hi marya, this is just an FYI additional datapoint for you. This is the way that we played back in the day and the way I implemented on my site (which will go live at some point).
You can only win by saving bid and reaching 500. You can't win by backing into over 500 as the non-bidding team. In fact if the bidding team went set and non-bidding team got 31 plus some meld and went over 500 they wouldn't win. And if the set bidding team then got the bid again and went over 500 they would win, even if less than the non-bidding team that added even more to their score and has a higher score than the bidding team that just saved and went over 500.
The actual bid made has nothing to do with it. This is just adding the points made to the score as with any other hand.
That may seem complicated, but it is simply checking if bidding team saved and score >= 500. The non-bidding team score is not looked at in determining if game over.
There are players who will try to extend the game by bidding over the other team without much hope of saving in hopes they get a killer hand next time. This is handled by logic in my program (and we practiced within my group) that going over 500 and set the bidding team is a win as if you were bidding team and saved. This dealt directly with someone trying to keep you from clsoing out the game. I also have a runaway game over if player goes below -500. Both of these are purely my convention but implemented in my rating version of Double Deck Pinochle.
It is the having to save bid before winning though that is interesting. I read the above and cheecked my memory and my code because I recalled not being able to win just yet if other tem got the bid.
hope that's helpful.
rd
Interesting, this thread was initiated to discuss the definition of "Bidder Out".
I think the general concensus is that it means that when both teams exceed 500, it is treated like a tie and the tie is broken by team who won the contract.
About rdwrites' conventions...
"Declare or Set to Win" - this would seem to amplify the competitive intensity for close finishing games. No Coasting allowed. Interesting.
and
"Mercy Rule" - I have seen some very large gaps between scores, but I've never, ever seen a team go below -500. That said, this seems like a good rule for online play, where nasty players seek out ways to be extremely annoying and horrid.
(10-14-2015, 12:55 AM)rdwrites Wrote: [ -> ]You can only win by saving bid and reaching 500. You can't win by backing into over 500 as the non-bidding team. In fact if the bidding team went set and non-bidding team got 31 plus some meld and went over 500 they wouldn't win.
rdwrites - consider this scenario:
Team A has 440 pts, and team B has 490 pts. Team A wins the bid with 20 meld, while Team B is the defender, also with 20 meld.
Team A takes 30 pts during the hand bringing their score to 440 + 20 + 30 = 490. Team B gets 20 pts to score 490 + 20 + 20 = 530. The non-bidding team has scored over 500 pts - in effect "backing into over 500". Does the game continue, according to your rules? It wasn't clear to me when your rule applies; i.e. does it apply only when both teams are at 500+, or does it always apply?
Good scenario. It always applies. That's what I mean by not being able to back into the win by going over 500 as the non-bidding team, and program not looking at non-bidding score (ever) to see if game over.
Now I did visit your site awhile ago and saw you implemented what appears to be universal Bidder Out (if both teams over 500), and mick referred to as Coasting (and I called it backing in, some slang from back in the day), and I guess the way we played is not as universal, but certainly having to save bid to go over 500 and win is a big part of the game. Quite frankly a team could bid very aggressively if they can get away with it and hold off the other team over 500 (and maybe getting some points each hand as non-bidding team and going ever higher) until the team that was behind manages to save a bid that puts them over 500 and win the game.
I have seen this and done this many many times back in the day. Basically it's Bidder Out all the time.
The Bidder Out save was standard, the or set bidder and go over 500 my convention to deal with players who would bid whatever it takes to keep the game alive hoping they get a killer hand next time to win the game (and keep doing it, and keep hoping) so if they bid to where they're set and setting team is over 500 then they get the win in my convention. I don;t consider bidding out the wahoo to keep the game alive for themselves something to be supported even though standards would allow it.
Again, nice scenario. Hope that helps.
Observations:
I can't seem to shake the notion that "Bid or Set to Win" is better for the game!
I never really considered the "Bidder Out" rule to be a rule worth scrutinizing/debating.
"Bidder Out" is a rule clearly established to reward skill, but only in situations where the scores are close.
"Bid or Set to Win" goes further by rewarding skilful bidding (including inflating the contract that the opponent wins), and becomes a critical rule even when the scores are not close.
Analysis:
Critical people are always complaining that Pinochle games are too reliant on luck.
Even staunch Pinochle players have very little to rebut that claim.
The Meld round can offer card combinations accumulating hundreds of points in a single hand. (Points awarded for simply sitting in the seat)
The Play round can only offer a maximum of 50. (Points awarded for conscious decision making *when game rules don't dictate a specific play)
To analyze the three active segments of a non-passing Pinochle game -- namely Auction, Meld, Play:
Meld has the highest luck factor and the lowest skill factor. Yes, you have to be able to identify and count the meld, but that skill is typically removed during online games.
Play has a median luck factor and a median skill factor. It cannot be considered a pure skill segment because sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.
Auction has the smallest luck factor and the greatest skill factor. Maybe this is why I always teach new players how to bid LAST. It is virtually pure skill, with a few exceptions.
Conclusion:
I am not suggesting that the Meld segment needs to be "corrected", but rather the Play and Auction segments could be afforded greater rewards.
If ever anyone was so bold to try to "improve" Pinochle by stripping back the luck factor, "Bid or Set to Win" seems a justified coup.
What a interesting seed to plant. ...hmm, I wonder if it could grow.
I definitely agree. I guess I would have been disappointed if I learned a version where Bidder Out all the time (not just when both over 500) was not the convention. My goodness, you'd have to shut a team out by pulling over 30 repeatedly to stage a comeback. Not going to happen.
yeah, mick, it raises the intensity and skill level a bit for sure. I'm not quite sure how the both over 500 Bidding Out got so entrenched.
I don't see how it would affect your PPN Notation however, unless you were referring to future potential enhancements of some kind.
In any event, highly recommended from my experience. And now I see it will have to be one of those things I have to explain clearer for my Rating game as I didn't know about the only both over 500 convention.
(10-14-2015, 10:18 PM)rdwrites Wrote: [ -> ]I don't see how it would affect your PPN Notation however, unless you were referring to future potential enhancements of some kind.
I plan to develop the PPN in such a way that it doesn't matter the rules or variants that are used.
My intention for the parser, is that it doesn't have to do any Pinochle-related calculations (at least not in the early stages), it merely shows what it is given.
What IS important is that all rules/variants are express-able using the PPN.
Two existing PPN tags that can be used to accurately express this topic are: [Competition] and [Victor]
The Competition tag is very vague at this point. Properly expressing a certain game is going to require a tighting of terminology and mostly likely a standardized set of official keywords to describe all possible variants and rule modifications. This is a very tricky endeavor.
oh yeah, a greatly expanded version of marya's config table, like where she has Bidder Out as an option. I understand.
I would say way to do it is to have a keyword registration table that identifies meaning and possibly suggestable by authorized users for variations they represent. Certainly to attempt to pre-define every permutation would be an undertaking but probably most will be pre-defined anyway.
(10-14-2015, 10:18 PM)rdwrites Wrote: [ -> ]I definitely agree. I guess I would have been disappointed if I learned a version where Bidder Out all the time (not just when both over 500) was not the convention. My goodness, you'd have to shut a team out by pulling over 30 repeatedly to stage a comeback. Not going to happen.
yeah, mick, it raises the intensity and skill level a bit for sure. I'm not quite sure how the both over 500 Bidding Out got so entrenched.
Maybe I'm not understanding this correctly: Are you saying that the only way you can win a game is if your team ends a hand with a score of 500+ and either takes and makes the bid, or sets the opponents who took the bid?
If that is the case, it totally increases the luck level and decreases the skill level, not to mention it doesn't stop the very thing you are trying to stop, which is teams overbidding to keep an opponent from getting the bid to win. I will explain in detail when someone confirms that I am understanding the proposed rule change correctly
yes, your understanding is correct, and I'll look forward to your explanation.