from sasku's offers

I didn't play on the opening days, but I heard that there was also "own" in the bidding then. In my opinion, there should still be more bidding rounds to make the game a little more bridge-like. Especially in tournaments, where quite a lot depends on making a trump or making a mistake. With the current system, you may not get any information about the partner's cards before the opening move (if at all), because in the best case, there are 3 bids (after the pass, I mean), and in most cases it is limited to two. Those who are used to playing overbidding in live will probably object, but in my opinion it is better to spend a few seconds more on bidding and then there wouldn't be so many "wrong" trump cards in tournaments, which give some people undeservedly many points. For example, I will mention the players who performed in the tournament in one round with a difference of points E2 and N5. In one pair, the first hand (W)) immediately bid 7; 2nd, 3rd passes and 4th (S) made a square (perhaps out of fear of a hairy one), which means that he didn't know the strength of the pair and luckily it went well. Nord probably had a good hand, but he didn't dare to make a square right away, because he didn't know anything about the pair yet. In the second pair with the same cards, he made the remaining passes and played out the suit with a draw. This is a big difference, but it still happens. With such cards, the most likely difference is still E4-N2 ( :D) In the 1st variant of the "Own" bid, it would probably have gone like this: W offers 5, N- own, E passes, S-6; W-7, N maybe own or also passes and S- then he boldly made a square. In the 2nd variant: W-7; N own, E-pass and S-square-- 1 bid more, but how much more information!. With more bidding rounds, there would also be less sleight of hand, especially in tournaments where you may not know your partner's playing skills at all. Of course, the general level has already risen and there probably won't be any more so-called "constant blind square" players.

I agree that the bid should be improved to give the partner a little more information about their hand. So only the next bidder could take "their own"? I.e. if someone passes in the meantime, they can't take it anymore? Another option would be to allow bidding even after passing. i.e. if there is no strength to make an opening bid (a straight card with three pictures), then after the 7-pair bid, you could still make a square (if I have more squares in my hand and something else to hit). The fact that someone "isn't used to playing with a bid to take" is not a sufficient argument not to do it in a pinch - the goal is to make the game more exciting and offer more opportunities.

Linguistically, it would also be correct that passing is not giving up, but just looking or waiting. In poker, you can even raise after a check, an eksole and in the so-called second round. In bridge, the "passer" can initially respond to a pair after the same ode, showing his strength in relation to a trump or no trump. The "own" system has been played in several ways among the people. It is more common that the bidder has this right in the forehand and if he does not use it, then it passes to the next round and if he does not use it or passes either, then "own" the backhand. However, if someone raises in the middle of a bidding round, then he can already take his forehand. The point to consider is whether to allow the pair (after the opening bid, if the 2nd hand is passed) to take it or to give this right to the backhand (i.e. the other opponent) or not. In any case, trumps come "more correct" and give more opportunities to the owners of the weaker card. As an additional move, after the first round, the "pass" can be offered again in the second bidding round. I actually support it, it's up to you whether to try two things at once. I haven't participated in the Estonian Sasku MV live, how is it with this "own" thing there?

"Taking" could come back. In competitions, it has been the case that a bid "taking" can only be taken from the backhand of the player who made the last positive bid. This option is not supported by the fact that after passing you still have the option to bid - I've never seen such a thing anywhere

Actually, if 1. makes a bid and 2 fold, then the forehand is the same as the backhand :p

I also support adding my own offer.

Without "taking" this thing is incomplete. In real life, I can take from the player sitting before me. If the players in between pass, then I can take from the player who bid before me. In this case, I am forced to call out my 7-trumps suit IMMEDIATELY and the cat-and-mouse game is completely eliminated. Very dull and stupid. Half the game is lost.

That's exactly right. I've talked to many people, but the younger ones and those who haven't played much at all don't know this rule. It's not complicated if you're afraid of it - just bid and exchange information at 1st degree. Otherwise, it's just a blind square game, or as you accurately expressed, you generally have to show your maximum right away, without knowing anything about your partner's hand. Opponents are simply the type of gambler, which is not suitable for a doubles game.

I also have a small observation. In the case of the game of Sasku, half of the game is the bidding, including "taking". How well the trump is made also determines the overall course of the game. You get the backhand of the bid, so if the person sitting on my right offers 5, you can't take it, but if I offer 6 next, the bidder after me can take it. Right now, when I'm the first bidder, I have to bid with all my might and there's no strategy. In this case, without bidding, Sasku is a card game reminiscent of children's Sasku, but maybe there would be a reason to take a step forward towards a REAL game. It's just sad to see that Sasku has become such a silly game, where people try to defend the introduction of changes with fervor and in a slang way. Find old-school Sasku players from real life and find out whether "taking" is an elementary part of Sasku or not. Young people should quickly learn real Sasku. There is another suggestion. I am not a young man in his 20s who has a vital need to do wrong to others, to speak ill of fellow players and to spit bile. And to be honest, I wouldn't bother/want to read about it. We all make mistakes sometimes, but that doesn't mean we should curse our fellow players. Maybe there could be a button that admins could press to control the conversation and decide whether the presence of a bile person is necessary.

I didn't understand this logic.