from the publishers of The Columbus Book of Euchre |
Return to index of columns |
Presented here are archives of euchre columns by Natty Bumppo, author of The Columbus Book of Euchre, published on line. |
A discussion of why to go alone when you can. Pages 74-75. An admonition to consider your position in the hand as well as your cards. Page 75. A suggestion that it is better to play euchre by intuition than by formula. Page 75. A spelling lesson. Page 76. Instruction on what to do with singletons. Page 76. Three history lessons. Pages 77, 78 and 80. An essay on ethics. Page 77. A lesson in mathematical probabilities. Page 78. A lesson on when to trump your partners ace. Page 78. A lesson in commercial promotion (its not euchre; but its relevant in the context). Page 79. An explanation of reasons not to assist. Page 80. An explanation of a time to go alone with 8 points. Pages 80-81. An explanation of the difference between bidding (as in spades and bridge) and calling (as in euchre). Page 81. An explanation of the rationale for not shifting the lead on a lone hand. Page 81. An explanation of scoring. Page 81. |
I make no apologies for criticism of the work of others.
Thats part of my job.
I got an e-mail a few years ago from Joe Andrews suggesting that authors in the same genre should not put one another down, out of concern for encouraging one anothers sales. I rejected that suggestion out of hand. I reject it now. It is my duty, as an informed observer, scholar of the game and author, to flag errors in other publications. If I didnt, Id be selling out and letting my readers down. The Amazon.com reviews are a travesty. Anyone can take a potshot at anyone else and anonymously, with the blessing of Amazon.com in the Kids Review format. By the way, I did not write any of those Natty Bumppo fan club reviews on Amazon.com. I did not induce them; I did not promote them, and I have no idea who did write, induce or promote them. Another thing: Those who criticize The Columbus Book of Euchre for presenting no hands have not read pages 32, 36, 39, 44, 45, 46, 47, 51, 52, 56, 57, 59 and 67. Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
My partner, a new acquaintance, was doing everything right. It was a rare moment on Yahoo! : Playing with someone I could trust. We were leading 8 to 6. The nine of diamonds was turned on my left. My partner passed, and so did the dealers partner. I held both red bowers, the queen of hearts, the king of clubs and the ten of spades. I, too, passed; and the dealer turned the diamond down. My partner passed again, and the dealers partner called clubs alone. Oh, boy, I thought, where was next? Im gonna watch this partner for hearts. I gnashed my teeth as the player on my right took trick after trick, and the game. My partner showed nary a heart but is that an excuse for not calling next when the opponents have six or seven points? And then I thought about what my partner did show: Three diamonds to the ace. Well, thats why he did not order up that nine of diamonds. He had diamonds stopped. |
My partners hand My hand Turned up |
It was my fault we lost the game, not my partners.
By passing an opportunity to order for a safey (what some call a Columbus coup or a
donation), my partner showed me that he had a sure trick in the suit turned.
And there I sat with two sure tricks of my own, the bowers.
I should have ordered the diamond. For a point,
and the deal and, probably, the game.
Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
Issue 2: What do you do ahead
8 to 0?
Call hearts: 60% Issue 3: What do you do ahead 9 to 8?
Call hearts: 30% Issue 4: What do you do ahead 9 to 7?
Call hearts: 70% Issue 5: What do you do ahead 8 to 7?
Call hearts: 40% Issue 6: What do you do behind 7 to 9?
Call hearts: 90% Issue 7: What do you do behind 8 to 9?
Call hearts: 90% Issue 8: What do you do tied 5 to 5?
Call hearts: 36% Issue 9: What do you do tied 8 to 8?
Call hearts: 30% Issue 10: What do you do tied 9 to 9?
Call hearts: 90%
Not me, brother no way, no how. At 8-9, you can take one here and get the deal at 9-9. Its tougher at 7-9 but, in my opinion, you are far more likely to score one in hearts than two in anything else. Just what do you propose to euchre the opponents with? Your hand is good for only one trick in black. Counting on your partner to take two tricks on an opposing call is a long shot, to say the least. I prefer to play the cards I have, instead of the cards my partner may have.
It is but a hand which, if hearts is made trump, would probably succeed, at most, slightly less than 50 per cent of the time; so I consider it to be a highly euchrable hand. However, to go with hearts as trump when the score is 9-9 should score your team more victories than would passing to second seat which will in all probability call a black suit, trump. I would expect, at best, if black was made trump, to stop any march attempt and, since that is not good enough at 9-9 or 8-9, make hearts trump. Take your lumps and salvage now.
A euchre hand is simply a hand with a sure trick in every suit. Its the kind of hand on which you might be better deferring to others on the making of trump.
The potential left bower in it is only protected with a king. If first seat wins the first trick and leads back trump, your play does not 100% guarantee your team a trick. To me, a euchre hand will have a serious threat to upset the opponents, should the opponents make trump as you anticipate. I call what you describe a "stopper" hand.
At 9-1 the opponents still need two long-shot scoring plays and a single point three scores before my team scores a single point. Since the risk to be euchred, should I call hearts, is too high for my liking, and a 2-point score by the opponents will place them in position to win with only two long-shot scores, I would sacrifice the probable point by the other team and count on winning shortly after, by virtue of having two of the next three deals. Patience, I say. Similarly, I pass at 8-0. If the resulting score after the hand is 8-1, the opponents still need two long-shot scores plus a single point to win, and my team has two of the next three deals to close it out. Getting euchred will permit the opponents to be capable of winning in only two scores. Patience, I say. In my opinion, at any score, making trump or passing with this hand is a crap shoot. That is why I would choose to pass in all situations involving this hand, in which the gun to finish me off is not being held to my head. Not that I agree with it, but, if I correctly follow the logic for passing in first seat when the score is 9-9, then it would not be such a bad thing if the partner in third seat passed. After all, you passed with a euchre hand??? No way are you going to euchre the opponents near 50 per cent of the time if they make a black suit trump. No way! Wont happen. Can it? Even though the potential to score one point with this hand is in grave doubt at any score, with partners help two points is absolutely possible.
Unless the score is 9 to 0, your favor (or, perhaps, 9 to 1, or 9 to 2 or 9 to 3). You have a euchre hand. Hearts is your best suit, and the opponents have indicated that they may not have the right bower. But you have at most one point in hearts, most likely; and your hand is eminently euchrable. Thats why it makes sense to call hearts at 9 to 0 (you might go out, and getting euchred wont hurt you) and maybe at 9-1, 9-2 or 9-3, scores not posited in the poll. Not at 9-4. You do not want to call hearts at the other scores because of the pregnant possibility you will be euchred. And the worst that can happen to you by passing (unless the opponents have 9 points; Ill get to that) is letting the opponents score a mere point, to pass you the deal. You have them stopped on a march. Why punt at 9 to 9? At 9 to 9 its a crap shoot. The reason to call hearts is that your partner is conditioned to pass if you dont call next. But the reason to pass is that you cannot guarantee it. Its not the normal next situation, where you dont mind being euchred. Heres the deal: If your partner is a conservative good euchre player, you call hearts at 9 to 9 (because he would pass a good heart hand). If he is a wild and crazy guy, you pass let him decide. Bottom line: Call hearts at 9-0, 9-1, 9-2 and 9-3, and maybe at 9-9. Otherwise, pass. Call hearts behind 7 to 9 and 8 to 9? Yeah, yeah, I know, you need to score. But you are only slightly more likely to score by calling hearts than by passing; and if you score calling, youll probably score only one point. At 7 to 9 you need to euchre the opponents to get back in the game. At 8 to 9 a euchre would put you out. You need two points in both instances. You wont get two points calling hearts. You might get them letting the opponents (or your partner) call. Bite the bullet. Let someone else call trump. Especially at STD. BYE! BYE! Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
Anyway, Fuller led the queen of spades; Johns partner, Hawk, dropped the jack of spades;
Fullers partner, Hedy, went up with the king, and John pulled in the trick with the ten
of diamonds. He returned the king of clubs.
Everyone followed suit, and it was Hawks lead.
Where Hawk went to school, we don't know Ohio?
Alabama? but he did not lead trump, either, even though he had a little trump.
He laid down the queen of hearts.
Hawk had already showed himself to be a pretty good player, though. Give him the benefit of the doubt: Since John had not led trump, maybe Hawk figured John for a wing and a prayer and played for the cross-ruff. So: Two tricks are gone; the queen of hearts is on the table, and Hedys sitting there with the ace of spades and the ace and nine of trump. And what does she play? Trump with the nine of diamonds, you say? Nah. Don't send a girl to do a womans job. Trump with the ace of diamonds, you say? Nah. Want to lose it to a bower? Hedy sluffed her ace of spades. John took the trick with his king of diamonds. Fuller followed suit with the ten of hearts. Third trick. Sure point. Now John led trump: Right bower. Fuller had no trump (the left bower was buried); Hawk played the queen of trump, and guess whos sitting pretty with a guarded ace of trump? Hedy. She laid down her nine of trump on Johns bower and claimed the last trick with the ace. Morals: 1. Lead trump, damn it! That reduces the chances your clubs will be trumped, and youll catch the left bower if its unguarded. Lead trump goes for both partners. John would have given Hedy a trick by leading trump, but it would not have cost him the point. If Hawk had led trump, however, through Hedy, she could not have stopped the march. 2. Go alone, damn it! John had a pretty sure point, and his partners ace of clubs would have been just as good buried as in his hand. If both Fuller and Hedy had had only one trump apiece, it would have been a walk to four points. If one of them had had the ace of clubs, John still would have had a club winner for the point. 3. Nice stop, Hedy! Players on line type ns any time a maker fails to march, but its not true. What Hedy did was really nice. She saved the day. Her nine of trump on the heart lead would have been overtrumped by the king; her ace, by the right bower. By ducking (sluffing a black ace, no less, of a suit she knew the dealer could not lead anyway) she saved her red ace (and her teams red ass). And she had reason to believe that John did not have both bowers, since he had not led trump. Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
In two-handed pinochle you do not have to follow suit at all in the first round of play.
In 7-up you can trump any time, even when you have a card of the suit led. In spoil five, a game akin to euchre, there are certain high trump you do not have to follow suit with when lower trump is led. |
A renege is actually a privileged legal renunciation, as in the examples above.
The word comes from the medieval Latin re and negare, meaning (when
combined) to deny forcefully.
An illegal renunciation is a revoke failing to follow suit when you are required to. Its what we usually mean when we say renege. These niceties are not found in most dictionaries, or even in most playing card encyclopedias; but they are explained in David Parletts Oxford Guide to Card Games (Oxford University Press, 1990). There are at least two types of revoke, however, that go beyond renunciation of the suit led: (1) In some games notably in partnership pinochle you must play trump if you have any and cannot follow suit. (2) Also in partnership pinochle, when trump is led you must top previous trump played if you can. Not to do so, in either case, is to revoke. So a better definition of revoke, to encompass those games, might simply be to fail to play a card required. Which brings us back to the euchre game recounted above: What happens when you are deprived of the opportunity to play timely a card required? I say B Woods and his partner have to eat that euchre, and my sixth card with it. It aint bridge. Its back alley euchre. Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
I would assume, wrote the Panhandler, one Jonah W. B. Myers,
the point is to keep out the mystery of whether or not a trump card is out of
play so you know its out there, but you still dont know
where.
It makes sense. The reason for reducing the original euchre deck from 32 cards (with sevens and eights) to 24 was said to be to add power to every hand, and thus to diminish the role of luck in the game (the 32-card deck still is called for in most Hoyle encyclopedias). Reducing the pack to 21 just takes that application one final step eliminating all unseen cards (there are no buried cards in bridge, spades, Rook or pinochle). Playing with a 21-card pack eliminates not only the mystery of whether a trump card is out of play, but also of whether any particular card is out of play. For example, when no one is going alone, you know your king is not boss if the dealer has not turned down the ace. But you have to adjust your perception of the odds, since it means also that there are three five-card suits and one six-card suit before trump is made, instead of four six-card suits. The game Mr. Myers described, if I understood him, has a set pack, with three nines removed permanently. For example, you might always play with a pack with a heart nine only. Or you could vary it by the session nine of hearts one day, nine of clubs another, and so on (stay tuned: This is only beginning to get confusing). With a 24-card pack, once trump is made there are two six-card suits, one seven-card suit (trump) and one five-card suit (next). With a set 21-card pack it varies: Depending on what winds up as trump, you might have one seven-card suit, two five-card suits and one four-card suit; or it might be two six-card suits, one five-card suit and one four-card suit; or it might be one six-card suit and three five-card suits. Thats a fair amount of recalculation on each hand. But there are other ways to do it: You could start with 24 cards and, once trump was made, require that all nines be thrown out but the trump nine, to give you a turbocharged trump suit of seven cards against two five-card suits and a four-card suit. Players with other nines to discard would draw from the deck to replace them, in the same order as the order of play. Or you could require that all nines be thrown out but the next nine, to give you always one six-card suit (trump) and three five-card suits. Or, you could let the trump maker or some other player call the nine to be saved, with the same discard-and-draw procedure. Think of the new strategic considerations: You could be sitting there with a fistful of nines, either calling wildly or keeping your mouth shut hoping to help your partner or euchre someone, in anticipation of what you would draw. And, if you adopted the last-stated variation, the player making trump could call for his own nine to stay in the game if it was trump, or for any nine but his own if not (if he was a dealer picking up, that could give him a quadruple discard). In any of those ways, theres still a lot of rethinking on each hand even after trump is made and the hands are set, for a typically drunken euchre player (Oh! Yeah! A nine could fall on this trick!). Probably the least confusing method would be always to save only the next nine. That would weaken the trump suit slightly (but I can hear the Equal Rights for Next chant from the lobby, in support). The West Virginia Panhandle is sandwiched between western Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio (Wheeling and Weirton are the main cities Weirton is only 30 miles from Pittsburgh). It was in eastern Pennsylvania, not western, that euchre is said to have originated (with the Pennsylvania Dutch, who are not Dutch at all, but of southwestern German stock). But its in central and western Pennsylvania that many people play euchre to 11 points instead of 10. Jonah said that his people play 21-card euchre to 10 points, however. So, the region we hear from about 21-card euchre doesn't say much if anything more about its origin than western Michigan says about the win by two points version we discovered there recently. Different foks, different strokes; lotsa folks, lotsa strokes. Natty Bumppo, author, P.S. After this column was published, Jonah Myers wrote me: My grandmother told me she learned it from her parents and she always thought it was a game made up by the coal miners. There was a mine in my home town of Glen Dale (also George Bretts and Brad Paisleys home town), about 10 miles south of Wheeling. Most of the miners were Slovakians, Hungarians and other eastern Europeans. Heres how we do it: We have a set deck with nine of hearts only. If you dont use the nine of hearts, you cant use the phrase coined by my friend Thomas P. Heise, Everyones got a heart! He says that every time he leads them. Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
Its 4 to 4; the nine of hearts is turned up; and you are in third chair holding
both red bowers, the queen of hearts, the ten of diamonds and the ten of clubs.
What do you do if you have a partner you know and trust?
Except for me it was unanimous: Order up the nine of hearts. I was not surprised. I had already run this question by my own panel of experts, and the results were nearly the same (but my favorite expert was drunk, as usual, and never replied). I said pass, if you can trust your partner to call next; and I still say it. Two of the experts, with whom I play regularly (at a real table, and not on line), acknowledged that they might pass if I was their partner. And that response highlights the key element of the question: if you have a partner you know and trust. Thats what makes next a convention; its a two-way street requiring strategic agreement. You dont call next because you have it; you call it because, in first chair, its the thing to do. If you dont have it, your partner should; and, if you are playing the convention, you can trust your partner to pass a good order if he is strong in next. Its no sure thing, in any event; but there's a good chance your opponents do not have the bowers of that color if they did not order or pick up the turned card. I did have second thoughts, however, when met with such an overwhelming rejection of my idea in both the private and public polls; so I dealt and played twenty hands, as posited above, in Gerry Blues Euchre Laboratory. The results were astounding:
* Ordering up I netted 17 points over
the twenty hands
* When I passed and my partner called
next when there The latter result was not based on foolish calls. In the first place, there were only sixteen hands to call: The dealer would have picked that nine of hearts up on his own four times, and would have got euchred three of those four times. That gave us a 5-point head start in the experiment. I did not have my partner call next every time, but only when it made sense to from his own vantage (and by the convention). He did call diamonds 13 times, making 9 points on 1-point scores, 6 on three marches, and 4 on a lone march = 19. A lone march? How could he go alone, you ask? Without either bower? Try it sometime; you might like it. He had four diamonds and the king of spades (it was hand No. 3). I think thats a reasonable shot. After all, its next. He counts on me for any bower not buried. It wont work if his left-hand opponent pays attention to what the other opponent discards and the other opponent discards correctly but it works about half the time. (Hand No. 12 was another good shot at a loner, holding ace and king of diamonds, ace of hearts, ace of clubs, and king of spades. It doesnt work, but your partner cant help you march.) And on the other three hands of the 16, my partner called spades twice and made a point, and he passed once and saw the dealers partner score a point in clubs (hand No. 6). And I think thats a reasonable pass: Partner holds the ace and king of hearts, the ace of diamonds, the ace of spades and the jack of clubs. Thus he has both black suits stopped and relies on me to stop any foolishness in diamonds. The net result: 5 on dealer pickups + 19 calling "next" + 2 calling spades = 26 - 1 made by opponents = 25. To complete the experiment, I played those sixteen hands yet two more ways: (1) Having partner call whatever looks good (or pass), without regard to next, and (2) requiring him to call next every time, regardless of what he holds. In the first scenario we netted only 12 points; in the second, 27. The second scenario is too much to ask for, of course, considering what is held in third chair; but the first is what you will get if you pass that nine of hearts to a partner not cognizant of next. One of the problems in the first alternative scenario (calling without regard to next) is a loner in clubs made by the dealers partner when your own partner passes. We would score a point calling next. Your partner holds king and nine of spades, ten of hearts, queen of clubs and ace of diamonds. I think you should call next with that (unless your opponents have 8 points). Its not a good hand; but its not one you can safely pass like the one above (the one with both black suits stopped and two diamonds). The worst that can happen is to get euchred. Sometimes you have to think of next as a safety, or donation. I photographed all twenty hands I dealt in the Lab, and you can see them here (click your magnifier or Expand to regular size if the photo shows up tiny on your monitor, as it does on mine). Its as Tug McGraw said, Ya gotta believe (hes in Heaven if anyone is). Either you believe in next or you dont. And as my brother-in-law Bill the philosophy professor says, If you go, you go all the way (hes a big Frank Sinatra fan). Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
More book reviews
February 18, 2005
Here are a couple of new customer reviews of The Columbus Book of Euchre on amazon.com: |
** (2 stars) Not very good, but
still has some neat stuff I am new to euchre, and I want to become better. I searched the internet for books on Euchre, and there were lots of listings for the Columbus Book of euchre. It had a great rating, and lots of nice reviews. So I had my dad send a way for a copy for me. Wow, was I suprised. I showed it to my parents. My dad took a black marker and crossed out all of the bad words. This book really does use the "f" word, and other bad words as well! Mr. Bimmpo trashes other Euchre writers, while praising his books to the high heavens. that is really not too cool! The book is full of home grown Euchre slang from the state of Ohio It is NOT an easy guide for becoming a better player. The book does have some nice sections, and you will really like the cool stories about some of the players who play in bars. I just loved the color pictures of euchre games and party loving people. I guess euchre is a good game for drinking and having fun. Now my friend in Michigan wants to buy a copy and I told him no, you will be disappointed. Has anyone else out there bought this book and read it? Cory (age 11) * (1 star) A really bad book! I ordered the Columbus Book of Euchre in December, and received it a few weeks later. It is just awful! There is not one hand of Euchre in the book. I was shocked to see the "f" word in print, as well as the word "bull---t". The back of the book is filled with an index which tells you such information that the word "euchre" is on 45 pages and the word "bower" was on 22 pages. And there is a chapter which puts down other euchre books except for one. Another page has a picture of some dude and a gun on a table with some other players playing euchre. This book looks like it was copied at a staples stores and then stapled together. I felt like I got rooked. Save your money, and get a copy of ellis' or gallager's book. |
Thanks, kids but, please, spell my name right?
And, Cory thats Columbus Indiana, not Ohio.
Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
The left was held unguarded by one of the opponents, but the other opponent held
the king, ten and nine of trump. It
was Redd Doggs partners failure to account for the possibility of a guarded
king, after the first trump lead (king guarded twice, as Billy
Bulldozer Arnold would say) that caused the catastrophe.
Doggs partner led trump twice more, lost her queen to the king, and watched the
opponent cash two little diamonds.
The second trump lead was OK (the ace was a sure winner; and, if it caught a trump, there could be only one left out against the loner, if any). But she should have played it safe with one of the black aces on the third trick. That would have left the queen of trump for her third trick if her ace was trumped with the opponents last trump. She called the euchre fate. Dogg called it stupid. Heres another way it could have happened: Left-hand opponent false cards the left bower on first trick hes the one with the king-ten-nine as right-hand opponent shows out. Doggs partner should lead a black ace to the second trick in this case, just to be safe. She should smell a rat. At least she might have the excuse of confusing defensive play if she gets euchred on this one, and not incur the utter wrath of Dogg. If shes desperate (like, behind 9 to 1), she can go ahead and lead the ace and queen of trump to catch the ten; but she must know that she does that at the risk of losing her queen to the king. Better to play safe unless its euchre or bust. Heres a different scenario, in which taking the risk (in times of despair) might be more plausible: You hold right-ace-king-nine of trump (hearts) and ace of clubs. Score is 5 to 5, and you are in the middle (second chair). A spade is led, and you get it with the ace of trump and lead the right bower, catching nothing on your left and the queen of trump on your right. Now what do you lead? If you lead the king of trump, the player on your right may have the left bower and the ten of trump as well, over your nine (having false carded her queen). But she might not have the left and still very well have the ten of trump. If you dont lead the king of trump to take her ten, you may not get your four points; if you do lead the king, you can get euchred. Well, youre a big boy; youve been euchred before, and on a loner before; and if you cant stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen. How bad do you want four points as opposed to one? Is it worth the risk? Redd Dogg might question your risk assessment if you get euchred, but he might not call you stupid. Natty Bumppo, author, Borf Books http://www.borfents.com |
back to The Columbus Book of Euchre Links New appendix
Reviews of other books on euchre Guestbook: Sign / Comment View