as good a score as 500, provided the slam makes for 1430 and few find the sacrifice, you'll see more aggressive sacrifices.
But another reason why it might be more common in home games is that they may still be using the old scoring, because that's what's printed on their rubber pads from 30 years ago. In the old scoring, NV downtricks went 100, 300, 500, 700, 900... instead of 1, 3, 5, 8, 11....  In duplicate, that changed in 19871; in rubber it was years later.  But it has changed, and any game should be using the new scoring.
1: The story goes that Edgar Kaplan bid 7H Vulnerable, and a young Jeff Meckstroth bid 7S on nothing.  He took 2 tricks against the making grand, gaining a profit for -2100 vs -2210.  Kaplan was outraged, and since he was on the Laws Commission, he got the law changed (now you have to take 5 tricks for -2000).

The reason is that the term "double" is something of a misnomer. It means "increased penalties" but usually more than just "double." Because your question would be "on point" if the penalties were for a doubled contract were exactly double those for an undoubled contract.Non vulnerable, that would mean penalties of 100, 200, 300, etc. for 1, 2, 3 undertricks, etc.
In actual fact,, only the penalty for the first undertrick is doubled, from 50 to 100. The penalties for the second and third undertricks are 300 and 500 (instead of 200 and 300). After that, each undertrick costs 300 points, so the fourth undertrick is 800 points and the fifth is 1100 points.
This penalty structure was set up to prevent just the kind of behavior you are describing. Under the "old" scoring, doubled undertricks cost "only" an additional 200 pounts (or quadruple 50) after the first, meaning that the sequence was 100, 300, 500, 700, 900, for the first five undertricks. Under these rules, it was worth going down five (win eight tricks) to stop a slam, now it is worth going down only four (800 points versus 1100 for the fifth undertrick and 930 for the slam). Whereas, if "double" meant exactly that, as in your example, it would indeed be worth going down eight (bid seven, make five tricks out of 13) for a penalty of 800 (twice 50*8) to stop a slam.


text:
What if two players are eligible for the Express bonus?
The longest path for Adam are ten trains while Bella and Celia both has a longest path of fifteen trains, i.e both Bella and Celia has the longest path and thus are eligible for the Express Bonus/European Express.
Are the express bonus points divided between Bella and Celia, do they both receive the entire bonus of ten points, or is the express bonus skipped?

The rules, p7:

If several players are tied for the longest path, they each receive the 10 point bonus from the European Express card.

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:
Contract Bridge Better minors
Using better minor convention partner open one club, and I have five diamonds with three honors. I answer two diamonds to show the diamonds. Is this correct?

No, playing a natural system such as Goren or Two Over One the jump shift response into a new suit shows about 17-18 points in addition to the good suit. You have the good suit but (at time of writing) not the requisite overall hand strength. If the suit being bid is not at least 5 cards in length then the bid must also show 4+ card support in Opener's suit..
In addition to the above the bid announces that:
- The opponents shall not be allowed to play undoubled;
- Slam will be bid if a fit is found and sufficient controls are present.
It is because of the first point above that the bid should be made on HCP rather than playing strength. Good suits with playing strength but less defence can make a delayed jump shift, a delayed jump raise, or a delayed jump rebid. These now deny sufficient defensive strength for the initial jump shift. The jump shift response must never be made with a two suited hand unless the second suit is Opener's first bid suit.
When partner opens 1C it is very likely (especially playing a Strong 1 NT) that partner intends to rebid either 1 or 2 NT. Narrowing the jump shift response to slam going hands leaves more room for additional exploration below game, which will not only improve any NT games stumbled into but also find more good minor suit slams.

A Strong jump shift is more likely to show 17+ than 20+, depending on system and partnership agreement

@DavidSiegel: While I take your point, why not link to an actual expert's opinion?

While I like Pavlicek's writing, that page, while including a strong jump-shift as part of the structure does not describe it in any detail, and I find the Bridge bum site well worth using as a reference.

@DavidSiegel: I have concerns about the author's competence, as that one page is particularly badly written. It suggests that a han with a longest suit of 5 cards can be one-suited; it cannot. It can be three suited (5440) or two suited(5431 or 5422) or balanced (5332) but a hand must have a 6-card or longer suit to be one suited. That kind of imprecision can ruin partnerships. It is also frequently wise to jump shift in a 4-card suit when holding 4-card support for partner and requisite strength., which I don't see described at all.

No.
Playing Standard American or Two-over-one the classic agreement is to play strong jump shifts in a non-competitive auction. In that case a 2D bid after a 1C opening would show not only a 5-card suit including at least 5 HCP, but also at least 17 points in the overall hand. Such a bid is forcing to game.
However, many of the stronger players now prefer to play Weak Jump Shifts in which a bid of 2D over an opening 1C would show a 6-card suit, and 2-5 HCP in the total hand. Over such a bid, opener usually passes or bids the final contract. A bid of 2NT is forcing and asks the responded to further describe his hand.
Playing SA or 2/1, a bid of 1D over 1C often indicates a 5-card suit. With a 4-card or longer major, the responder will usually bid the major unless the diamonds are significantly better, and the hand is strong enough to reverse by bidding the major later. Therefore only hands which are 3-3 or shorter in the majors (or rather strong hands) will bid 1D. Many (but far from all) such hands have 5+ cards in the diamond suit. Therefor opener should be prepared for a 5-card diamond suit, and responder does not need to jump to show it, unless the hand suits the partnership agreement for a jump-shift, weak or strong.  If the bidding has gone 1C-pass-1D, the responder will probably rebid Diamonds later to show such a good suit as 5-cards with three honors. Remember that as a new-suit bid from an unpassed responder, 1D is forcing 1 round.
To anyone thinking that "Standard American" should include 4-card major systems, and so this answer should have discussed such alternatives: that was once the case, but has not been for several decades. No North American tournement or club player describing a system as "Standard American" will mean a 4-card major system. This has been true since not long after the final edition of Goren's Bridge Complete came pout in the early 1980s with the Goren system fully reworked on a 5-card major basis. There is a case to eb made that a 4-card major system is better in many cirumstsancecs. But what ever one might call such a system, it isn't "Standard American" (much less SAYC), and it isn't common in NA duplicate play.

Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

Please keep discussion of required downvote comments in the linked chat room. Your comment was there for two months; you're not going to get any new responses from people who downvoted your post.

@murgatroid99 I do not use the chatrooms here. Ever. I find they serve only to hide possibly useful information, and have an unhelpful interface. I object to my comments being removed to a chatroom.  But since that comment did not directly relate to the answer, I will refrain from reinstating it.

If there was anything that was both useful and relevant in those comments, it should be turned into an edit to the answer itself. All other comments do not belong here on the post. I was trying to be helpful by moving them to the chat room to preserve them in some form so that the discussion can continue if you want, but you are free to act as though the comments were simply deleted.

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


text:
Phase 10, no card to discard to end the turn
What to do when you don't have a card to discard to end your turn?
(Also, what happens when you lay down a skip card? Does the color change to what the next player lays down or do you have to use the color played before the skip card was played?)

This should be split up into multiple questions so that they can each be answered in a better manner.

If you don't have a discard during the game, it means you have played all of your cards, so the round ends. You can end the round either by discarding your final card, or by playing all cards in your hand.
The color doesn't change in Phase 10. Perhaps you are thinking of Uno rules? You can discard any card you like; the color doesn't matter.

https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/W4729.pdf

In my experience if you don't have a discard, you're out of the game. Some variations allow you to still compete for snaps though.


text:
Bonus continent troops in Risk
So I have taken over all of Australia and I get 2 extra troops.
My friend then attacks Indonesia from Southeast Asia. When it's my turn I retake control of Indonesia.  Now, do I get 2 more bonus troops since I retook control over the continent?

You gain bonus troops at the start of your turn for controlling an entire continent so as long as you still control Eastern Australia, Indonesia, New Guinea and Western Australia at the start of your next turn you will get the two bonus troops. It doesn't matter if you lose and regain control of all area's in a continent but if you have that control at the start of your turn.

I think the answer to your question is 'no', but it all depends on the timeline which you haven't clearly explained.
At the beginning of your turn you calculate the bonus armies you receive. In addition to bonus armies for the number of territories you occupy, you receive bonus armies for any complete continents you control. Because this is calculated at the start of your turn, this means you must control these territories for an entire round in order to receive the bonus armies.
Here is the relevant excerpt from the rules:

Continents. In addition, at the beginning of your turn you will
  receive armies for each continent you control. (To control a
  continent, you must occupy all its territories at the start of your
  turn.) To find the exact number of armies you’ll receive for each
  continent, look at the chart in the lower left-hand corner of the game
  board.

So, if you lose Indonesia, then when your turn comes around you no longer control Australia and therefore do not receive bonus armies. If, on that turn, you reclaim Indonesia, you still do not receive bonus armies because that bonus is awarded only at the start of your turn. However, if you hold all of Australia through the next round and still control it at the start of your next turn, then you will receive your bonus armies for Australia.
The only question to ask is "Do I control it at the start of my turn?"


text:
How is a Gin Rummy hand scored if both the knocking and defending player have Gin?
I am playing with the Big Gin variant, which is not part of the base game.
Say I pick up a card from the deck which makes me a Gin hand. Only, I don't realize it due to say, misreading my hand, or I questionably decide to try for Big Gin for extra points, and simply discard my remaining deadwood card without knocking.
My opponent now draws from the deck, makes Gin, and knocks.
How is the hand scored?
In particular:

Does the defending player receive the Gin bonus?
Since the defending player has equaled the knocking player's deadwood count (0), do they receive the undercut bonus even though the knocking player made Gin?
If so, does the knocking player still receive the Gin bonus?

Your opponent gets 25 points plus 0 points. You do not get a chance to undercut. According to Pagat:

A player who goes gin can never be undercut.

You do not get a gin bonus because you did not declare gin. You don't have a chance to declare gin because play ended. Play ended because your opponent knocked. Again from Pagat, emphasis mine:

You can end the play at your turn if [...] Ending the play in this way is known as knocking [...]

The original revision of this answer was waaaay off. Some sources (rummy.com) call "going gin" and "knocking" two totally different things, which really confused me when I read the question. Other sources (Pagat.com, Wikipedia.com) label going gin a special case of knocking - knocking for zero. I could use a little help in establishing the authoritativeness of Pagat. Anyone?

You'll have to forgive me if my terminology is bad; I'm a complete beginner to the game.  Some excerpts from Harbin's "Waddington's Family Card Games", from which I learnt the game: "Suppose that you decide to 'knock' or go down with 6 points against you..." and later: "If you go down with no unmatched cards at all, this is 'going gin' and you call 'Gin'."  Perhaps "going down" was the phrase I was looking for, rather than "knock", where knocking and going gin are the two special cases of going down?  Other sources seem to think "going down" is simply another term for knocking.

It turns out http://rummy.com/ginrummy.html answers this pretty specifically - more clearly than the Pagat source you've quoted, though it does agree with you.  Search for "Gin Scoring" on that page.  If you're happy referencing that source in your answer, I'll gladly accept your answer.


text:
Is it mandatory to draw more Destination Tickets when they are completed?
In TTR USA, does a player have to draw more Destination Tickets when they run out?
(Meaning they've completed all the ones they started with.)
Or can they simply continue to play by extending their longest route or blocking other players?

No. Your opponents should not know when you complete a route until the end of
the game. Also, you score points for every track you lay down, so you aren't just playing to block other players or to get he longest route. Completing routes is simply one of the ways to score points, it is not "the object" of the game.

Thanks. I play with my 8 yr old son and he seems to enjoy just building the routes he can - and blocking me!

No, you are not required to draw more destination tickets. Nor, do you "run out" of destination tickets because they are kept hidden until the end of the game from players.
From the rules:

Players keep their Destination Tickets secret until the end of the game.

This hidden information can additionally be used to bluff your opponents, by making them think you have more or less points than you actually do!

This does not appear to add anything new to the question that was not answered in the other answer. While it is a good idea to not inform others of your ticket status the rules state that it is a secret and that was already in the other answer.


text:
Bridge guide for experienced Spades player?
I'm a long-time online Spades player who's never played a single hand of Bridge, but I'd love to give it a try sometimes. I've always felt that the games seem rather similar, so I was looking for something like a quick guide to Bridge for Spades players. There's a rather nasty lack of unique search words for this, so I figured I'd ask the community.
So basically, two questions:

Are Bridge and Spades similar enough that you can learn one from knowing the other?
Is there a guide that you can use to learn Bridge, speaking from someone with experience in Spades?

The two games have some similarities. But they have a lot of differences too. Spades is a lot simpler, and so going from Bridge to Spades is relatively easy. Going from Spades to Bridge, well you're slightly ahead of the curve in having played a trick-based partnership game, but there is still a lot of other stuff to learn.
To be honest, any general introduction to Bridge would work for you. The bidding in Bridge bears absolutely no relation to bidding in Spades - this is the part you'll need to learn (and hence the section of the guide you want to pay attention to) - there are a lot of conventions to learn. The gameplay is relatively similar in Bridge, but a) there is a dummy hand which is controlled by his partner (declarer), and everyone can see it; and b) players know a lot more about other people's hands because the auction/bidding has a lot more detail than in Spades.

You may find the jump from Spades to Contract Bridge much larger than you expect. However the popularity of (generic) Bridge pre-dates the invention of Contract Bridge by Harold Stirling Vanderbilt in 1925. If you have a gaming group interested in advancing their card-play skills together, you might consider jumping first to one of the antecedent games from the turn of the Twentieth century, the games that initially inspired early stars such as Sam Stayman and Oswald Jacoby. In chronological order (and thus also in order of increasing complexity):

Whist
Auction Bridge
Plafond

as well as a more recent related game:

Bid Whist

Although the Laws of Contract Bridge are straightforward, at least until you have to deal with irregularities, that is not the source of the game's complexity. Many great minds have worked over the past century developing increasingly complex bidding systems and conventions, and one must know at least one of these in substantial detail before setting foot in Bridge Club or Tournament with intent to play.
However, when your group decides to jump into Contract Bridge, you could do substantially worse than to use an old reference by either Ely Culbertson or Charles Goren.  Both of them were extremely accomplished players from the early days of Contract Bridge, and wrote extensively to popularize the game.  Both advocated a natural bidding style with similar features (which came to be called "approach-forcing"), the main difference being the use of the more accurate Work Point Count by Goren to replace Culbertson's Quick Trick hand assessment. Old copies of their books are still available at used book stores now and then at very reasonable prices.
Update:
Many national and other bridge organizations also publish guides on How to Play Bridge:

How to Play Bridge - American Contract Bridge League
Learn to Play Bridge - by Richard Pavlicek
Online Bridge Lessons from BridgeBase.com

Comments being ephemeral and all that, the astute comment below by Mycroft is here reproduced:

To emphasise a point mentioned, but not really pointed out, in the answer - DO NOT try to learn Bridge by reading the Laws. Unlike many board and card games, they don't even give an idea of how to play - as stated, the language(s) of bidding are necessary to even start play, and nothing in the Laws explains what things mean - just who can decide what they're allowed to mean. In this respect, it would be more like learning to play hockey by reading the NHL rulebook. In both cases, it's a tool for referees rather than an introduction to the game - very useful for veterans, but not newbies.

To emphasise a point mentioned, but not really pointed out, in the answer - DO NOT try to learn Bridge by reading the Laws.  Unlike many board and card games, they don't even give an idea of how to play - as stated, the language(s) of bidding are necessary to even start play, and nothing in the Laws explains what things mean - just who can decide what they're allowed to mean.  In this respect, it would be more like learning to play hockey by reading the NHL rulebook.  In both cases, it's a tool for referees rather than an introduction to the game - very useful for veterans, but not newbies.

@Mycroft: Great point. I've added to the answer with a citation.

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


text:
Can I play Ticket to Ride on my iPad against people using Ticket to Ride pocket?
I want to play against my friends on Ticket to Ride but I wondering if I can if they are on their iPhones and I am on my iPad?

Yes, all iOS versions of TTR may be involved in a multiplayer game, but only with expansions that are available on all devices.

I believe you are incorrect about expansions, at least for Local multiplayer. I have TTR on my iPad with all expansions purchased. On my phone running Android with only the base TTR game and no expansions, I am able to join games created on my iPad for expansion maps. So I think only the creator of the Local game has to have the expansions. Anyone joining an Online local game would have to have the expansions to play them, though.

Interesting. I think that they may have changed that - I wrote my answer a couple of years ago, and I remember hearing that there was a big update to the app that changed lots of things, especially ones relating to expansions. Or maybe I was wrong two years ago, it's hard to say.

I think you're right - I know as of this past December it was opened up, because my extended family played several games with several expansions that only I had purchased on the one device. But it does seem like that wasn't always the case.

As official site says, you may:

Online Play (WiFi or 3G) against other iPad, Android, Mac and PC gamers with Days of Wonder Online support
Players can challenge rail barons playing on other platforms including Steam PC and Mac, Android, iPad, and on Days of Wonder's online portal

They did not say exactly about iPhones, but I think they did not make special version for iPhones only.


text:
In Phase 10, can you play out your hand before all players has played a turn?
In Phase 10, is it legal to lay out your phase and play out your hand (placing remaining single card in the discard pile) in the first round, before all players have had a chance to play in that round (i.e. pick up a card and discard)?

Yes, of course it is.
There's no rule limiting when you can go out.  Play your phase, empty your hand, round over.
Nice hand, BTW.

Short answer: Yes.
Explanation:
This is one of the main tactics in Phase 10. It is used to surprise the other players so they don't make their phases and only you move on to the next Phase in the next hand. Another benefit is you catch your opponents with many cards in their hands.
Why is it legal? Lets grab the rule book:

GOING OUT / FINISHING A HAND: After laying down a Phase, players try to “go out” as soon as possible. To go out, you must get rid of all of your cards, by discarding or hitting on an existing Phase. The player to go out first wins the hand. The winner of the hand, and any other players who also complete their Phase, will advance to the next Phase for the next hand. Players total the cards left in their hands. (The fewer cards left in your hand, the better!) All the cards are then shuffled and a new hand begins. (Remember, if you did not complete the Phase before another player went out, you must work on the same Phase again in the next hand.)

It's actually less about what the rules state, and more about what the rules don't forbid.
They don't forbid going out immediately after making a Phase, in fact the rules practically encourage it: "players try to go out as soon as possible."


text:
Losing points for partially completed destination tickets in Ticket to Ride
I have the game Ticket to Ride: Europe and I'm a little confused about the points for destination tickets. I read somewhere that if you don't start to complete one of your destination tickets, at the end you don't lose any points. Not sure if this rule it's real, but if it is...
Let's say that I have done these 2 tickets: Frankfurt-Wilno, Danzig-Kiev and I have one more route from Wilno-Athina. Does the last one count as unfinished or does it count as not started?
I consider it started because it goes from Wilno to Kyiv and from there you can continue towards Bucharest-Sofia-Athina.
So, if you can clear things up.
What's the deal with the unfinished and not started tickets?

There's no such thing as a ticket that's "started" vs "not started". Unless it refers to the act of taking the ticket. When you take a ticket, you must complete that route, or lose points for not having completed it. It doesn't matter if you've touched those cities with any trains or not.

At the end of a game of Ticket to Ride, when final scoring happens, your destination tickets can only have one of two statuses: complete or incomplete. As per the rules for destination tickets on page 6 (emphasis mine):

The cities listed on a Destination Ticket represent travel goals for the player; they can result in a bonus or a penalty. 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.

The scoring is clarified on page 7 under Calculating Scores (emphasis mine):

Players must then reveal all of their Destination Tickets. The value of successfully completed tickets is added to their total score. The value for any incomplete Tickets is deducted from their total score.

If a player drew and kept a destination ticket, whether it has been started by the player or not, it is considered incomplete at the end of the game, leading to a loss of points.


text:
Double Deck Solitaire for PC 1989-1992
Looking for the name and information on a solitaire game found in early releases of solitaire for the PC (circa 1989-1991).
It used two decks, eight foundation piles and a tableau with maybe 3 rows of 4 piles?
The object was to build up on the foundations (which began with queens perhaps).  One foundation went up by ones, one by twos, one by threes, and one by fours, I believe.
Was it called Queen Solitaire or King Solitaire, perhaps?

Might have better luck on Arqade: http://gaming.stackexchange.com/

This sounds a lot like Picture Gallery Solitaire, a game that was put out for Palm.
I believe you can find an implementation on SourceForge.


text:
In Uno, can you play a Wild Draw 4 Card drawn as a penalty, if you have a card the same colour as the draw pile?
E.g.
- Player 1 plays a Draw 2 Card.
- Player 2 picks up 2 cards, one of which is a Wild Draw 4 Card. He also draws another unplayable card. The draw pile is showing a yellow card. Player 2 has a yellow card in his hand (but he is not allowed to play these).
Can he play the Wild Draw 4 Card?
I say yes because he has no other playable cards.
My partner says no because he has a card in his hand that matches the colour of the draw pile.
What is the official rule?

I think you mean "discard pile" rather than "draw pile".

Official Rules
"Official rules" do vary slightly from site to site, however all seem to agree (including the rules on Wikipedia) that being on the receiving end of a Draw Two or Wild Draw Four forces the player to draw 2/4 cards and forfeit their turn, therefore Player 2 is not allowed to use either card, and play continues to the next player after Player 2.
Under the official rules you are only allowed to immediately play drawn cards when, on your turn you choose to draw a card, and the card you have drawn is playable.
House rules
Otherwise there is a common house rule regarding not ending your turn after receiving a Draw Two and/or Wild Draw Four.
If playing with this house rule Player 2 must play the yellow card - if they were to play the Wild Draw Four they could be challenged by Player 1, and end up drawing more cards as a penalty for playing a Wild Draw Four while they have a card in hand that matches the current colour.

NO
You do not play any cards after having a Draw 2 (or Wild Draw 4) played on you.  You draw the cards and then it is the next player's turn.
See the section on Special Cards in the official rules.

I agree, but your answer bring nothing new to the table. If you don't add a link or any source to the rules, your answer is the same as the previous answer.

Here's a link to the official rules: https://service.mattel.com/instruction_sheets/42001pr.pdf


text:
Ticket to Ride multiplayer between OS X and iOS
We've purchased Ticket to Ride for iPhone/iPad iOS and I was wondering if I purchase the desktop version for OS X would we be able to play locally between the two devices.

According to the game maker's website, yes:

Online Play (WiFi or 3G) against other iPad, Android, Mac and PC gamers with Days of Wonder Online support

I would take that to mean that both device need to be online to contact their server to set things up, but cross-platform isn't an issue.

At the moment, choose the Steam version over the Mac app store one if you can. There are currently (Dec. 9 2015) issues between the different platforms since the last update but our tech team is on the deck and in the end this will be possible to play over WiFi between the different platforms. For now the Mac App Store is a little behind in terms of updates


text:
Should I alert a conventional 'Pass'
My partner and I have a pretty neat system for bidding against opponents opening a weak 2 (2 in a Major = <11 HCP, 6-card; 2 Diamonds as either the Multi or weak with diamonds). In this system, if North opens and East passes, that pass has a specific meaning.
Does this 'Pass' need to be alerted? Is it reglementary to alert a 'Pass'?
Same goes for Double, we have some specific agreements for Double in this defense as well. Does that need to be alerted?

If your Double in this situation is primarily take-out, not a two-way bid, and shows a strength of at least 10 HCP but does not promise a significantly stronger hand such as 17+ HCP, then it is probably not alertable.

From the English Bridge Union Blue Book (Rules and Ethics):

Unless it is announceable (
  see 4
  D
  , 4
  E, 4
  F
  and 4
  G
  ), a pass
  or bid must be alerted if
  it
  :
  (a)
  is not natural; or
  (b)
  is natural but has a potentially unexpected meaning

('Natural' has a long paragraph of definition; a natural pass is
"A pass
which does not unexpectedly convey values or specify suit holdings.")
So yes, if your bid (including pass or double) is conventional it must be alerted.

Rules can be different in different places.  For conventional passes, it's the same in the ACBL (i.e. North America).

Also, any pass that promises a minimum strength > 0 HCP is alertable, without any exceptions that I can think of right now. Unless it is part of a constructive defense it is also probably a restricted bid that could only be played in extended team play or other unrestricted events.


text:
Do you score points for claiming a route in Ticket to Ride Pennsylvania?
Do you score points for claiming a route in Ticket to Ride Pennsylvania as you do in all other variants of the Ticket to Ride game?
The rules aren't explicit and there is no scoring guide.

In Ticket to Ride, the expansions rules feature the differences with the base game ones.
If the routes were not meant to be scored, it would be stated in the rules for that map.
On the Pennsylvania map, you score using the same points scheme as usual:

1 space   --> 1pt
2 spaces --> 2pts
3 spaces --> 4pts
4 spaces --> 7pts
5 spaces --> 10pts
6 spaces --> 15pts
7 spaces --> 18pts

This backed by Alan R. Moon himself on BGG

The original USA map says under the rules for 'Claiming Routes':

"When a player claims a route, he records the points he receives by
  moving his Scoring Marker on the Scoring Track"

The Pennsylvania rules say as follows:

"When a player claims a route, he may also take the top Stock Share
  from any of the Railroads listed on the route he claims."

It also starts with:

"This rules booklet describes the game play changes specific to the
  Pennsylvania Map and assumes that you are familiar with the rules
  first introduced in the original Ticket to Ride"

I take this to means that you do score points when claiming a route as this in the origional rules and taking a share is an additional optional action.  If the expansion rules says it assumes you are familiar with the original game and doesn't specifically say you don't score routes then that rule, along with all other basic rules, still apply.

It makes more sense to keep the convention of scoring for the tracks you place as per other TTR ride games. My beef is that I started with TTR Europe as my base game and there are no five place routes on that board, so it took quite a while to find out how much to score a five place route in the Pensylvania expansion. Indeed, because of the existence of five place routes in TTR Pensylvania we assumed initially that you didn't score routes as you placed them.


text:
Take out double at first opportunity to double?
I dealt and passed - LH opponent passed, partner passed and RHO opened 1 Heart.
Holding:
♠ K98   ♥ 109   ♦ A986  ♣KJ2

can I double as this is the first opportunity to do so?

Hi Hazel - welcome to the site!  Could you add a few more details, such as what system you were playing and the order of the suits in the hand you have given? (I think it's standard to give hands from spades to clubs, but that would imply weak hearts). You can copy and paste unicode suit symbols from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_Playing_Card

Also what did you have in your hand?

I would assume that the cards listed are what Hazel had in her hand, and the punctuation above is just a little ambiguous.  Usually people don't know what their RHO is holding when deciding how to bid!

@thesunneversets Ah, that makes more sense!

@Hazel Dee: Welcome to the site. An upvote to get you started.

I'm assuming that the cards in the question are your cards, in the conventional ordering of Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs.
You certainly can make a takeout double at this stage - you have a shortage of your opponent's bid suit, and no major shortages elsewhere - but the question is, do you really want to?  With such an uninspiringly flat hand, only 11 HCP, and a partner who has already indicated that she doesn't have an opening hand, it seems unlikely you're going to be able to seriously compete in this auction, even in the best case scenario.  Supposing you force your opponent to bid here - do you really want to end up in 2C or 2D with a marginal fit and about 20 points between you?  (Not entirely a rhetorical question - maybe if you have 60 below the line, or your opponents have 70 below it, you do!)
If you're not worried about ending up in a miserable minor-suit partscore or, even more likely, giving your opponents a little more information about the lie of the cards than they previously had, then this doesn't seem an actively diabolical bid.  In general though I would adhere to the rule of thumb "third hand low, fourth hand high": given that your hand in the fourth seat is so unexciting I'd usually just keep quiet and hope for more interesting cards next time around.

Regarding the statement: "Supposing you force your opponent to bid here": Is the opponent you refer to here In-Hand Opponent or Opposite-Hand Opponent? It certainly can't be either of LHO or RHO.

As a passed hand I would eagerly double with this hand
♠ KJ98 ♥ T9 ♦ A62 ♣KT92
but not with the hand you have inquired on. My reasons for regarding the hand above as significantly better are:

Holding a good 4-card spade suit I can reasonably expect to compete profitably to 2S even if partner has only honour-third in Spades and a shapely 8 count or so. This re-entering double really should promise 4 spades so that partner can respond 1S on honour third if second hand passes again.
The minor suits have the broken holding in the long suit and the solid holding in the short suit. Reversing the honours in the minors weakens the hand by perhaps half a point in this situation.
Competing to three of a minor with two balanced passed hands is unlikely to be a winning contract; likewise with attempting to compete to 2NT.

The opponents can often get into trouble on hands like these so there is no  rush to compete. If the auction continues after your second pass with 2H - P - P back to you still retain the make a reopening double in a last attempt to compete in 2S. If instead a 1S, 1NT, 2C or 2D call came back to you in reopening seat you are just where you want to be on this hand; defending.

My answer is yes, to the "first to bid" part, and not quite to the "should I double" part.
My personal requirement for a takeout double is 14 points. You have 12, (11 in HCP, one for the doubleton in hearts), which I consider too weak for such a bid.
Change the hand slightly to:
♠ KT98 ♥ --- ♦ A9862 ♣KJ92
and I'd double in a heartbeat, with three points for the void, and at least four cards in each of the other three suits.
Note that you seem to be missing a card in the original question. If the missing card is a low spade (so that you have four), that would make a better case for a double, even with your hand. And if the missing card were the queen of spades, then I'd certainly double with 13 HCP and a doubleton in the opponent's suit.


text:
Can the original Ticket to Ride (US) rules be applied to the Europe map?
I am planning to get the Ticket to Ride: Europe and introduce the game to a new player. For a beginner, I was thinking of playing the European map with the original US rules. I will be ignoring tunnels, ferries and train stations.
Is the European map playable and balanced with just the original rules?

I would suggest that Ticket To Ride is fairly self-balancing.
What this means, applied to your question, is that the European map and destination tickets won't be as intrinsically balanced as if you'd played with the full rules.  Obviously routes involving lots of ferries and tunnels have suddenly become a lot easier to complete, and as such more attractive to go for.
Equally, though, we can assume all players know this to be the case.  If the game gains an element of competitive jostling to be first to obtain what appear to be underpriced routes, then that's a whole new layer to the game, and one which I imagine would be a lot of fun.
I wouldn't want to play Ticket to Ride: Europe with the US rules a lot of the time, but as a break from the norm there is no reason why it shouldn't be a great game.  Having to re-evaluate a "known" gameboard in the light of a dramatic change of the ruleset is an excellent strategic exercise in and of itself.

I do not think this is the best idea, here's why:
Usually, a game is designed and playtested against its original rules, to fit them as well as possible.
Since the Europe version adds the train stations, the game is built in a way that encourages their use. In this case, the map has several choke points that get crowded quickly, requiring the other players to build the stations.
So as long as you respect the other rules (mainly the one stating that with less than 4 players, double routes only count as single routes), you could encounter difficulties completing your objectives.
You can just risk it and hope for the best, of course. But in my experience, dumbing the rules down is not even necessary. I've taught TTR:E to a lot of people, and even the newbs hadn't had any difficulty dealing with the additional rules. You'll have to recap the rules for ferries and tunnels once or twice, but that's it.

The map plays well using only the US rules, but not as well as with the full TTR:Europe rules.
You will have to decide how to handle the ferry routes and the tunnel routes. You can play it ignoring the difference, treating them just as any other route, and it won't break the game. It also won't have the same level of difference in feel, either.
Note also: The Ticket point costs are formulaic - they are  the shortest possible route length between the two cities (except for the 2 miscalculated ones). So no adjustment of ticket values is needed.


text:
How can I do better than chance in Uno?
Just started playing Uno. What are the most important strategies that might improve my game? Of course luck is important, but I'm trying to do better than crossing my fingers.
For example, before and after a player announces "Uno", should my play be different? While there's a "wild" card, how should I decide which color to switch to?
@paul-marshall thanks for the reply. I understand that normally i shall change color to the one that i have most cards -- but is there any occasion that i shouldn't do so?
For the wild card, let's say now i have one blue, one yellow, and one wild card, and the table is playing red. shall i use wild card to change color (to blue or yellow), or, just hold the card and hope i could discard yellow and blue later? is there some thumb rule when shall use wild card and when not?

I have a possible second answer (might just delete the first), but I need some direction. What sort of strategies are you interested in? It looks like you are specifically interested in how strategy should changed based upon if one or more opponents have one card left (are you also interested in 2,3 or other late game decisions based on player hand size?), what call color you should choose when you have 2 colors and at least one wild, when the best time to use a wild (did you mean any wild?).  important strategy, are you measuring that strategies increased odds at winning?

Or is Important Strategy a measure of improved odds at winning by difficulty to implement that strategy. For example, card counting all played card colors and ranks (0-9 and Special cards) is quite difficult to do, but probably increases your odds of winning by a substantial amount. (Counting colors only also probably increases your odds by almost the same amount, but is much easier to do.) Does color&rank counting rate higher as an important strategy than color counting alone? (Then there is the difficulty of measuring just how difficult a strategy is to pull off.)

You're trying to run out of cards, and the opportunities to change colors are somewhat limited. Your goal, therefore, should be to play the last card of one of your colors, then be able to switch to another color you have on the next play. This doesn't always work, of course.
When changing colors (via wild or matching the card), you should switch to the color that you have the most of. Switching to the color that you have the most cards in gives you the best chance to "even out" your hand; if you're stuck with 7 cards in your hand, it will be easier to play when you have 2 yellows, 2 reds, and 3 greens than to play when you have 5 yellows and 2 reds. Note that it will be easy to play one card when you have a four-card hand consisting of one of each color, but it will be hard to go out with such a hand: changing colors is somewhat difficult, and you can't count on it happening when you want it to.
When somebody calls "Uno," it's best to assume that their last card is the same color as the previous card they played; otherwise, the player going out is hoping against hope for a lucky play. Therefore, you change the color in play after somebody calls "Uno," by whatever means is handy. (Or inflict a Draw Two or Draw Four Wild against them.)

I disagree on your theory about a player who called Uno being more likely to have the same colour card as the one he/she just played. I consider myself above average at calculating statistics during game play and have found that this is more often not the case than you might expect from the play style that you'd expect players to play (eliminate cards by colour). In my experience keeping the colour the same is the better choice, the player with just one card is more likely NOT to have the same colour. Just my opinion and on-the-fly statistics.

@Bazzz, what do you mean by "more often than not"? 10% chance of same color? 30%? 60%? If they have a 34% chance of matching the current color (or higher), then you should definitely change colors; if you change, and they don't have the current color, then you still have a 67% chance of stymieing them.

I have a feeling (based on my own experiences with the game) that if you were to keep track of the times players calls Uno and the last card is the same colour as the one they just played, and you were to keep track of the times players call Uno and the last card is of a different colour than the one they just played, that the "different colour" track will end up having a higher number.

That's a problem: you'd need to know how much more often they have a different color. If they have the same color just 34% of the time or more (it's different less than twice as often as it's the same), you need to switch, because the odds of switching to the wrong color are pretty low.

@Bazzz and PaulMarshall, I am working on modifications to an UNO simulator. I am very interested in this question of how often the 2nd to last card (UNO!) is the same color as their very last card when they go out (all possible scenarios;Wild&Wild, Wild&Color, 2CardsSamecolor, 2CardsDifferentColors). My problem is that I am not certain exactly how to model players "normal" behavior. What colors a player has left will vary greatly based upon their strategy. The best strategy I have found so far is to always play the highest Point card in the color with the most cards.

This MostCards/HighestPoints strategy seems attempts to have 2 different colors going into the last two cards. How would you modify a strategy to attempt to get only a single color for the last two cards? Would you still use wilds as a last resort? With 3 cards would you always play the single card of a color? With 4 would you try to optimize by trying not to play a card with exactly 2 cards of a color (play the other two instead), those other 2 should they be the same or different colors (I.e. RRGB or RRGG is better?). How far should this optimization extend, 5 cards?

@Bazzz, just some preliminary observations from running a couple of hundred thousand simulations. For strategies that attempt to even out the colors, the last two colors being the same (32%), and different (37%), one Wild (28%). For the random legal card it is same (48%), different (35%), and one Wild (16%). The card counter has similar numbers to the random player, but with 5% less of the same/different color and %10 more one Wilds. Still analyzing the last 5 cards to see if playing a color with fewer cards helps wins when you are down to 4-5 cards(Does holding 2-3 same color help?)

A couple of pointers from the rules.

Keep your score low: The winner is determined by whomever scores 500 points first, or in the variation Running Player Totals, by whomever has the lowest total points when someone reaches 500. A good strategy is always try to play your highest value card if you can (other than a Wild/Wild-Draw-4, since at least one of those can be played when a player calls UNO), or to switch to a color that has the most points in that color in your hand. (I.e. if the top card of the discard is a red 5, and you have a red-6, red-0, blue-5, blue-7, the best play to keep your score lowest is probably the blue-5. Although it is one point higher than the red-6, "blue" has more total points in that color that you need to get rid of.)

Scoring - When a player goes out, all other players card values are added that players total. First player to 500 points wins. Wild, Wild Draw4: 50 pts, Draw2, Skip, Reverse: 20 pts, All number cards (0-9): Face Value. Variation: Running totals for each player can be kept instead. When one player's total reaches 500 (or some other value), the game is over and the player with the least points wins.

Maximize playable cards - While Paul Marshall points out that you should try to even out colors, you should also try to even out numbers and word cards (numbers/names are a lot less probable with 25 cards of each color, and only 8 of each name/number other than 0). Each extra differently named/numbered card reduces unplayable discards (I.e. With only two cards left, if they are differently numbered and colored, there are only 42/100 unplayable cards (not counting Wilds). If the two cards are different colors, but are the same number/name then there are 46/100 unplayable cards). Additionally, if you have lots of a particular named/numbered card, then there are fewer of those in the deck or players hands, which also reduces the likelihood that you can play them.
Play Draw cards when going out - If you can manage to go out on a Wild Draw-4 or a Draw 2, those cards are added to an opponents hand before scores are calculated. These additional card draws add on average 11.48 points/card to your score.
Attack the leader - This is only easy if you sit adjacent to them. You can choose to play Wild Draw-4 cards, even if you have a playable color. If you aren't caught, the person about to win just drew 4 cards. If you are caught though, you draw 4 and likely added 46 points to their score. If not adjacent to a player, you can choose to change colors if the leader called UNO and chose the color themselves (makes it less likely to have the right color).
Reneg instead of using Wilds If you have 3-4 cards left, in different colors, with a Wild, it might make sense to Reneg and draw a card instead of giving up the wild. When you Reneg, you can only play the card you draw, but you have approximately (24+8+7)/108=35% chance of drawing a playable card (24 other cards of that color, 7 other wilds, 7 other cards of that number/name.

Some of these strategies conflict with others, so the state of the game will determine what the proper action to take is. For example, if you have many more cards than an opponent who is sitting on 3 cards, you should probably start getting rid of your high point Wild-Draw 4 card (50 points instead of the average 46). Draw 2 actually has a worse average payout for an opponent than making another player draw two cards.

Could you please clarify "Reneg"? This is the only Google Search result I have and since I learned Uno with rules from another language (Italian), I'm not sure about it... Maybe "Reverse"?

Specifically, for the colors to choose for wild cards, you could look at every discarded card and the ones in your hand to determine which color has the fewest remaining cards left in it (but people may not wish to play with you if you take forever every time). You might be better off just thinking "lots of blue cards have been played, so let's try blue" if you want to avoid being beaten next turn. In fact, if you are confident what your opponent's last card might be (I can't leave it on red or I'll lose), you might intentionally draw in the hopes you can change the color with that card.

Change colour as much as you can, most players want to maintain the colour as long as they still have cards of that colour and want to change otherwise. A nice way to approach this game is to always change the colour when you can (by number on number or by wild), even if you still have cards of the previous colour. The theory behind this is that on average you'll receive an equal number of cards of every colour. If you deplete yourself of a certain colour you will end up drawing cards when that colour is the current one. Changing colour often results in you having a multi-coloured hand that enables you to always have a playable card, and depend less on luck. Subsequently it minimizes the number of draws that you need to make. And, it annoys the other players which is a good thing.
As mentioned in my comment I disagree with Paul on his theory that the player who calls "Uno" is most likely to have a card of the colour that they just played. Expecially if the card that they just played is a low number. Players tend to get rid of the higher numbers earlier (for obvious reasons). If the Uno caller just played a red "2", I will most certainly attempt to keep the colour red as I strongly believe that the chance that they have another red card and it being lower than 2 (as players tend to play 2s before they play 1s and 0s) is smaller than the chance that they have any card of another colour.
Generally speaking what I'm saying here is that if you want to be less dependent on luck you should likely get yourself familiar with some quick on-the-fly basic statistics that you can apply whilst playing. How many cards of a certain colour have been played already? Is it therefore more likely that the Uno caller has that colour, or not? Etc.

Use your uno wild card when you have 3 cards left. Lets assume you have only  blue 4 and 1 cards. Place the wild card down and if the color is red say blue.
If the other player doesn't have blue, place one blue card down and say UNO. After the person picks up a card and you place your blue down and you win.

This really doesn't add anything new to the question that wasn't mentioned anywhere else and is talking about a pretty specific situation


text:
Did the first version of Ticket to Ride released in Europe have a USA map or a Europe map?
In the United States, the game called simply Ticket to Ride has a map of the United States. Was this the case when it was originally released in Europe?
I’m curious to know if it was branded differently in that region, like if Europe got Ticket to Ride USA and what Americans call Ticket to Ride: Europe was the original game released in Europe.

The German Wikipedia article is pretty clear on this.
Name              | Erscheinungsjahr   | Spielplan
                  | (Publication Year) | (Board Map)
--------------------------------------------------------
Zug um Zug        | 2004               | USA
Zug um Zug Europa | 2005               | Europa (Europe)

The first version to be released in Germany was the US board in 2004. This went on to win the prestigeous Spiel des Jahres (Game of the Year) award in the year 2004; awarded by a jury of critics.
A game is only eligible to win Spiel des Jahres in the year it was published in (unless it was published in the previous year after the list of nominees had been closed). And there has not been the case of a spin-off version winning Spiel des Jahres if the main one did not. In fact, while I don’t have sources it is very unlikely for spin-offs even to be considered, since they typically follow the same principle as the main game which would have been eligible earlier.
The Europe board was not released until the following year, 2005. The table at the bottom of the Wikipedia article indicates that.
Incidentally, the game did receive a minor rebranding in Germany by getting a new (German) name: Zug um Zug. In Scandinavia (specifically Finland, where I bought the Scandinavia version), the original name was kept.

I have both Ticket to Ride (North America) and Ticket to Ride, Europe, and I live in Europe.
As far as I know, Ticket to Ride was the first one available. But I have no link to prove it.

I would think that the copyright dates in the rules would prove it. Or maybe pictures of the box art?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticket_to_Ride_(board_game)   that states TTR was released in 2004 and Europe in 2005.   Also the Boardgamegeek pages for each game state the release years as 2004 and 2005


text:
Response to "convenient" minor bid
My partner opened 1 Club. I held:
 S: J732
 H: -
 D: Axxxx
 C: QJxx

She was upset that I bid two clubs rather than 1 Spade. I did not think the Spade suit was good enough to bid. What do you think.
On another "convenient" minor open I had 4 Spades and 4 Hearts, both with two honors, and 8 points. I bid 1 NT, which I thought would indicate that I could support either suit.
I had the same partner both times and caught a lot of flack over these bids. Was my thinking wrong?

Assuming you are playing some simple form of standard american, yes your thinking was wrong on both hands.
Usually the responder is supposed to "bid up the line", giving preference to majors in case she has a 6-9 point hand.
With the first hand, you can either bid 1D or 1S. The reason to bid 1S instead of 1D is that the auction 1C-1D-1H-1S might have a special meaning (4th suit bids can have special meanings) and might show a stronger hand than what you have. Suit quality considerations are very rare when responding at the one level and your hand is not one of those rare hands.
With the second hand, you must bid 1H, and if partner bids 1S you can raise to 2S. 1NT actually denies a 4 card major.
The scoring in bridge gives preference to majors and as a result most bidding systems give preference to the majors. Bypassing 4 card majors when responding is usually considered bad.

Bidding a new suit is usually considered forcing for one round so you should be able to bid your diamonds or spades then return to clubs if needed (i.e. you should be guaranteed to be able to bid up the line as per Aryabhata's answer and still end up in clubs if you want)

Yes, if partner bids 1NT, you can give preference to clubs.

You should bid as low as possible to leave bidding room for opener. That suggests that 1 diamond is the best response in the first hand (unless it is artificial but forced and shows a "bust" as some players bid), 1 spade is a close second best, and TWO clubs is the worst, because it "jumps" the bidding when opener may have only a three card suit.
Some partnerships give preference to the majors and say that you should respond one spade with ANY four carder, even 5432. If partner has a four card spade suit, say, KJ76, s/he'll want to play in spades with a 4-4 (eight card) fit. Worst case, it will be 9876, but to have the "worst" four cards on both sides is pretty rare. With a 3-card spade suit and a 3-card club suit, partner may call 1NT to your 1 diamond or 1 spade bid, which your 2 club response precluded.
In the second hand, the lowest reasonable response is 1 heart, four card major. Again, even with 5432. If the opener has four hearts s/he'll raise hearts, with four spades, bid one spade; with 3 spades, 3 hearts, 4 diamonds, 3 clubs, s/he'll bid 1NT. But you're bidding 1NT takes most of these options away from partner.


text:
Why did I win "Asia Passport" achievement early?
I'm playing iPad edition. Fifth Legendary Asia achievement says:
Asia Passport: Win all achievements for the Legendary Asia map.
I thought it means that I have to win first four achievements.
For some reason I won it in the middle of the next game after winning Mountain Hermit. At that point I already had Double Trouble, but not two others.
Any ideas what happened?

This happened to me too - I'm fairly sure it's just a bug.

As stated you should never be able to win it, as it is a Legendary Asia achievement and so you need to have it in order to earn it!

@TimothyJones Thanks, I've sent this question to the Days of Wonder support.

@Nick I don't understand what you are saying, sorry.

@Sergii It itself is a legendary Asia map achievement, so in order to obtain you, you must first have it! It should say "Win all OTHER achievements for the Legendary Asia map". But that's just being pedantic really.

I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because while this can be considered on topic since it is a computer-based game based off a board game it does not appear to be on topic. What you are describing sounds like a bug in the game you are playing and something that should be reported to the developer and it is not something that anyone on this stack exchange site can help you with.

should this be moved to Arqade?

@chicks this question is to old to be migrated but there is nothing stopping it from being asked there. However this is a question that is asking about a bug so there is nothing that a user at Arqade could answer about it.


text:
Question on ethics or rules
I would very much like to know the correct ethical procedure for the following play. Hearts are trump.

West led a small club
North played a small club
East played a small spade
I as South played a Jack of clubs thinking I was taking the trick
Then, East said "Oh, I have some clubs" and played the Queen of clubs.

I had the King of clubs and would have taken the trick given the opportunity. It didn't seem fair for me not to get to play it after East's card was changed.
Do I get the chance to take the trick I would have taken or does this trick belong to East?

East reneged (played an out-of-suit card when they had a card of the correct suit), but fixed the error before the next trick; since they're the defender, two things happen:

East's small spade is left face up on the table in front of East. It's a "major penalty" card, and must be played by East as soon as it is legal to do so, on some future trick. (Furthermore, if that card is still face up when West leads, you get to pick whether West must lead spades for that trick, or must not lead spades until he loses the lead.)
You can change the card you played, so that you played the king of clubs and took the trick.

If the declarer made an error (you as South, or you playing the dummy North hand), then you get to fix the error, and everyone playing after the corrected player may also change their play. Declarers don't get penalty cards.
Short Answer: you get a chance to take the trick, and there are additional penalties for East playing incorrectly.
If it's an informal game, then maybe you don't worry about the penalty card (how friendly is your game?), but you definitely get to change your play.

And East should thank his lucky stars; in most other trick games, a revoke like that would have resulted in much more severe penalties.

@KeithS, it gets nastier if the next trick has already started by the time the revoke is found; if East won the trick, then they transfer that one (plus one more if they win any further tricks down the line); if East lost the trick (even if West won it), then they transfer only one trick (as long as East-West won that trick or any later trick). This case has lighter penalties because it was caught in time.

That's true. In Bridge, these are more appropriate penalties because East's action probably still would have been to play Q-Cl to try and take the trick, rather than "evading" it to foist it on someone else. In exact-prediction and evasion games, evasion is seen more often, and so the ill-gotten knowledge of a revoke is doubly damaging; the revoking player has a chance to take or lose the trick to their advantage. Penalties for revoking in such games are usually far higher, up to and including a misdeal and severe points penalties for the offending side.

The one time I remember a revoke happening in the bridge games my family played, we just called it a misdeal and dealt out the next hand. They were friendly games.

Reference - Laws of Duplicate Bridge 2007
In a tournament the correct procedure is to summon The Director (Law 9B):

After Attention Is Drawn to an Irregularity

(a) The Director should be summoned at once when attention is drawn to an irregularity.

(b) Any player, including dummy, may summon the Director after
  attention has been drawn to an irregularity.
(c) Summoning the Director does not cause a player to forfeit any
  rights to which he might otherwise be entitled.
(d) The fact that a player draws attention to an irregularity
  committed by his side does not affect the rights of the opponents.

No player shall take any action until the Director has explained all matters in regard to rectification.

The Director (rather than the players) take the appropriate steps to rectify the situation. Laws 61-64 cover revokes (failure to follow suit) and the steps The Director may take to rectify the situation.
If you're playing informally, you'll have to sort the situation out yourselves. I'd suggest following Laws 61-64. In the situation you described the following would happen:

East withdraws his card (if East is defending it becomes a Major Penalty Card), East now plays a legal card.
You (South) may withdraw your card and play a different (legal) card.

Penalty cards are covered under Law 50. There are various restrictions imposed on you (and potentially your partner) when you have a penalty card.


text:
What's the impact of allowing other players to continue while you choose tickets?
The rule book says that you need to decide on your tickets even before the next player takes his/her turn. How big a deal is it to allow a fellow player to decide on destination tickets while others are taking their turn?

You could just make the player choose their tickets in a different room, and then when they have returned and announced their decision, ever other player can announce what they did on their own turn (place cards they drew face down in-front of them, place train cards slightly off the track, etc.)

Allowing play to continue can give the player who is choosing which tickets to pick up an advantage:

Other players may place a route blocking one of the tickets the first player was considering keeping.
Seeing what colours others pick up can indicate where they're going. Another round of this can only help decide which routes are worth keeping.
If play has gone full circle while you're deciding, you also are guaranteed to know which colours will be available for you to pick up once you've selected your tickets. This is huge.

I thought I remembered seeing advice somewhere on the site that said "always let play continue if you're choosing the tickets, never let it continue if it's someone else", but I couldn't find it. While this is certainly the most "effective" way to play, I personally think it's a bit underhand.
I prefer to play as written in the rulebook, but if it's a causal game and people want to keep playing, I'll generally let it happen (no matter who is choosing the tickets). It definitely gives an advantage to the player choosing their tickets, but it's not game breaking.

Thanks Tim! I accept these advantages, but question is, how influential these are... do they really make a great difference? For example, in fact blocking routes can actually deter the other player from choosing a ticket, or rethink a strategy...

If you were going to play the blocking route anyway, it's probably best to wait until the player has selected that ticket- so they end up with the penalty. If you're selecting tickets, I'm not sure there's much disadvantage in allowing play to continue without you, since you can make more informed decisions.

However, I think it's only in rare situations where it would actually affect the outcome of the game - say a player has just drawn tickets, and they have almost completed LA->NYC, except for one 2-train route. One of the other players might choose to conservatively block that route in their next turn. This is obviously useful information. Most times that tickets are drawn, you won't have a situation like that.

I wouldn't say it's underhanded - if there are two players playing by that rule then you'll always have to wait, and then it's even. (We play contrary-wise - you always keep going, so everyone is getting the same advantage)

I think it's underhanded to apply one rule to yourself, and another to everyone else. But, yes, it's easily mitigated :)

take a picture of the board with a smartphone, turn your back to the board and choose if you really want to make things in parallel...

Given that the ticket picking process is usually the slowest aspect of the game, and that turns are designed to be really short, when I play with my board gaming friends we play with a house rule.
The house rule is:

If a player picks tickets, play may continue until another player
  indicates that they want to place track.  Then play stops until the
  ticket picker has finalised their decision.

Even though technically picking cards of any description gives information that the ticket picker should not have, we have found that the difference that this makes is negligible and the time saved is worth the marginal advantage that we give the player.
Of course track placement is the most important information in the game and the ticket picker should, under no circumstances, ever be allowed to see track placements before making their final decision.
In a tournament setting or playing with untrustworthy players I would recommend sticking to the official rules.


text:
What is the name of this Yahtzee variant with 10 dice?
I took a class once where we had to design a handheld game system for a variant of Yahtzee, which I seem to recall being called "Back Yahtzee", however I am unable to confirm this online.
There were two sets of dice and I remember the "Yahtzee" was obtained by getting 10 of the same number and it was called a "big big."
I recall that you could score two things at a time, for example a full house on 5 dice and straight on the other 5.
Does anybody know the name of this game and where I could find the rules?

Is it Double Cameroon. It sees to match.

Here's another like to the rules: http://www.boardgamecentral.com/rules/double-cameroon-rules.html


text:
How to play multiplayer Ticket to Ride (iOS/iPad) with friends over the Internet?
I am trying to play Ticket to Ride for the iOS on the iPad (regular full version, not pocket) with friends over the internet (not local wifi).
I tried using Game Center to issue a 'challenge', but it doesn't seem to work.  I always end up in a room with random players when I use the 'local' play feature.
Does anyone know if this type of multiplayer game is possible with the iOS TTR?

It is possible to play with specific friends in real-time, though it may not be possible to play asynchronously. (Last time I tried, the game aborted if either my opponent or I left the TTR app, so it was real-time play only. That was a while ago though.)
Here's how to set it up.
For iPad:

On the main TTR screen (with Gerry the Conductor holding the ticket labeled Play!), click the "More..." gear.
On the next screen, click Online Games. This should automatically log you in to the online servers.
In the spiral notebook at the center of the screen, click either the Game Center tab (for your GC friends) or Buddies (friends you've marked in some version of online TTR - web or mobile).
Tap the name of one friend you want to play with. This will fly out a screen where you can choose the map and whether the game is ranked or not. Make your choices and hit the green Play button
A standard Game Center Multiplayer Game window will appear. It will default to a 4-player game, with you, the friend you selected, and 2 auto-match slots. You can delete slots (though in trying I had to remove my friend first and then could delete the auto-match slots) or add specific friends with the Invite Friend button. If you add, you'll be prompted for the message to send them. If they accept, the game will start.

For iPhone:

On the main TTR screen  (with Gerry the Conductor holding the ticket labeled Play!), click your playername in the upper right. (You may need to click on your player icon first to make it slide out).
Under the box with your playername and account #, click "Edit my profile" and then "Yes" to go to the Days Of Wonder site. This should automatically log you in to the online servers.
From the profile page, you should be able to add/delete buddies.


text:
Bridge bidding - how do I decide whether or not to bid 1NT with weakness in a particular suit?
If I'm inclined to bid NT with 15-17 points, but am weak in one suit, how weak can I be, and still bid 1NT, as opposed to bidding 1 club, to find out if my partner can show strength e.g. a stopper in my suit, by bidding it?

Can you be more specific?

I think you are looking at this the wrong way, if you bid nt your partner should normally be running the auction

I'd probably think the key point here is whether the opponents have bid that suit or not.

I focused the question, and wonder if it can be re-opened in its current form.

Your partner's response(s) ought to give you a good idea of whether a no trumps contract is the correct one to pursue, or if you might be better off looking elsewhere.
Perhaps your partner will bid Stayman over your NT bid.  If you find a satisfactory fit in hearts or spades, then the question of whether you have a shortage somewhere else becomes irrelevant (in fact, it turns into a bonus).
Otherwise, your partner may well - indeed, is statistically quite likely to - try to bid the suit that you are weak in.  If he does, then this reinforces your initial assumption that a no trumps contract may be a good place to be.
If your partner avoids the suit you are weak in - especially if he avoids it twice, then perhaps NT is not such a good idea.  However, if this is the case then he has almost certainly bid in a suit that you hold 4 cards in, by now.  If so, you have a pretty good option to shift to, outside of no trumps!

Good answer!  The key point is not to fixate on NT just based on what you're holding.  Use your bidding conventions to convey your hand to your partner, and then find what fits best for both of you.

If you have a balanced hand, 15-17 HCP, but you don't open 1NT, you may encounter difficulties rebidding.
For example, you open 1m and your partner responses 1NT, and then you are in a dilemma. Your 2NT rebid promises 18-19 HCP (between 1NT opening and 2NT opening), which is unsuitable now. Sometimes you reverse with a 4-card major and your parter goes 4M with only 8 points. Other times you pass or bid a 3-card suit, but your partner has 9-10 HCP.
For 15-17 HCP, I open 1NT for all 4-3-3-3, 4-4-3-2, 5m-3-3-2, and 5m-4-2-2. Whether to open 1NT for 5M-3-3-2 or 6m-3-2-2 is another question to discuss. Don't forget 1NT opening preempts opponents' majors!

Something I wrote on Another Site, but it's still relevant, and contains some information not in the current answers:
"If it looks like a balanced 15-17, open 1NT". That's the modern guideline.
All of the caveats of the past:

need stoppers in 3, preferably all 4 suits;
need 2.5 QT;
4333, 4432 or 5m332 only;
no small doubleton;

and the rest have all dropped by the wayside. People still discuss what to do with 5M332 and 6m322, but more and more pairs are moving to "put it in 1NT".  Most will bid 1NT with 5m422, even 5m4M22.
People are pushing the boundaries of what regulators consider "balanced", as well. Something like AKTx KJ9x K QTxx has always been opened 1NT by many with "looks balanced to me", and regulators are bowing to the inevitable. So now, players are saying "well, of course AKTx KJ9x 7 KQTx is balanced." Others are saying "are you out of your mind?" and "if you describe that as balanced, that's clear misinforming of the opponents"... You can see from this, or from the 7m222s that people want to open 1NT as well, just how much those caveats/old rules have disappeared.
The problem isn't that any of those old caveats are bad - in fact, we'd prefer to avoid them even now. The problem is that if you don't open 1NT with a balanced hand in your range, it's almost impossible to show it later, or you have to devote so much of your system to "15-17 balanced, unsuitable for NT" that could be used to distinguish between all the rest of the hands in a "12-21, 3+" 1♣ or 1♦ call (which needs a lot of distinguishing as it is). Never mind when it goes 1♣-p-1♥-2♠; now you really want to be able to say "pass is minimum, no 4-card raise (if BAL, 12-14, much easier than 12-16), 2NT is a big hand (18-19 much easier to handle than 16-19),..."
It does cost sometimes, like all decisions. You will get 1NT-p-3NT off the first 5 heart tricks sometimes. But it pays back 4, 5, 6-1 on hands where partner can rely on you not having that hand when they try to figure out this crazy auction.
But the stopper requirement went out with Goren in the 1960s. You just can't bid standard sanely with it.

Well said - pretty much what I attempted to say, but failed to quite get across. Experts have been opening 1NT with a stiff K for as long as I've been playing bridge - approaching a half century now - and just hoping it wouldn't happen often enough to get flagged as an illegal partnership agreement. Finally, the regulating bodies have bowed to the inevitable.

The old ACBL regulation on that was 100% unworkable. If you were in flight A, you did it, your partners did it; your opponents would do it (but would call the TD if you did); and it was legal under certain circumstances - one of which was it was undiscussed. So if your partner ever said anything about it, you couldn't do it again with that partner.  Which was totally unworkable, so nobody didn't do that, so nobody was playing legally, but everyone was playing it...just a mess. Now, of course, the "judgement" players are saying "how dare they!  stiff SQ is fine, but the obvious DJ is illegal?"

Yes, i remember those days also. The work-around on partnership discussion was essentially: wink-wink-nudge-nudge "Don't make a bid that doesn't give you a system rebid."

Many also put at least some 5m422 hands in 1N.

Thanks - I implied it with "throw out shape requirements", but I should (and do now) mention it specifically.

I frequently open a 15-17 1NT with a small doubleton minor, but guarantee at least Qx or xxx in each major to stand partner's possible weak transfer.
A hand that fails this standard, but does not have a 5-card major, has at least 7 minor suit cards and thus is opening a 4-card or longer minor suit.

This is very much a matter of partnership agreement. Some people hold to the definition of "No voids or singletons, no more than one doubleton" for a hand balanced enough to open 1NT. Some prefer "no suit weaker than Qx" instead or in addition. Some will open with a singleton A or K, or even a singleton Q.
The ACBL's Standard American Yellow Card" says that: "Notrump openings show a balanced hand and may be made with a five-card major suit or a five-card minor suit." This is likely what a pick-up pair who have not discussed the matter will play. An established pair should discuss.
The vital thing is that a partnership have a clear agreement on what hands will be opened with 1NT.
As Mycroft points out, if you don't open 1NT with some such hands, there can be a problem finding a good rebid, particularly after a 1NT response to 1 of a minor. On the other hand if you include more distributional hands in the range of a 1NT bid, there may be other bidding problems or missed fits. Personally I would not open a hand with a 6-card suit, or a singleton, with 1NT, but many good players do so.
If you are going to limit what hands can be opened with 1NT, discuss with your partner responses and rebids when opening a 15-17 HCP hand in a suit, esp a minor suit. If you don't both know the sequences you will use with such hands, you are setting yourselves up for a problem.
There are also rules limiting what the agreements here can be. These depend on the sponsoring organization. The ACBL now defines as "natural" any "NT opening bid or overcall that contains no voids, no more than one singleton, which must be an ace, king, or queen, and that does not contain 10 or more cards in two suits combined." and permits most such bids in most sponsored games. As some other answers point out, such rules have grown more permissive over time. But just because something is legal does not make it good bridge, or right for a particular pair.

I wish that any downvoters would leave a comment indicting what they think is wring with this answer. In the absence of a comment, I cannot improve the answer, others cannot use the reasons to write better answers, and readers have no idea why someone objects to the answer. Such a downvote seems pointless.


text:
Opener rebid priority
I'm playing/studying SAYC. So I know that game in major comes first then notrump then game in minors.
When I open with 1 Club partner responds with 1 Spade -- I have 18PTS and 4 hearts and NT distribution, should I bid 2Hhearts, 3Hearts, or 1NT?

With SAYC a balanced hand would normally be bid as follows:

13-14 points - open 1 of a suit then rebid 1NT
15-17 points - open 1NT
18-19 points - open 1 of a suit then rebid 2NT
20-21 points - open 2NT

Your rebid should be 2NT. If you bid this, your partner has a very good idea of what you've got and can then decide how best to proceed.
It's also worth noting that when your partner responded he should have been "bidding up the line". So if he had the same number of hearts and spades, he would bid hearts rather than spades. A heart fit is therefore unlikely.

+1: 2NT is the right bid. Even with 5-4 spades-hearts, partner can always bid 3H to find a heart fit.

@Tom77: why unlikely? Assume he has 5 spades, and 4 hearts. He bid spade first (according to your link (http://home.comcast.net/~kwbridge/up.htm):  "If you have suits of unequal length, you should still show your longer one first.")).

Note that 3NT is NOT generally bid with stronger hands than 21 balanced points. As these would have been opened either 2NT or 2C, 3NT can be reserved for a game-forcing system bid showing spade support of some sort.

@PieterGeerkens: No, 3NT is "usually" rebid with a long club suit (at least in SAYC I think).

(long club suit which you expect to run, that is).

You should rebid 2NT. Your partner is unlikely to have 4 hearts, though it is still possible for 5-4 or 5-5 majors. He should have bidden 1♥ for 4-4 majors.
The 2NT rebid often makes you the declarer, hiding your strong hand. You will not lose 4-4 heart fit since he can bid 3♥ for 4 hearts (and hence 5 spades). If your partner were the declarer, 4M is less scary than 3NT.
Consequently, 2♥ reverse is for unbalanced hands. With an unbalanced hand, you dislike dangerous 3NT. This also promises 5+ clubs. (With 0-3 spades, 4+ hearts, 2-4 clubs, the hand is either balanced or an 1♦ opener.)  You are more likely to go to a correct club contract, such as 5♣ or slams.
I also suggest 3♥ jump reverse for 6 clubs and 5 hearts without game-forcing values. It takes up much space, but it precisely describes hands difficult to bid. With game-forcing values, you have unambiguous "2♥ reverse then 3♥".


text:
Interpreting bidding by partners
RHO: 1C --> LHO: 1S --> RHO: 2D
Does this mean 4-4 in clubs/diamonds, or 5-4 in clubs diamonds. Is it a reverse? (e.g.18+ pts?).
Assuming opponents play SAYC.

Definitely a reverse, say 15-16+ HCP + distributional values.
Promises 5+ clubs.
Can be a "waiting reverse" with only 3 diamonds to elicit more information from partner, with either 3 hearts or 6+ clubs.

The point to a "waiting reverse" is when opener has multiple options for a non-ideal bid, and wishes to set the denomination after responder rebids. It should be done only in a suit below 2 of responder's suit, unless opener is stronger than a minimum reverse. As noted it is often done with 3 of responder's suit to see if responder can rebid it. It often implies slam interest, as the extra information communicated may be of more use to the defence in merely a game contract.
With a minimum reverse, opener must be able to retreat to either 3 of responder's suit or 3NT if the reverse suit is raised.

Thank you for thorough explanation. so answering higher ranked suit on higher level definitely means reverse, right? How would you go if you had minimum opening points (12pts), 4C-4D-4H-1S, opened 1C, partner responded 1S (forcing). You can't show 2D due to minimum opening points & you can't bid 1nt.

Open 1D instead of 1C. If you can't handle all possible responses by partner, then you don't have an opening 1-bid.

Rephrasing slightly: Open 1D instead of 1C. If you can't rebid over all possible forcing responses by partner, then you don't have an opening 1-bid


text:
Why it is important to make a delayed raise and not jump directly to 4-lvl? (System: simple SAYC)
On responding with 13 pts and 4-card major support why it is important to make a delayed raise (e.g. change suit and only then jump to 4-lvl) and not jump directly to 4-lvl- what added value does it supply to the partnership? What would go wrong if I'd just jump to 4-lvl - would our partnership be deprived in some way?

A common bridge principle for SAYC is to bid up strong hands slowly, but jump to a high bid quickly with weak hands that have long suits or other preemptive features.
In the situation you describe with responder having 13 points, you'll want bidding space to communicate whether or not you should be in game or slam, because opener has promised 13-21 points (and therefore the combined hands have 26-34 points).
If slam is possible, most tables will bid it up slowly and find the right slam contract, while your hasty 4 bid lands you a mere game contract (which will give you the bottom score in duplicate bridge).
Therefore, in SAYC, the jump to 4 of the opener's major response is reserved for a weak bid that typically indicates a small number of points but good shape.
For example, with 6 low trump, a void, and a single Ace for high card points, that would be a perfect hand to jump to the 4 level because:

You have a great chance of making the contract
You may prevent your opponents from exploring game
You would have no interest in exploring slam with such a hand, even
if partner has 20-21 points.

You're right that there's a possibility for slam if the fit is right. If the hand had more points a splinter bid could help communicate the possibility but splinters typically require 13-16 points. I wonder if there's a better bid for a hand like that?

The key for an immediate jump to 4 is to be sure that slam is (nearly) impossible opposite partner's strong hand, while providing a good play for game opposite partner's expected minimum opening. Hands such as these qualify over 1 Spade by partner:
Kxxx          xxxxx
Qxx     or    Qxxx
QTxxx         Kxx
x             x

None of these offer a decent slam opposite
AQJxx         AQJxx
AKJx    or    AKJx
Ax            Axx
xx            x

despite the massive fit because, among other reason, they don't have an ace, a void, or two kings. However they still offer a play for game opposite minimum hands such as these:
AJTxx        AJTxx
Kxx     or   x
KJx          Qxx
xx           Axxx

If you jump from say, one spade to thtree spades (four spades in hand) or four spades (five spades in hand), you are saying that you have spades, and nothing else, with most of your 6-9 points concentrated in the trump suit. You might just make your contract, but even if you go down, the idea is that you will have kept your opponents out of a two-or three-level contract that would have scored higher than the penalty you suffered.
By using a delayed raiese, you show values in a "second" suit that offers an alternative to the bid suit, that could offer the possibility of a game in the second suit, or no trump. Let's say the bidding is one spade, two hearts, with your bid showing four hearts and three spades. If partner has four hearts, he might bid four hearts with a 4-4 fit and use the 5-3 spades as a side suit. If his distribution is 5-2-3-3, he might bid no trump.
Also, your delayed raise would show 10+ points. Opposite an opening hand, you probably have game if you can find a suitable fit; the bid of a "new" suit makes it easier to find the best fit.


text:
Simplest form of RKCB - asking for kings after asking for queen
According to wikipedia on RKCB, after an 03 or 14 response

...the 4NT bidder may ask about [the queen] using the cheapest bid other than five of the trump suit. The code for replies to that "queen ask" vary; a common rule is that the cheapest bid in the trump suit denies the queen or extra length and any other call shows it.

Sometimes though, a call of 5NT is only available to show the queen
(Example: 1S - 4NT - 4D - 4H --> 5NT - shows the queen).
Now assume I find out we together have all 5 keycards and the queen, then how do I ask for the kings? Is there a standard simple non-nonsense way that most casual/random partnerships use?
(5NT that I'd use to ask for kings is wasted ...).
I'd assume that would be now bidding 6C (and responses to it 6D - 0 kings, 6H - 1 king, 6S - 2 kings, 6NT - 3 kings). Right?
(P.S. I'm looking for most simple straight-forward non-nonsense common way here...)
In other words, how do I ask for kings in RKCB (as opposed to regular Blackwood)?
(Since 5NT is now occupied by queen ask)

You should use specific king asks instead of count asks. In this auction, opener's 5NT denies any side suit kings; Eddie Kantar in Roman Keycard Blackwood suggests that it show a side queen, singleton, or doubleton, with a jump to 6S denying even that much. Kantar then suggests that a cue bid by responder is a grand slam try, looking for a third-round control in the suit bid.
1S-4NT-5D-5H-6C would then show the spade queen and the club King.
1S-4NT-5D-5NT asks for a specific King, promising all key cards; opener bids their cheapest K.
Obviously, this requires some discussion with partner, but not much more than "Q ask with specific Kings, 5NT specific K ask"; third-round asks and distinguishing 5NT/6S responses to the Q ask should not be used outside an established partnership.