Hoyle's Games Modernized Part 14

Twelve cards, all winning 12 For the last card 1 For the capot 40 -- Total score for one hand 170

When it is considered that in some hands the score may be nothing, and that it may vary in all degrees between these, the variety obtainable will be strikingly evident.

THE FINAL SCORE.

It is necessary now to explain what is done with the scores made in the successive hands, and how the final adjustment is effected.

According to the original mode of playing, the game consisted of 100 points; indeed, in early times the name _Cent_ (corrupted into Sant or Saunt) appears to have been applied to it. Hoyle adhered to this, but at some later period the 100 was altered to 101. This was also the ordinary way of playing the game in France, and has been generally adhered to in England until the last few years. According to this, the score of each hand is registered, either by writing it down, or by some kind of marking contrivance, and the whole added up until the 100 limit is reached by one of the parties. The game may extend over several hands, or it may, by the aid of the extraordinary scores, be completed in one. {114}

It will, however, often happen that both parties may arrive simultaneously near the 100 score, and it then becomes necessary to register carefully and in proper order the scores made at the different stages of the hand by the two parties respectively. The laws prescribe that the scores, whether obtained by the elder hand or by the dealer, shall be reckoned in the following order of precedence--viz.:

1. Carte blanche.

2. Point.

3. Sequences.

4. Quatorzes and trios.

5. Points made in play.

6. The cards.

Applying, therefore, the scores made by either player under each of these heads, in the order named, the one who first reaches 100 will have won the game.

This simple game of 100 may suffice for domestic amus.e.m.e.nt; but a few years ago an alteration was made in the practice of the clubs, by the introduction of what is called the _Rubicon Game_, which is as follows:

There is no definite number of points const.i.tuting a game, but the players play six deals, forming what is called a "partie." The scores made by each player in each deal are registered on a card, and at the end of the partie they are added together. The partie is won by the player who has made the highest aggregate score. The winner then deducts his adversary's score from his own, and 100 is added to the difference, which makes the number of points won.

Thus, suppose A has scored in the six deals 120 {115} points, and B 102, A wins 120 - 102 + 100 = 118 points, for which he has to be paid.

But there is another condition, namely, the establishment of 100 as a "Rubicon." The law says that, if the loser fail to reach this amount, the winner reverses the rule, and instead of _deducting_ the loser's score _adds_ it to his own.

Thus, if A has scored 120, and B only 98, A wins 120 + 98 + 100 = 318, although the loser is only four short of his former score.

This mode of scoring has now superseded, at the clubs, the original 100 game. It certainly adds a new feature to the play; for if a player finds, towards the end of the partie, that he is not likely to reach the Rubicon, it is his interest to score as few points as possible, instead of trying to win.

APPLICATION OF SKILL.

The skill required in Piquet applies to the rejection of cards from the original hand, and to the subsequent play, both of which offer excellent scope for intelligence and judgment. It would be impossible, in the short s.p.a.ce at our disposal, to enter into all the complicated considerations which influence this matter. These, therefore, must be studied in larger works on the game.[33] The essay by Hoyle, printed in the modern editions of his "Games," contains much useful instruction, though not very clearly conveyed. The following are some hints taken from it:

In discarding, it is a great object to retain such cards as will be likely to favour your winning "the {116} cards," _i.e._ making the majority of tricks, which will generally make a difference of twenty-two or twenty-three points to the score. Do not, therefore, throw out good trick-making cards for the hope of getting high counting sequences or quatorzes, the odds for which are considerably against you.

The next attention should be to your "point," which will induce you to keep in that suit of which you have the most cards, or that which is your strongest. Gaining the point generally makes ten difference in the score.

Good authorities attach even more importance to the point than to the cards, because it scores earlier, and may save a pique or a repique.

Of course, you would retain a good sequence--good, that is, either in respect to length or to rank of cards. A sequence of four is especially valuable, because, if you happen to take in one card in addition to it, it may add ten to your score. And even a sequence of three is not to be despised, as that also invites useful increase from the take-in.

Of course, also, you would keep any quatorze if you have it, even if low, as it would destroy three aces in the adversary's hand.

A trio should also be kept, if it can be done without detriment to the cards or the point, as there is always a possibility of converting it into a quatorze. (If you take in five cards, it is only three to one against your doing so, _i.e._ you would probably succeed once in four times.)

But Hoyle gives a case to show caution in this respect. Suppose you have ace, king, queen, and seven of hearts, and two other queens, and that it was a question whether you should discard one of your queens or the seven of hearts. If you discard {117} the latter, it is three to one against your getting the queen quatorze; but if you discard the queen, it is five to two that you will take in another heart, which would probably give you not only the point, but also five certain tricks towards the "cards."

Suppose you, being elder hand, receive queen, ten, nine, eight, and seven of clubs, knave, ten of diamonds; king, queen and knave of hearts; ace and nine of spades, the natural impulse would be to retain the clubs intact for the point and sequence, and discard from the other suits. But Hoyle recommends you to _discard all the clubs_. It is true that if you took in the knave of clubs it would be a good thing, but it is three to one against it, whereas, if you keep the other suits intact, you will take in something that will give you a better chance of scoring than you could have made by the other course.

It may a.s.sist your discard to consider, by inference from your own hand, what the adversary can or cannot possibly hold. For example, if you are very short of a suit, he may have a long point or sequence in it. If you have any honour or ten, he cannot hold a quatorze of that rank, but if you are short of one, he may do so; also your holding a knave or ten, or some other combinations, will prevent him from holding a quint in that suit, and so on.

Beware how you unguard kings and queens. If, being elder hand, you reject a guard to a king, it is probable that in taking five cards you may replace it; but when you are younger hand, it is highly desirable to retain the guard, and for this purpose it is considered further advisable to keep a small card of a bad suit, that it may serve as a guard for a king if you should take one in. {118}

In some positions you must regulate your discard according to the score.

Thus, if you only want a few points, it would be foolish to lay out with a view to any large object; you would devote all your attention to what counts first, namely, the point and sequences; success in which might carry you out before your opponent could get in. On the other hand, if your adversary is much in advance of you, you can probably only retrieve your fortune by a large score, and you would discard with this view. To consider the "cards," unless with a view to a capot, would be useless.

It is considered desirable for you, if elder hand, to take all five of your cards, unless you have a chance of a great score, and there can be no repique against you. The consideration is not only whether the cards will benefit you, but also whether, if you leave them, they may not much more benefit your adversary.

If the younger hand should have dealt to him a hand which will enable him to make six tricks, Hoyle advises that he should not make such a discard as will incur the risk of losing the "cards," unless he should be very backward, and have a scheme for a great game.

In regard to the play of the hand, it is difficult to lay down rules, but an acquaintance with Whist play will be a very useful general guide to the student, showing him how to establish and bring in his suits, how to get tenaces led up to, how to preserve guard to second-best cards, and so on.

The most essential thing is to secure the seventh trick, which scores the "cards"; though, of course, every trick made is of importance to your score, the last counting two. {119}

But the most important point in play is to discover and to take due advantage of the contents of the adversary's hand. The compulsory calling and showing of the various scoring elements give certain positive indications; but many others may be obtained by a skilful player, by inference from his own hand, and from the cards he may see of the stock, and these indications may often be used to considerable advantage.

For this reason, there is an antagonistic exercise of skill in concealing the contents of your hand from your adversary, in order to prevent his drawing correct inferences. For example, a clever player will sometimes refrain from claiming scoring-elements which he may hold, when he thinks that by concealing them he may gain greater advantage in the play. This is called "sinking."

With a bad hand great care is often necessary, by guarding second-best cards, or otherwise, to gain a single trick and so save the capot, which makes such a large score.

A more powerful aid to skill, both in discarding and playing, is to be found in the study of the laws of probabilities, which are peculiarly applicable at Piquet. Lengthy and elaborate statements of the chances will be found in "Cavendish" and in the earlier editions of "Hoyle"; and are well worth the attention of those who care to study the game fully.[34]

{120}

POKER.

There are several varieties of Poker, distinguished by the names of "Straight," "Draw," "Stud," and "Whiskey" Poker respectively. These, again, are played in different ways, varying with the locality, scarcely any two States of America, the home of the game, being fully agreed as to its correct form. So fully is this divergence recognised, that even in America a company, sitting down to play Poker together for the first time, usually begin by discussing how the game shall be played in respect of the various points of difference. We shall endeavour to give a clear idea of what (if any) may be called the standard games, with a few of the more important variations.

The most popular variety is Draw Poker, though the full name is rarely used, the single word "Poker" being usually understood to indicate the "Draw" game.

Draw Poker is played with the full pack of fifty-two cards. There is no set limit to the number of players, but five make the best game and six should be the maximum. As each player holds five cards at the outset, and has the right, if he so pleases, to {121} "draw" five more, it is obvious that if even six players exercised their right to the full extent, the pack would not suffice to supply their demands. As they never do fully exercise it, with six players there is a sufficient margin; but with seven the margin is inconveniently small.

The stakes are represented by counters, known in America as "chips." We will suppose that these are equivalent to pence. A certain amount, say twelve counters, is fixed upon as the limit of the stake. As will be seen hereafter, such limit is rather imaginary than real, applying merely to the successive stages by which the ultimate total is reached, the latter being (unless, by agreement, a limit is placed on this also) an unknown quant.i.ty.

The dealer having been selected, and the pack shuffled and cut, he proceeds to deal round, one at a time, five cards to each player. First, however, the elder hand, at this game known as the "Age," before seeing his cards, starts the pool with a preliminary stake known as the "ante."[35] This must not exceed _one-half_ the limit. Thus, in the case supposed of the limit being twelve counters, the Age has the option of putting up any number from one to six, as he pleases. This stake, from the fact that it is made without seeing the cards, is known as a "blind."

[Ill.u.s.tration]

We will suppose that five players are taking part, whom we may distinguish as A, B, C, D and E; that they are seated in the order indicated in the diagram, and that A is the dealer. The deal pa.s.ses from A to B, and so on.

B is in such case the Age, {122} and has put up, by way of ante a single counter.[36] Each player looks at his cards, whose value depends upon his possession of certain combinations, ranking in proportion to the rarity of their occurrence. C is the first to declare. If his cards are so bad that he has no hope of winning, he may "pa.s.s," _i.e._ go out of the game altogether for that hand. In such case, he throws his cards, face downwards, in front of the Age, who will in due course be the next dealer.

If, on the other hand, C thinks his cards worth playing on, he "goes in,"

_i.e._ he puts in the pool _double_ the amount staked by the Age. D, E and A in rotation do the same, either "pa.s.sing" and throwing up their cards, or "going in" and placing in the pool a like amount to that just contributed by C. When the turn of B (the Age) is reached, he has to make a similar decision, and, if he decide to go in, must put in the pool a like amount to that {123} which he first staked, thereby placing himself on an equal footing with the other players.[37]