Recommend
1 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

Tichu» Forums » Rules

Subject: Double runs or runs of pairs or sequences of pairs or whatever you want to call 'em rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
What preview button?
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So I've got a few questions about sequences of pairs. From my original reading of the rules and from our plays last weekend, we interpreted the rules about sequences of pairs as requiring at least three consecutively ranking cards, with the possiblity of more.

For example, a run of 223344 (6 total cards) is a legal play which is legally beaten by a 334455 (6 cards) (or subsequently higher double runs such as JJQQKK (6 cards)).

As another example, it would also therefore be legal to play a 22334455 (8 cards) which would be beaten by a 22445566 edit 33445566 (8 cards) (or again a subsequently higher double run such as JJQQKKAA (8 cards)). This would also imply that double runs of potentially even more - 10 cards, 12 cards, or even a very unlikely 14 cards would be possible.

In the above two examples, it should also be noted that a *longer* run may not be legally played on a shorter run (nor a shorter run on a longer run for that matter). Where the first player plays 223344, the next player may play 334455 to beat the lead, but may *not* play 33445566 since the parameters (or shape, if you will) of the lead has not been matched.

A few questions ...

Is the above interpretation correct within the rules?

Also, I saw another thread here on bgg where it was implied that a sequence of pairs need not be a minimum of three separate ranks, but could in fact be as few as two.

As in 2233 (4 cards) would be valid and validly beaten by 3344 (4 cards) (or JJQQ (4 cards) for that matter).

Is this also correct? If so, we were incorrectly disallowing this play.

And just for the sake of completeness, though I don't think we were playing this incorrectly ...

It is *not* permissable to play a so-called triple run such as 222333444 or any other permutation as implied above (222333, JJJQQQKKKAAA). Correct?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Steve Zamborsky
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
designer
badge
"Ah, Denny, I've hardly seen you this episode."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dujo wrote:
So I've got a few questions about sequences of pairs. From my original reading of the rules and from our plays last weekend, we interpreted the rules about sequences of pairs as requiring at least three consecutively ranking cards, with the possiblity of more.

For example, a run of 223344 (6 total cards) is a legal play which is legally beaten by a 334455 (6 cards) (or subsequently higher double runs such as JJQQKK (6 cards)).

As another example, it would also therefore be legal to play a 22334455 (8 cards) which would be beaten by a 22445566 (8 cards) (or again a subsequently higher double run such as JJQQKKAA (8 cards)). This would also imply that double runs of potentially even more - 10 cards, 12 cards, or even a very unlikely 14 cards would be possible.

In the above two examples, it should also be noted that a *longer* run may not be legally played on a shorter run (nor a shorter run on a longer run for that matter). Where the first player plays 223344, the next player may play 334455 to beat the lead, but may *not* play 33445566 since the parameters (or shape, if you will) of the lead has not been matched.

A few questions ...

Is the above interpretation correct within the rules?

Also, I saw another thread here on bgg where it was implied that a sequence of pairs need not be a minimum of three separate ranks, but could in fact be as few as two.

As in 2233 (4 cards) would be valid and validly beaten by 3344 (4 cards) (or JJQQ (4 cards) for that matter).

Is this also correct? If so, we were incorrectly disallowing this play.

And just for the sake of completeness, though I don't think we were playing this incorrectly ...

It is *not* permissable to play a so-called triple run such as 222333444 or any other permutation as implied above (222333, JJJQQQKKKAAA). Correct?


To answer your questions:

1. Not entirely correct. When pair sequences are played, they always have to be subsequent pairs (no matter how many of them you're playing). So your above example of 22445566 is an invalid play and would change the perspective of the likelihood of larger double runs (which you'll find that they're not all that likely). Other than that, everything else seems good.

2. This is correct, two subsequent pairs is a legal play.

3. This is also correct. Triples are allowed (333, 777, etc.) but not subsequent triples.

Hope this helps!
-Steve
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasta Batman
United States
Tustin
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Dujo wrote:
.. sequences of pairs as requiring at least three consecutively ranking cards, with the possiblity of more.

Two consecutive pairs is the minimum.

Quote:
Also, I saw another thread here on bgg where it was implied that a sequence of pairs need not be a minimum of three separate ranks, but could in fact be as few as two.

Correct.

Quote:
It is *not* permissable to play a so-called triple run such as 222333444 or any other permutation as implied above (222333, JJJQQQKKKAAA). Correct?

Correct.

If you haven't already, I highly recommend you check out the following annotated rules and player aid. The aid is really helpful for teaching.

http://scv.bu.edu/~aarondf/Games/Tichu/Tichu.html
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/info/10948
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
What preview button?
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Zambo wrote:

1. Not entirely correct. ... 22445566 ...


Sorry, that was a typo. I meant 33445566. My mistake. And I was so meticulous. Oh well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew M
United States
New Haven
Connecticut
flag msg tools
admin
8/8 FREE, PROTECTED
badge
513ers Assemble!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
pastabatman wrote:
Dujo wrote:
.. sequences of pairs as requiring at least three consecutively ranking cards, with the possiblity of more.

Two consecutive pairs is the minimum.


Well....one consecutive pair is allowed, but it's just called a pair.

-MMM
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pasta Batman
United States
Tustin
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Octavian wrote:
pastabatman wrote:
Dujo wrote:
.. sequences of pairs as requiring at least three consecutively ranking cards, with the possiblity of more.

Two consecutive pairs is the minimum.


Well....one consecutive pair is allowed, but it's just called a pair.

-MMM

Let the hair-splitting begin! laughlaugh The notion of 'consecutive' has no meaning for a singleton.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matt Davis
United States
New Concord
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Well, consecutive still has a meaning. It just adds no new information to the concept of "pair".
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Timothy Hunt
United States
St Louis
Missouri
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dujo wrote:

In the above two examples, it should also be noted that a *longer* run may not be legally played on a shorter run (nor a shorter run on a longer run for that matter). Where the first player plays 223344, the next player may play 334455 to beat the lead, but may *not* play 33445566 since the parameters (or shape, if you will) of the lead has not been matched.



Yes, that it correct... but I really love the use of the word "shape" to describe the type of trick that's being played. I shall likely use this term when I next teach the game, to see if it improves understanding.

Dujo wrote:

or even a very unlikely 14 cards would be possible.


Note that if it occurred, it would be very unlikely to be played as such, as it would require the lead to play it. It may happen if your partner played the dog, or the player before you goes out, winning the trick, thus passing the lead to you.

You couldn't open with it, as that would require the one/mah jong, and the phoenix cannot be used as a wild card for the one to make it a pair.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
What preview button?
United States
Medford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Timotheous wrote:
Dujo wrote:
shape

I really love the use of the word "shape" to describe the type of trick that's being played.
[/q]

Borrowed and reimplemented in a slightly different way here from Bridge discussion where players often discuss the "shape" of their hands when describing suit distribution. (I.e. 5-3-3-2, 4-3-3-3, 5-4-2-2, etc.) Feel free to use and pass along. Enjoy!!!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.