Ben Baldanza: Two for the Show – Trick-Taking for Two

The most popular trick-taking card games require four players, usually playing in partnerships. Bridge and Spades, two of the most popular card games ever, are like this. Tichu and other climbing variants also usually follow this pattern even though one could argue that “trick-taking” doesn’t fully apply since the goals are usually different. Hearts is a four-player singles trick-taking game that remains popular and has grown with its ubiquity on the Internet. The popularity of four-player partnership games is improved in that in addition to playing the cards effectively, there is the added dimension of working two hands together well and signaling intentions the help to optimize this. So when discussing two-player games, trick-taking doesn’t immediately come to mind.

Fortunately, while not that common, trick-taking for two works well when adapted to the format and at least one game, Bridgette, is a legitimate classic in the game world while being a two-player trick-taking game. The game that many of us learned as young children is War, and this is probably the first introduction to trick-taking that most people get. Each player starts with half of a normal deck of cards and reveals one card at a time simultaneously. The higher rank wins the trick, and play continues until one player holds all the cards. If the same rank appears, a war ensues and this is resolved again using a higher-rank mechanism. The game wears out quickly but is a nice way to drill number rank and I remember playing this often with my brothers or sisters.

Trick-taking games use many different scoring ideas, but two common ones are to value the absolute number of tricks taken or avoided (as in Spades) or modify this based on bidding as to what will be taken or avoided (Bridge, Was Sticht?). Among the best two-player trick-taking games, both ideas are used but there are none better than the two that best define this category: Bridgette, by Joli Kansil, and Duck Soup, by David Parlett.

Bridgette was first released in 1970 and it has been republished continually since then. The game has won numerous awards and it is justifiably regarded as the finest example of two-player bridge ever invented. This can be taken further to say that it is the finest example of a two-player trick-taking game ever invented as well, and for what it’s worth this game was #11 on my Top 10 and on a different day would have made that list. The brilliance of the game is in the addition of the Colons, three extra cards that principally add to the defense and correlate to the other cards. The Grand Colon is treated as part of the Aces, the Royal Colon as part of the face cards, and the Little Colon as part on the spot cards. Instead of following suit, a player can play the matching colon which causes them to lose the trick, but forces the other player to lead a new suit on the next trick.

Prince Joli Kansil is a master card-player and his love for Bridge and detailed attention to the game play has made Bridgette a masterpiece. Beginning with an exchange that allows players to improve their hands, into the bidding process, and then through the play, the game is fresh and demands attention throughout. As if making the game play well wasn’t enough, Kansil developed a revised, simpler scoring system that is particularly useful for non-Bridge players to get going with the game. While this system is simpler, it is not simple, and thus while providing a less-threatening way for newbies to get into bidding games, it also is built on sound principles that hold up well for more seasoned card players. The first copies of Bridgette were sold with the author being Joel Gaines, which of course was Joli Kansil’s name before he married into Hawaiian royalty and adopted a name with a card-player’s initials (JQK).

While everyone has at least heard of Bridgette and most have probably tried it (if not, what’s stopping you?), a less common but excellent two-player trick-taking game is David Parlett’s Duck Soup. This game uses a standard deck of cards, and the rules are available online at Parlett’s website. The game plays in two “courses”, each with 13 tricks, and in the first round the Ace is low and the low card of the lead suit wins the trick. A card is drawn after each play, and as soon as the deck runs out (and thus players have 13 cards left in their hands), the second round begins. Now the Ace is high and the high card of the lead suit takes the trick. Tricks won with both cards of the same suit are stored face down and score one point, those won with different suits are stored face up and score two points. At the end of the first round, the scores are noted, and at the end of the second round the two scores are multiplied for the total. Thus it is essential to manage your hand to win tricks in both rounds, as 13 x 0 won’t gain you much! The game normally plays to 250 points, and that takes four to six hands typically. This is a wonderful game and works very well, and since it can be played with a standard deck of cards there is almost no time it can’t be suggested when two players are ready to go.

An advanced search on BoardGameGeek for two-player trick-taking games lists a smattering including games like Blue Moon. Parlett didn’t stop with Duck Soup; his site also has rules for other good games in this format including Parity and Cross Purposes. Maureen Hiron’s new aBridged can be played with two but isn’t best in this format and while certainly worthwhile, it is no Bridgette. Many four-player trick-taking games have two-player variants, but games designed for two using this idea tend to work better and while the two detailed here don’t cover the spectrum of games available, they are both best in class for what they try to do. Have fun with both, and list below your other favorite two-player trick-taking game(s), if you have any.

Next Issue: How Kosmos Changed the Two-Player Game World

Editor’s note, March 2, 2010: Ben intended “Two for the Show” to be a regular biweekly column, but work ate into his time, so only three columns were published, this being the final one. —WEM

Comments: