In the case of disagreement, a concerned and responsible participant would adhere to the cooperative spirit in investigating alternatives congenial to the pursuit of a common enterprise, rather than hold on tenaciously to his own view. For his view may be the product of obscuration of mind (9), rather than an impartial exercise of reason.
A. S. Cua, Ethical Argumentation: A Study in Hsün Tzu's Moral Epistemology (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1985).
Is that so difficult? For example, why are men looked at so strangely when they argue a feminist position? If there is something unenthical or unfair occuring, do you have to be the victim to cry foul? Is it so surprising that an uninvolved party would cry foul? Or even the person who is realizing the unfair benefit?
Yet people are so used to the notion that only victims complain about their suffering, that people who stand out against the unjust are ridiculed, scoffed, and, eventually, challenged to explain what personal gain they must stand to get for sticking their neck out.
I have no particular incident in mind. But to a less serious extent this happens during game nights. When an argument over the rules happens, what side are you on? Do you naturally choose the side that stands to gain you something? Do people believe that you are arguing objectively if you are involved in the outcome? ARE you arguing objectively?
The unfortunate thing is that most people won't believe you , even if you are being objective. But the principles that apply during game night are no less than the principles you hold throughout your life. What kind of person are you? What do you stand for?
There are, of course, situations where, within the game itself, you must argue out of a kind of deception - Diplomacy is the obvious example. But the key here is that this is within the game itself, not about the rules of the game. (In any case, this is one reason why I don't normally play Diplomacy. Too hard not to let the game world creep into the real world.)
The game board is an opportunity, like any other, to strive to be the best you can be ... as a human being. Intelligence, creativity, guile ... these all make for good game moves and help you achieve the goals of the game. But good manners, civility, consideration ... if you have these, then even if you don't achieve the goals of the game, you win.
Yehuda
Thursday, March 31, 2005
March Gaming at the JSGC
We seem to be hitting a low point in attendance. This is always frustrating. It has happened before, and we have bounced back, but at times like this, keeping the game club going and getting the word out is hard work. I'm envious of those who live in population dense areas with easy access to these games (and in their native language), such that membership problems are caused by too many, rather than too few, players.
Anyway, we still have at least 5 each week, but that includes myself and my son, and occasionally my wife.
March games:
ASL - yes, a local Jerusalemite found out my club by way of the new Tel Aviv club's web forums (apparently, many people have suddenly discovered my club this way, but they live in Tel Aviv). Looking for an ASL partner, he came one evening and taught some of our members who were interested. I wasn't. Dice, combat, war. Brrr.
Amun-Re - Continues to be a club favorite by everyone but me, who painfully loses whenever we forget to play "draw two, keep one". Luck averages out over time, so they say. Yeah, right. Tell me about it.
Checkers - played with my son while waiting to start the club. I resigned after 4 moves.
Geschenkt x 7 - Elegant, light, and quick.
Hansa - Really fell flat, and we quit halfway through. Previously, this had worked ok for two players. For 4 players there does not appear to be any real buildup, just an endless series of repetition. I thought it was better than the rest of the group, but they were not convinced.
Othello - someone else played with my son. This person also lost very quickly, although the game continued until the end.
Princes of Florence - Slow, thoughtful, and thoroughly enjoyed by everyone. Most slow thoughtful games seem tedious, but this one seems to work anyway. Not for my wife, however, who is usually grabbing the role she wants in PR before everyone has finished with the last one.
Puerto Rico x 2 - I won't bother saying "with expansions" anymore, since we NEVER play PR out of the box. We have pretty much settled on a consistent set of rules and buildings that just works best for our group. Just a few of the buildings are not quite permanent, yet, which is great, because it keeps us on our toes. Time for me to make some new ones.
I think each group of players requires their own set of buildings, and, even more so, even within one group these buildings should change over time. In one group, Factory at 7 is simply too strong. 6 months later, the same group playing Factory at 7 might be right.
San Juan x 4 - A perfect time slot, longer than Geschenkt, shorter than a meaty game. Probably Lost Cities would work here too (others?), if I had it.
Settlers of Catan - still enjoyed once in a while, and especially with new players.
Tikal - enjoyed, and works with 2, 3, or 4 players.
Traumfabrik - a little less meaty than a meaty game. I enjoy it, but we can't figure out a strategy, yet. The person who wins is never the person we expect to win.
Web of Power x 2 - Mixed. Three good games, one poor game. Another game with really simple mechanics but some convoluted rules on placement restrictions and scoring. I like it more than the group, I think. Sort of a Taj Mahal light.
Yehuda
Anyway, we still have at least 5 each week, but that includes myself and my son, and occasionally my wife.
March games:
ASL - yes, a local Jerusalemite found out my club by way of the new Tel Aviv club's web forums (apparently, many people have suddenly discovered my club this way, but they live in Tel Aviv). Looking for an ASL partner, he came one evening and taught some of our members who were interested. I wasn't. Dice, combat, war. Brrr.
Amun-Re - Continues to be a club favorite by everyone but me, who painfully loses whenever we forget to play "draw two, keep one". Luck averages out over time, so they say. Yeah, right. Tell me about it.
Checkers - played with my son while waiting to start the club. I resigned after 4 moves.
Geschenkt x 7 - Elegant, light, and quick.
Hansa - Really fell flat, and we quit halfway through. Previously, this had worked ok for two players. For 4 players there does not appear to be any real buildup, just an endless series of repetition. I thought it was better than the rest of the group, but they were not convinced.
Othello - someone else played with my son. This person also lost very quickly, although the game continued until the end.
Princes of Florence - Slow, thoughtful, and thoroughly enjoyed by everyone. Most slow thoughtful games seem tedious, but this one seems to work anyway. Not for my wife, however, who is usually grabbing the role she wants in PR before everyone has finished with the last one.
Puerto Rico x 2 - I won't bother saying "with expansions" anymore, since we NEVER play PR out of the box. We have pretty much settled on a consistent set of rules and buildings that just works best for our group. Just a few of the buildings are not quite permanent, yet, which is great, because it keeps us on our toes. Time for me to make some new ones.
I think each group of players requires their own set of buildings, and, even more so, even within one group these buildings should change over time. In one group, Factory at 7 is simply too strong. 6 months later, the same group playing Factory at 7 might be right.
San Juan x 4 - A perfect time slot, longer than Geschenkt, shorter than a meaty game. Probably Lost Cities would work here too (others?), if I had it.
Settlers of Catan - still enjoyed once in a while, and especially with new players.
Tikal - enjoyed, and works with 2, 3, or 4 players.
Traumfabrik - a little less meaty than a meaty game. I enjoy it, but we can't figure out a strategy, yet. The person who wins is never the person we expect to win.
Web of Power x 2 - Mixed. Three good games, one poor game. Another game with really simple mechanics but some convoluted rules on placement restrictions and scoring. I like it more than the group, I think. Sort of a Taj Mahal light.
Yehuda
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Jon: 1/2, Rachel: 1/2, Too Much PR: 1
I have been trying to get my wife to play other games, but she is a one game woman. The game changes every once in a while, and then stays the same for a long period.
First it was Scrabble, then Bridge, Boggle, Settlers of Catan, Cities and Knights of Catan, Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers, and now Puerto Rico. It has been PR for about a year now.
We play two player, and have gradually evolved into the best set of buildings from my expansions plus the official buildings (See my building sets for details): Aqueduct (or Assembly Line), Small Fashion District, Hacienda (or Black Market, Bazaar, or Civil Office), Small Warehouse, Hospice (changed so that you can move a colonist onto it as soon as you buy it), Large Market, ??? (no good choices here; Office in two player sometimes. Church is kind of dull. In multiplayer I have a few other choices), Discretionary Hold, Factory, Large General Workhouse, Large Business, Wharf, City Hall, Customs House, Fortress, plus any two of several random buildings from my big buildings, such as Distillery and Cathedral.
We don't play official two player version. We play: one of each violet building, 4/5/6 ships, 1 GP to start, -2 of each plantation and barrel type, 5 quarries, 6 roles, 3 roles taken per turn (governor twice), 50 VP, 35+2 colonists. It works out to a very balanced game, often with all victory conditions filled at once.
Anyway, yesterday's game ...
Rachel starts with Indigo and Small Fashion District, I start with an unusual Hacienda. (I never get anything good with Hacienda, but I keep trying. In this case, because Large General Workhouse is in the game, I can alleviate some of the bad luck.)
Rachel takes Hospice and Tobacco, I take Coffee, Sugar, and then LGW (wierd to take both LGW AND Coffee, but LGW does give more production.)
Rachel takes Large Business, I take Factory (also works well with LGW), big buildings, go back and forth, shipping, etc...
To make a long story short, we play subtly, strategically, tactically, and with a great flourish, we decisively end the game 58 to 58, no gold or barrels each. Perfect tie.
I'm hoping to convince Rachel that it is time to move on to a new game, maybe Go.
Yehuda
First it was Scrabble, then Bridge, Boggle, Settlers of Catan, Cities and Knights of Catan, Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers, and now Puerto Rico. It has been PR for about a year now.
We play two player, and have gradually evolved into the best set of buildings from my expansions plus the official buildings (See my building sets for details): Aqueduct (or Assembly Line), Small Fashion District, Hacienda (or Black Market, Bazaar, or Civil Office), Small Warehouse, Hospice (changed so that you can move a colonist onto it as soon as you buy it), Large Market, ??? (no good choices here; Office in two player sometimes. Church is kind of dull. In multiplayer I have a few other choices), Discretionary Hold, Factory, Large General Workhouse, Large Business, Wharf, City Hall, Customs House, Fortress, plus any two of several random buildings from my big buildings, such as Distillery and Cathedral.
We don't play official two player version. We play: one of each violet building, 4/5/6 ships, 1 GP to start, -2 of each plantation and barrel type, 5 quarries, 6 roles, 3 roles taken per turn (governor twice), 50 VP, 35+2 colonists. It works out to a very balanced game, often with all victory conditions filled at once.
Anyway, yesterday's game ...
Rachel starts with Indigo and Small Fashion District, I start with an unusual Hacienda. (I never get anything good with Hacienda, but I keep trying. In this case, because Large General Workhouse is in the game, I can alleviate some of the bad luck.)
Rachel takes Hospice and Tobacco, I take Coffee, Sugar, and then LGW (wierd to take both LGW AND Coffee, but LGW does give more production.)
Rachel takes Large Business, I take Factory (also works well with LGW), big buildings, go back and forth, shipping, etc...
To make a long story short, we play subtly, strategically, tactically, and with a great flourish, we decisively end the game 58 to 58, no gold or barrels each. Perfect tie.
I'm hoping to convince Rachel that it is time to move on to a new game, maybe Go.
Yehuda
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Purim Fest
Went to the parents this shabbat, and out to a friends for lunch. Of course, games played:
Fri night
Bridge: I've been playing bridge since I was 4 years old with my family, one of the first games I learned after rummy (many different types) and war. Bridge is to card games what Go is to board games - the pinnacle. But you have to play often, and many years, to get the patterns down and start playing well. Experienced players just can't enjoy a game against inexperienced players, or with an inexperienced partner. Even when all players are competent, good manners is keenly important, since the "right" play is sometimes obvious to one player in a partnership, but not the other. That is part of the game, and you have to accept it. But playing "right" does make you feel so smart.
Sat lunch
Pit: Tried to rope my host in to play with me and his kids, but my host, while a lovely man, can't handle this type of game.
Go: His son and I, both amateurs, played a few games. I initially gave him the starting advantage, which he soundly beat me with. I took the advantage the next game, and still lost due to a hairs-breathe race for one point in the middle of the board. We then played the same position several times, each time backing up further to see if I could win by making slightly different plays, but I lost each time. There was something wrong with my initial placement, which I still have to discover.
Arimaa: I don't know where he (son) learned this from, but I tried this game which was designed specifically to be "difficult for computers to solve." The game is played with chess pieces, where each piece can move one space orthogonally in any direction, and you get 4 moves each turn. In addition, bigger pieces can push or pull smaller pieces. There are four spots on the board where, if your piece lands, and is not orthogonal to one of your other pieces at the same time, it is removed from the board. Lastly, one your pieces next to a larger enemy piece is frozen (for you), again unless orthogonal to one of your pieces. Search Google for details.
Anyway, I found the game difficult, but my first impression was that, like Abalone, a good defensive position will probably beat any offensive position. With certain exceptions, such as Go, and the Gipf series, I am not much of an abstract/no randomness gamer, so this doesn't really appeal to me.
Spit/Speed: Whatever you call it. I played against my friend's 11 year old. I still got it, but I am slowing down every year. I measure my lifeblood by assessing how good my spit skills are.
Sat night was Purim dance party. Boomba boomba Boomba boomba.
Yehuda
Fri night
Bridge: I've been playing bridge since I was 4 years old with my family, one of the first games I learned after rummy (many different types) and war. Bridge is to card games what Go is to board games - the pinnacle. But you have to play often, and many years, to get the patterns down and start playing well. Experienced players just can't enjoy a game against inexperienced players, or with an inexperienced partner. Even when all players are competent, good manners is keenly important, since the "right" play is sometimes obvious to one player in a partnership, but not the other. That is part of the game, and you have to accept it. But playing "right" does make you feel so smart.
Sat lunch
Pit: Tried to rope my host in to play with me and his kids, but my host, while a lovely man, can't handle this type of game.
Go: His son and I, both amateurs, played a few games. I initially gave him the starting advantage, which he soundly beat me with. I took the advantage the next game, and still lost due to a hairs-breathe race for one point in the middle of the board. We then played the same position several times, each time backing up further to see if I could win by making slightly different plays, but I lost each time. There was something wrong with my initial placement, which I still have to discover.
Arimaa: I don't know where he (son) learned this from, but I tried this game which was designed specifically to be "difficult for computers to solve." The game is played with chess pieces, where each piece can move one space orthogonally in any direction, and you get 4 moves each turn. In addition, bigger pieces can push or pull smaller pieces. There are four spots on the board where, if your piece lands, and is not orthogonal to one of your other pieces at the same time, it is removed from the board. Lastly, one your pieces next to a larger enemy piece is frozen (for you), again unless orthogonal to one of your pieces. Search Google for details.
Anyway, I found the game difficult, but my first impression was that, like Abalone, a good defensive position will probably beat any offensive position. With certain exceptions, such as Go, and the Gipf series, I am not much of an abstract/no randomness gamer, so this doesn't really appeal to me.
Spit/Speed: Whatever you call it. I played against my friend's 11 year old. I still got it, but I am slowing down every year. I measure my lifeblood by assessing how good my spit skills are.
Sat night was Purim dance party. Boomba boomba Boomba boomba.
Yehuda
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
WEEKLY UPDATE
Welcome to another edition of WEEKLY UPDATE
Yehuda: Today's top story - researchers have discovered that Tom Vasel, game commenter, reviewer, interviewer, and teacher, is, in fact, a giant computer.
"We first got suspicious when we saw the voluminous material 'Tom' produced each week," said noted game commentator, Tom Vasel. "In the last week alone, 'Tom' has generated 8 game reviews, 4 interviews, dozens of replies, articles and game entries, uploaded pictures of his game collection, written several blogs, and commented on thousands of geeklists, journals and blogs around the internet. That works out to almost 25,000 words/minute, faster than all but the best super computers"
That's when our noted undercover game reporter, Tom Vasel, noticed that Vasel stands for "Very Advanced Scientific/Electric Laboratory", or VASEL, a highly regarded research facility in South Korea, where 'Tom's submissions originate. "That was just the giveaway," said Tom Vasel, a lab technician who works at VASEL. "Gotcha."
Authorities suspect that the deception was funded by Rio Grande Games, makers of Crocodile Pool Party, the game which people now most associate with Tom Vasel.
And now here is a weekly round up of comments on Board Game Geek, with Jon Berlinger. Take it away, Jon.
Jon: Well, uh, Brackers asked how many shares there were in Acquire, because he didn't have an even amount. But then he found the rest of them in the box.
And, um, ... Lunga said that he once saw a game of St Petersburg where someone won without having the Observatory.
Hmmm. Oh, uh, dwarf posted a session report of Settlers of Catan ... but he accidentally played with all of the development cards from both the base game and the expansion, so he drew three road building cards.
Heh.
And, um, some more people said they liked Gola's Amun-Re session report.
And someone uploaded 4 images for 'Wizard'.
And Shade_Jon won two games of Geschenkt, but then he lost the next one.
And, uh, that's it. Back to you, Yehuda.
Yehuda: Thank you. That was ... thrilling. Now on to our spotlight interview with Nigel Geek, a game enthusiast from Manchester, who owns a special copy of Settlers of Catan.
[Begin interview]
Nigel Geek: It's great, man. Special edition. I paid five hundred quids for it. The win condition is eleven point. Look. Look at this rulebook. The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Yehuda: Oh, I see. And most Settlers of Catan games are played until ten?
Nigel Geek: Exactly.
Yehuda: Does that mean it's better? Is it any better?
Nigel Geek: Well, it's one better, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing until ten. You're at ten, game over, game over, game over, you've got ten points. Where can you go from there? Where?
Yehuda: I don't know.
Nigel Geek: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we get to ten, you know what we do?
Yehuda: Play until eleven.
Nigel Geek: Eleven. Exactly. One better.
Yehuda: Why don't you just take a regular game of Settlers and when you get to ten points keep playing?
Nigel Geek: [pause] This game goes to eleven.
[End interview]
Yehuda: Well that's it for tonight. Tune in next week when we ask Greg's dog the secret of how to win at Werewolf. Until then, keep the robber away from you.
From the WEEKLY UPDATE STAFF
Yehuda: Today's top story - researchers have discovered that Tom Vasel, game commenter, reviewer, interviewer, and teacher, is, in fact, a giant computer.
"We first got suspicious when we saw the voluminous material 'Tom' produced each week," said noted game commentator, Tom Vasel. "In the last week alone, 'Tom' has generated 8 game reviews, 4 interviews, dozens of replies, articles and game entries, uploaded pictures of his game collection, written several blogs, and commented on thousands of geeklists, journals and blogs around the internet. That works out to almost 25,000 words/minute, faster than all but the best super computers"
That's when our noted undercover game reporter, Tom Vasel, noticed that Vasel stands for "Very Advanced Scientific/Electric Laboratory", or VASEL, a highly regarded research facility in South Korea, where 'Tom's submissions originate. "That was just the giveaway," said Tom Vasel, a lab technician who works at VASEL. "Gotcha."
Authorities suspect that the deception was funded by Rio Grande Games, makers of Crocodile Pool Party, the game which people now most associate with Tom Vasel.
And now here is a weekly round up of comments on Board Game Geek, with Jon Berlinger. Take it away, Jon.
Jon: Well, uh, Brackers asked how many shares there were in Acquire, because he didn't have an even amount. But then he found the rest of them in the box.
And, um, ... Lunga said that he once saw a game of St Petersburg where someone won without having the Observatory.
Hmmm. Oh, uh, dwarf posted a session report of Settlers of Catan ... but he accidentally played with all of the development cards from both the base game and the expansion, so he drew three road building cards.
Heh.
And, um, some more people said they liked Gola's Amun-Re session report.
And someone uploaded 4 images for 'Wizard'.
And Shade_Jon won two games of Geschenkt, but then he lost the next one.
And, uh, that's it. Back to you, Yehuda.
Yehuda: Thank you. That was ... thrilling. Now on to our spotlight interview with Nigel Geek, a game enthusiast from Manchester, who owns a special copy of Settlers of Catan.
[Begin interview]
Nigel Geek: It's great, man. Special edition. I paid five hundred quids for it. The win condition is eleven point. Look. Look at this rulebook. The numbers all go to eleven. Look, right across the board, eleven, eleven, eleven and...
Yehuda: Oh, I see. And most Settlers of Catan games are played until ten?
Nigel Geek: Exactly.
Yehuda: Does that mean it's better? Is it any better?
Nigel Geek: Well, it's one better, isn't it? It's not ten. You see, most blokes, you know, will be playing until ten. You're at ten, game over, game over, game over, you've got ten points. Where can you go from there? Where?
Yehuda: I don't know.
Nigel Geek: Nowhere. Exactly. What we do is, if we get to ten, you know what we do?
Yehuda: Play until eleven.
Nigel Geek: Eleven. Exactly. One better.
Yehuda: Why don't you just take a regular game of Settlers and when you get to ten points keep playing?
Nigel Geek: [pause] This game goes to eleven.
[End interview]
Yehuda: Well that's it for tonight. Tune in next week when we ask Greg's dog the secret of how to win at Werewolf. Until then, keep the robber away from you.
From the WEEKLY UPDATE STAFF
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Games in Transit
My game collection is fluid.
I have previously bought and sold several games: Bang!, Settlers of Catan Card Game, Bohnanza, Citadels. I have traded others.
I just sold Acquire, Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers, and Harry Potter Quiddich Card Game to my brother for $30 total - to be used to buy a new game.
Currently sitting on my shelves are games that are not mine: Amun-Re, Dvonn, Taj Mahal, Evo, Strange Synergy, Chez Geek 1 and 2, Oasis, and Attika, all from Yaron's Tel Aviv group, and Web of Power and Hansa from Gilad's collection. In the meantime, Yaron has our San Juan (one copy), Die Macher (which is really David K's), Goa, and Through the Desert, while Gilad has our Torres.
Some of the other games I have were bought by me, some were bought by the group. New ones are on the way: Lord of the Rings the Confrontation which I traded for, Puerto Rico expansion.
If you look at the games we play each week in my session reports, some games come in, peak and leave. Others get played regularly, others get played consistently but infrequently. Same with players: they come, they go, some come regularly, some come consistently but infrequently.
Every week is a new week, and a new experience. Something that is almost entirely not like the bridge clubs I know: same game, same people - but different hands, fascinating and interesting every week. Theirs is the depth first/gain mastery experience. Ours in the breadth/wide and new experience.
Does this say something about me as a person?
I like going to the bridge club. Really, I do. But I don't go. I suppose that if I didn't have my own game group, I would be playing bridge each week. But I wasn't, really. I was playing Magic and D&D. If there had been a central Magic/D&D club with a lot of people I probably would have gone every week.
Actually, there is a Magic tourney every week in the mall, but it requires buying new cards every week, or collecting and buying expensive cards to compete. The playing is more mercenary, less friendly, and the players are pre-army teenagers with disposable income from allowances or jobs.
I wish I had just one more night a week to play. You know. Once in my own club, and once out at a bridge club. That way I could get both experiences. When my children are more grown up, I guess I will have that luxury.
I buy new games in the hope that the next game will be the next great one that enters heavy rotation in the playlist. I get rid of ones that don't get played any more. That's the way it goes.
"Just a box of rain - wind and water - Believe it if you need it, if you don't just pass it on" - GD
Yehuda
I have previously bought and sold several games: Bang!, Settlers of Catan Card Game, Bohnanza, Citadels. I have traded others.
I just sold Acquire, Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers, and Harry Potter Quiddich Card Game to my brother for $30 total - to be used to buy a new game.
Currently sitting on my shelves are games that are not mine: Amun-Re, Dvonn, Taj Mahal, Evo, Strange Synergy, Chez Geek 1 and 2, Oasis, and Attika, all from Yaron's Tel Aviv group, and Web of Power and Hansa from Gilad's collection. In the meantime, Yaron has our San Juan (one copy), Die Macher (which is really David K's), Goa, and Through the Desert, while Gilad has our Torres.
Some of the other games I have were bought by me, some were bought by the group. New ones are on the way: Lord of the Rings the Confrontation which I traded for, Puerto Rico expansion.
If you look at the games we play each week in my session reports, some games come in, peak and leave. Others get played regularly, others get played consistently but infrequently. Same with players: they come, they go, some come regularly, some come consistently but infrequently.
Every week is a new week, and a new experience. Something that is almost entirely not like the bridge clubs I know: same game, same people - but different hands, fascinating and interesting every week. Theirs is the depth first/gain mastery experience. Ours in the breadth/wide and new experience.
Does this say something about me as a person?
I like going to the bridge club. Really, I do. But I don't go. I suppose that if I didn't have my own game group, I would be playing bridge each week. But I wasn't, really. I was playing Magic and D&D. If there had been a central Magic/D&D club with a lot of people I probably would have gone every week.
Actually, there is a Magic tourney every week in the mall, but it requires buying new cards every week, or collecting and buying expensive cards to compete. The playing is more mercenary, less friendly, and the players are pre-army teenagers with disposable income from allowances or jobs.
I wish I had just one more night a week to play. You know. Once in my own club, and once out at a bridge club. That way I could get both experiences. When my children are more grown up, I guess I will have that luxury.
I buy new games in the hope that the next game will be the next great one that enters heavy rotation in the playlist. I get rid of ones that don't get played any more. That's the way it goes.
"Just a box of rain - wind and water - Believe it if you need it, if you don't just pass it on" - GD
Yehuda
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)