Does the Q of Spades Break hearts?
Sully
Hearts. Others say you must only break hearts with Hearts.
Which is it?
James Vipond
Hash: SHA1
In article <d62kvvorujhup940t...@4ax.com>,
Sully <su...@TheSullivans.com> wrote:
According to John McLeod's rules page for Hearts
(http://www.pagat.com/reverse/hearts.html), section "The Play of the
Hand":
> The person who holds the 2 of clubs must lead it to the first
> trick. The other players, in clockwise order, must play a card of
> the suit which was led if possible. If they do not have a card of
> that suit, they may play any card. The person who played the
> highest card of the suit led wins the trick and leads to the next
> trick.
>
> It is illegal to lead a heart until after a heart has been played
> (as a discard) to another trick, unless your hand contains nothing
> but hearts. Discarding a heart, thus allowing hearts to be led in
> future, is called breaking hearts. In general, discarding a
> penalty card on a trick is called painting the trick.
>
> A player whose hand consists entirely of hearts may lead any heart,
> even if hearts have not yet been broken.
>
> Although it is illegal to lead hearts until they are broken,
> players are permitted to lead spades. In fact it is a normal
> tactic to lead lower spades to try to drive out the queen. This is
> sometimes known as smoking out the queen.
It appears, therefore, that the heart suit may normally be broken
only with hearts.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBP/pE4sNJIejnLYNBEQJ9dgCgy5inPwnpzWRCgFlrtGvpBMpZ9pgAoJLa
DSeoUOpFSPmNqN4TaDmNTxmq
=2jgg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
James H. Vipond | The "From" address is valid but rarely read.
| Send private replies to the address at left.
arlateo @ |
itctel.com | Resident of South Dakota since 1973
John McLeod
>In article <d62kvvorujhup940t...@4ax.com>,
> Sully <su...@TheSullivans.com> wrote:
>> We are having a debate on this. Some say the Queen of Spades breaks
>> Hearts. Others say you must only break hearts with Hearts.
>
>(http://www.pagat.com/reverse/hearts.html), section "The Play of the
>Hand":
>
>> (as a discard) to another trick, unless your hand contains nothing
>> but hearts. Discarding a heart, thus allowing hearts to be led in
>> future, is called breaking hearts.
>
>only with hearts.
However, in the "Variations" section of the same page, under "Play of
the Hand", you can also read:
>Some play that the Queen of Spades breaks hearts. In other words,
>hearts may be led anytime after the Queen of Spades or any heart has
>been played.
I have often found it difficult to decide which of two or more
alternative rules to give in the main description of a game and which to
list as variations. I general don't like to sit on the fence and give
alternatives equal weight in the main description of a game, because I
think it is useful to provide a recommended set of rules that new
players can use to try out a game, without requiring them first to make
a series of decisions about which rule set to adopt.
I notice that in "Win at Hearts", the only book devoted to the game that
I have seen, Joe Andrews prefers the opposite rule: "None may lead a
heart until a heart has been discarded or the SQ played" (p114).
Until quite recently, card game books did not recognise any restriction
on leading hearts at all. However, I see that J.Q.Kansil's 1999 edition
of the USPCC (Bicycle) Official Rules of Card Games and Philip
Morehead's 2001 revision of A. Morehead and G. Mott-Smith's "Hoyle's
Rules of Games" both agree with Joe Andrews' version of the rule.
In selecting the rule to use for the main description on my Hearts page,
I was strongly influenced by the rule surveys done by John Hay around
1997, using the opinions of readers of this newsgroup as a basis. His
results are available at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/2767/
But given that I now seem to be out of line with most of the literature,
maybe I should swap the main rule for the variation on my page. I can't
think of any great advantage for one of these styles of play over the
other. Any opinions?
--
John McLeod For information on card games visit
jo...@pagat.com http://www.pagat.com/
Alan Hoyle
> on leading hearts at all. However, I see that J.Q.Kansil's 1999 edition
> of the USPCC (Bicycle) Official Rules of Card Games and Philip
> Morehead's 2001 revision of A. Morehead and G. Mott-Smith's "Hoyle's
> Rules of Games" both agree with Joe Andrews' version of the rule.
>
> In selecting the rule to use for the main description on my Hearts page,
> I was strongly influenced by the rule surveys done by John Hay around
> 1997, using the opinions of readers of this newsgroup as a basis. His
> results are available at http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/2767/
>
> But given that I now seem to be out of line with most of the literature,
> maybe I should swap the main rule for the variation on my page. I can't
> think of any great advantage for one of these styles of play over the
> other. Any opinions?
It seems that Joe Andrews' rule is the more commonly played Tournament
rule, but most people I've played with casally seem to play the other
way. The "queen breaks hearts" rule is hand-in-hand with the
following rule: "If hearts are not broken, and the player with the
lead has only hearts and the queen left, that player may announce this
and lead any card in hand." It also seems that the "no blood on the
first trick" goes along with this rule.
http://www.alanhoyle.com/hearts.html
By the way, I've spent far more time updating my web page than
actually playing hearts the past few years....
-alan
--
Alan Hoyle - al...@unc.edu - http://www.alanhoyle.com/
"I don't want the world, I just want your half." -TMBG
Get Horizontal, Play Ultimate.