Winning at Euchre

Rating:
Summary: Obviously this author wins because the system worked for me
Review: A well thought out "point system" to bidding worked well to take the deal and only average results to those that play by the seat of there pants. Euchre is a game of luck but this system eliminates stupid bids, believe me that when I say that.

thank you.

Rating:
Summary: Obviously this author wins because the system worked for me
Review: A well thought out "point system" to bidding worked well to take the deal and only average results to those that play by the seat of there pants. Euchre is a game of luck but this system eliminates stupid bids, believe me that when I say that.

thank you.

Rating:
Summary: A flawed Gorenesque point system for bidding
Review: Gallagher's booklet has a Gorenesque point system for evaluating a euchre hand. And while that is its most salient feature, its best feature is the second little paragraph in the Introduction: "Euchre is a bidder's game. You must bid at every opportunity. . . . Just to sit back and pass or hope to euchre your opponents is a loser's game. . . ."

Another section, the three "Most Common Errors by Euchre Players," is right on: Passing a biddable hand, failing to lead trump on offense, leading trump on defense. (Trumping a partner's ace is left out, but it is enjoined - in bold type - on the previous page.)

The point system assigns four points to a right bower, three to a left, two to each other trump card, and one to each ace in the off suits, for a total of 20 "high card" points. Then the author concludes, and attempts to demonstrate, that you need 10 points to go alone, and that you should order or pick up with a net of 7 points (but need only 5 to "assist" - and that's a flaw, since it encourages a dealer's partner, who normally should keep his mouth shut in order to give his partner a chance to go alone).

But the math is a little fuzzy. For example, the author states that if you have 8 points, your opponents have 6, your partner has 3, and the pack has 3. The actual probability is, the opponents have 6.7, the partner has 3.3, and the pack (i.e., the three cards remaining "buried," or unseen) has only 2. On average each hand is 167 per cent as strong as the pack.

The author says, at page 3, that a 10-point hand "cannot be euchred." Accompanying the discussion of the point system is a one-page chart of "biddable" hands from 7 to 13 points. The chart lists four possible "10-point" holdings, all of which *can* be euchred, but omits two - (1) a left with three other trump and an outside ace, which also can be euchred (by Right-Ace-x of trumps held by an opponent), and (2) a holding of five trumps without bowers, which is the *only* "10-point" hand that *cannot* be euchred. The error lies in ranking a 9, 10 or queen of trumps as high as an ace or king.

And the author's assertion that you must have at least 10 "high card points" to go alone seems rather timid from one who says you must bid to win. Natty Bumppo's Columbus Book of Euchre, at pp. 42-43, lists four "8-point" holdings that are excellent candidates for loners, and even a hand of 2 or 3 points that will do the trick on a long shot.

None of which is to say the point system is shoddy - by and large, it works. But it is flawed. For further examples:

(1) It fails to distinguish between the value of a "next" ace and one of the other color. An ace off color is much more valuable.

(2) It fails to evaluate distribution. The Goren point system in bridge gives a void the second highest value, comparable to that of the left bower in Gallagher's euchre system. Also in euchre a singleton ace is worth more than a doubleton ace; an ace heading a three-card suit is virtually worthless, and a two-suited hand has a value not addressed by Gallagher.

(3) It gives no value to kings. While a king often has no value in euchre, it has tremendous value in a two-suited hand or if its ace is buried or in partner's hand.

Another problem with playing by the numbers is that each euchre hand is situational - it's not only the cards that matter, but also the position (where you sit at the table, which is *so* much more important in a short game like euchre than in a long game like bridge or spades), and the score (many things you will do at 6 or 7, or at 8 or 9, or when your opponents are at 6 or 7 or at 8 or 9, you will not do at other scores). You play by Gallagher, I play by instinct, and I'll beat you.

Finally, would it be picayune to point out that the author has the horse on the rider (p. 45)? That he thinks "next" is "Nix"? That he lacks true bravado, or humor, as on page 39, where he writes, "Dealing out of turn . . . is considered poor sportsmanship if . . . done intentionally"? Not in Columbus, where stealing the deal is part of the game!

The book is OK; it's interesting. But it is too formulaic: It does not capture the intuition, the essence, of euchre.

Rating:
Summary: A flawed Gorenesque point system for bidding
Review: Gallagher's booklet has a Gorenesque point system for evaluating a euchre hand. And while that is its most salient feature, its best feature is the second little paragraph in the Introduction: "Euchre is a bidder's game. You must bid at every opportunity. . . . Just to sit back and pass or hope to euchre your opponents is a loser's game. . . ."

Another section, the three "Most Common Errors by Euchre Players," is right on: Passing a biddable hand, failing to lead trump on offense, leading trump on defense. (Trumping a partner's ace is left out, but it is enjoined - in bold type - on the previous page.)

The point system assigns four points to a right bower, three to a left, two to each other trump card, and one to each ace in the off suits, for a total of 20 "high card" points. Then the author concludes, and attempts to demonstrate, that you need 10 points to go alone, and that you should order or pick up with a net of 7 points (but need only 5 to "assist" - and that's a flaw, since it encourages a dealer's partner, who normally should keep his mouth shut in order to give his partner a chance to go alone).

But the math is a little fuzzy. For example, the author states that if you have 8 points, your opponents have 6, your partner has 3, and the pack has 3. The actual probability is, the opponents have 6.7, the partner has 3.3, and the pack (i.e., the three cards remaining "buried," or unseen) has only 2. On average each hand is 167 per cent as strong as the pack.

The author says, at page 3, that a 10-point hand "cannot be euchred." Accompanying the discussion of the point system is a one-page chart of "biddable" hands from 7 to 13 points. The chart lists four possible "10-point" holdings, all of which *can* be euchred, but omits two - (1) a left with three other trump and an outside ace, which also can be euchred (by Right-Ace-x of trumps held by an opponent), and (2) a holding of five trumps without bowers, which is the *only* "10-point" hand that *cannot* be euchred. The error lies in ranking a 9, 10 or queen of trumps as high as an ace or king.

And the author's assertion that you must have at least 10 "high card points" to go alone seems rather timid from one who says you must bid to win. Natty Bumppo's Columbus Book of Euchre, at pp. 42-43, lists four "8-point" holdings that are excellent candidates for loners, and even a hand of 2 or 3 points that will do the trick on a long shot.

None of which is to say the point system is shoddy - by and large, it works. But it is flawed. For further examples:

(1) It fails to distinguish between the value of a "next" ace and one of the other color. An ace off color is much more valuable.

(2) It fails to evaluate distribution. The Goren point system in bridge gives a void the second highest value, comparable to that of the left bower in Gallagher's euchre system. Also in euchre a singleton ace is worth more than a doubleton ace; an ace heading a three-card suit is virtually worthless, and a two-suited hand has a value not addressed by Gallagher.

(3) It gives no value to kings. While a king often has no value in euchre, it has tremendous value in a two-suited hand or if its ace is buried or in partner's hand.

Another problem with playing by the numbers is that each euchre hand is situational - it's not only the cards that matter, but also the position (where you sit at the table, which is *so* much more important in a short game like euchre than in a long game like bridge or spades), and the score (many things you will do at 6 or 7, or at 8 or 9, or when your opponents are at 6 or 7 or at 8 or 9, you will not do at other scores). You play by Gallagher, I play by instinct, and I'll beat you.

Finally, would it be picayune to point out that the author has the horse on the rider (p. 45)? That he thinks "next" is "Nix"? That he lacks true bravado, or humor, as on page 39, where he writes, "Dealing out of turn . . . is considered poor sportsmanship if . . . done intentionally"? Not in Columbus, where stealing the deal is part of the game!

The book is OK; it's interesting. But it is too formulaic: It does not capture the intuition, the essence, of euchre.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent bidding system and strategies for Euchre
Review: Tom Gallagher's WINNING AT EUCHRE is an excellent resource for any euchre player wishing to improve his game through an effective bidding system. The simple, concise format makes the book easy to understand. The author includes an index to define terms used in the game so strategies are clear. This book is the best on the market for an avid euchre player. Tom's system will definitely improve your game. The price is very reasonable also.

Rating:
Summary: Obviously this author wins because the system worked for me
Review: Well organized. Comprehensive, but concise. Easy to read and follow. Bidding methodology excellent for both novice and experienced player. Sample hands very useful to aid understanding of the author's bidding system. I thought I was a pretty good and experienced player before I read the booklet, but it improved my game significantly! And, I've seen it greatly help others who were much too cautious in bidding.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent bidding methodology; improved my game.
Review: Well organized. Comprehensive, but concise. Easy to read and follow. Bidding methodology excellent for both novice and experienced player. Sample hands very useful to aid understanding of the author's bidding system. I thought I was a pretty good and experienced player before I read the booklet, but it improved my game significantly! And, I've seen it greatly help others who were much too cautious in bidding.