# hist-games: Queries about One and Thirty (the card game)

Lee-Gwen piglet006 at globalfreeway.com.au
Fri Nov 3 04:21:27 PST 2000

```In  making up the rules booklet for the upcoming Tavern event, I ran into a
couple of slight (but interesting) differences between 2 reconstructions of
One and Thirty.  One of these is Justin's and the other I sourced from one
of the web sites which were sent to me (I forgot to make a note of it and
will have to find it again when I go on line).

Justin says:
"The dealer goes around to each player, starting with eldest and ending with
himself, and asks whether they want to "stick" or "have it". If the player
wishes to stick, the dealer goes to the next; if they will have it, they get
another card."

The other reconstruction differs from this slightly:
"Starting with the eldest hand (the player to the left of the dealer), a
card may be discarded face up by each player. It is replaced by the top card
on the deck or the previous card on the discard pile."

This second method interests me, I think that being able to take from the
(face-down) stock  or from the (face-up) discard pile adds something to the
game, but I do not know whether it is period.

Justin then goes on to say:
"They may continue to get more cards until they decide to stick, or they go
over 31, in which case they are out."

Which again differs from the second reconstruction:
"The player that comes closest to 31 with three cards in the same suit is
the winner. Play continues by discarding one card at a time until a player
knocks twice on the table. After the knock the players get one last discard.
The hands are then shown and the hand closest to 31 wins. A player who hits
31 exactly wins automatically and does not have to wait for the knock or
make a knock."

I wonder whence this knocking aspect is derived.  Again, I find this
interesting, but I am not certain of its period accuracy.  As well, it seems
to me that the second method is less "cut throat".

On the value of the Ace, Justin says:
"Neither Willughby nor Cotton states the value of the Ace; based on the
statement about pip cards, I take the Ace to be worth 1."

And the second reconstruction says:
"aces are 11"

Is there any way of knowing which of these statements is more likely to be
true?  (e.g. is there evidence that the Ace was  often worth 11?)

Justin says nothing on the subject of threes of a kind, but the second
reconstruction says:

"A three of a kind (different suits) is worth 30 & 1/2 points. "

Is there any evidence to support this statement?

Many thanks

Gwynydd

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, send email to majordomo at pbm.com containing
the words "unsubscribe hist-games". If you are subscribed to the digest version,
say "unsubscribe hist-games-digest". To contact a human about problems, send
mail to owner-hist-games at pbm.com

```