Posted by Sailing_Away
on 11/13/2008, 8:52 am
192.104.67.221
Low man hearts is considered by many to be the preferred way to play straight singles, and in my opinion, it is the most fun. The general overview is that it's a game of 3-on-1... the 2nd, 3rd and 4th place players try to give low as many points as they can. When low is no longer low, the 3-on-1 changes to focus on the new low. All the while, low is targeting high. If a player is close to going over, 2nd and 3rd tries best they can to keep high from losing while low tries best they can to send someone over.
In TOP, it seems that so often 2nd and 3rd are content to keep their positions. They would rather duck points and let high lose than keep the game going, take points and possibly lose their position. I have seen games where second will pass low a moon in order to guarantee a 2nd place finish.
Lots of speculation has already been made that allowing top 2 to advance to the semifinals or even have 2 wilds from the 3rd place finishers is part of it. Perhaps also the 10-7-4-1 point distribution also comes into play.... 7 points is almost as good as 10, and a 3rd place gets 4 times as many points as 4th. A consistent 3rd place player could have over 100 points just playing every day and never advancing beyond the 1st round but a consistent 4th place player would have at most 27 playing every day.
Frankly, I have been finding better low man games in the very random smoots lately than I have in TOP. It's not even losing I am talking about. I have finished in all 4 positions though admittedly notice more when I am getting nailed by the all 3 other players. If I came in 4th consistently in good, cut-throat low man games I would be much more satisfied. I find it interesting that the cut-throat games in the 1600+ league could be a direct result of rewarding ONLY the 1st place finisher. Could it be you already acknowledge what is wrong?
Opinions please.....
Message Thread:
« Back to thread