"Wolfgang Kern" <nowhere@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:g5hs70$ee2$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I think the order of a set of five
A set of five was just to simplify the issue... Did you want to see 52
cards? ;-)
> I think the order of a set of five isn't relevant at all in a cards
game,
> so we may always see and sort it ascending (like most players do).
The order of a set of cards is not relevant for cards in hand. But, the
order is relevant for cards in the deck or discard pile.
> sort it ascending (like most players do).
The secret is out. I sort my hand descending. I've done this since I was
a
child. I switched from ascending after I noticed a friend of my brother
would watch how many cards I moved to my right... At the time, I didn't
know what he was doing or why - just that he kept staring at my hand and
wouldn't organize his cards immediately - this kept delaying the gameplay
and made me upset. So, I switched directions to confuse him with whatever
he was doing. A hand or two later he let it slip that he thought he knew
how many high rank cards I had. Wrong answer. But, he told me why and so
I
stayed descending. It's not common, but every once and a while I'll
notice
the play behavior of some player will be weak when I have a weak hand
(thinking I have a strong hand) and will be strong when I have a strong
hand
(thinking I have a weak hand). The stalemate and eventual loss usually
confuses them. I've only switched to ascending once - after I noticed
similar behavior - when the other player seemed to start to win a few
later... So far, I think he was the only guy using this trick to figure
out
I was sorting my hand descending. Since most people do sort their hand
ascending (IMO), I don't think that most people use this trick or I
would've
noticed the stalemate effect much more often.
Rod Pemberton
|
