Proposal: No hair with a village over there

some sensible talk is starting to come :)

then a bunny could also be a bunny - even in the other village... maybe your grandfather lived in one place all his life and indeed, there are different rules in a different place and you played like that since you were a child, but logic has nothing to do with it... and you don't keep interrupting me when you can't come up with something clever...

MJ, my husband still goes to play Sasku with his Kursa brothers 1-2 times a year and believe me, they all play like that. They've been playing for years. Kursa brothers live all over Estonia and a furry IS furry! I haven't seen my grandfather and I don't think he knew anything about Sasku, despite that, I hear he was a smart and good man. My father, who also bears the respectful title of grandfather, is that right!...he has played like that all his life, that furry is furry. He had many places to live in his youth, because they were constantly moving because of Russian rule...but that's not important either. What's important is that the hairy one IS hairy. Really. The only difference between the one from my childhood and my husband and his fellow students, Sasku, is the number of points that you get at the end of the game. We played to 12 points, a suit gave 1 point, a diamond 2, or the same as here. They play to 16 and suits give 2 points, a diamond 4. But that's not important and a big difference.

You're a megajopski, you talk really smart, you're a tough guy behind a computer.

Maybe I could make the furry guy immediately end the game (that's how it was here before) - the first hand with the furry guy would be done right away. Then those who aren't VIPs would quickly have three games played and could come play chess or checkers.

Do what you want and let Meikop do as he sees fit and most expedient - after all, I don't care - it's not like you need advanced mathematics to understand the whole village and its points... I wasn't really interested in anything other than whether it is or isn't....it is - I could feel it myself....I simply expressed my opinions and experiences here...I don't see the point in arguing any further and besides, the few respondents here, including me, are not yet people....and it's possible that there is no truth...

That's right, a hairy person is a hairy person, but you don't get points for being hairy and stuck - that's what Wikipedia says... lol. I'm still arguing...

That's a good argument, Wikipedia... I don't consider Nurme's statement objective this time, because I've also played this game all over Estonia and with very different rules and I'm not saying that it's not played that way (a furry is a furry), rather it's even more so. At the same time, you can really say that a skunk is a skunk. Why that's not the case, there's a logical argument for that, which I explained above. If you can't offer, then you don't need to get a lot of points. It would be much easier to play only the square trump all the time, the draw trump, etc., and no bidding or cooperation with a partner before the opening move... If you still have a hairy leaf in your hand and are going to throw it over the edge, then 1 of the trump card will do, there's no way to sneak around here!

Swamp, my story is not objective? objective , objective <2: -t`ivne> objective, actually existing; impartial. Opposite subjective. Objective idealism, objective idealistic. Objectively. Objectivity So, why is my story not objective? Which part of my story is not impartial? In other words, in what case could the hairy one come over? For example, if I have 1st suit to beat, but there is nothing too special in my hand, then I may not bid. If my partner has the same theme and he does not bid either, but in the end I and my partner still have cards suitable for the hairy one, then the matter will go over. Does my story, swamp, make any sense to you? The number of people I have played with and the number of places I have played with becomes a kind of sandbox story "a´la" I'll call my older brother and he will show you all!

It can be assumed that the idea of the villain is to win the current game and thereby raise the winner's rating so much that other games, including chess and checkers, would already be won in advance, or at least send the players there morally ruined. Or, conversely, to raise the loser's rating so that he enters the next games with great skills, which in reality cannot be achieved due to limitations, and then quickly fall into a new villain due to the need to prove a non-existent forced rating and the fear of falling into a new villain. In both cases, the villain's plan is not to participate in a competitive game but to win it by a landslide. These manifestations can be seen directly in the game, when players try to win by insulting each other. How does one achieve a normal game like this?