Talk:Cheat (game)

message: Suppose a player puts down 4 kings, and is telling the truth.  Then, suppose a player puts down at least one Queen.  With knowledge that the kings are gone, can the next player put down deuces ?Jkister (talk) 17:59, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Playing cards by Rank

message: self-explanitory  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.24.106.153 (talk) 04:27, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding a link to [[Card_games]]

message: The Endgame section mentions a situation in which only two people are left in the game. This implies that people can be eliminated from the game. In the preceding description of the game there is no explanation of how this can occur. Could somebody in the know describe the conditions in which people can be eliminated from the game? Cricobr (talk) 17:49, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  how do players get eliminated from the game? 

message: I realize this sounds odd, but in some variants of BS that I've played, if someone lies about the card they put down, and no one calls out their bluff, once the next person puts down their card, the previous person, who bluffed, says "banana", to signal that they had been bluffing about their card. 98.217.230.157 (talk) 13:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Banana

message: There is a short demonstration of VALID (aka: non cheating or bluffing) plays as an example. For example, for a single pack without jokers, if the last player had claimed 3 Queens, the next player can either call cheat or choose to claim to play 1-4 Kings, 1-4 Jacks or 1 Queen. Although larger numbers could be placed, there would be little point as a player could simply call cheat against you.
I completely disagree that there is no point in claiming more then one Queen in this example. Even assuming P-1 did make a non-bluff play:
# P-2 and P-3 do not KNOW P-1 actually laid his Queens, only that he CLAIMED to lay them. P-2 now claims 2 Q's. P-3 isn't sure who bluffed so might not call, leaving P-1 to either call bluff, or claim to lay his 3Q's next turn. Since P-2 or P-3 don't know if P-1's second play is bluff, he could get away with it.
# Given the above, P-1 lets P-2's play go. P-3 could even have the other Q and uses P-2's bluff to his advantage. He also lets P-2's play go and now lays and claims his 1Q. P-1 now has to decide if P-3 had the Q he didn't. He calls bluff and ends up with 4 Qs and 2 random cards that P-2 played. Well done P-3 for not calling P-2's bluff.
Saying that Although larger numbers could be placed, there would be little point as a player could simply call cheat against you, is assuming that every play except yours is a non-bluff. This is clearly not the case. MrZoolook (talk) 14:17, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  No point in making a bluff..? 

message: Why should we keep a description which advocates one particular style of play that actually disagrees with the cited references (or at least those I can access online)? I changed it to a broader description that reflects the highly variable way this game is played. - 95.112.97.139 (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed - I'm not sure if "the first player to call "cheat" has to add the entire pile to his or her hand" is a mangled version of an earlier ruleset or a house rule, but it matches the Pagat source to say that either the bluffer or the challenger draws the cards. --McGeddon (talk) 20:08, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gameplay ambiguity after calling cheat 

message: in the version we play (in the UK) no-one is allowed to play picture cards, you go from ace to 10 and back to ace again (or any variant up or down), but no jacks, queens or kings are allowed, so you have to "smuggle" them in with your normal play. makes for a much more interesting game! 2A00:23C6:6C85:4601:3D20:FBFA:177A:3F5A (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Smuggling pictures 

message: I played this game as a teenager back in the 1960's, but we played a different version of it.
We did not play ranks in order. You could put down either 2, 3, or 4 cards, supposedly of the same rank, but it could be any rank.
If you challenged somebody who was telling the truth, you had to take only those cards into your hand.
Like, if you said "Three sevens" and I said "I doubt it", you would say "Here they are" and hand them to me.
But if you got caught lying, THEN you had to take all the cards on the table into your hand.
It makes sense that the risk of lying should be greater than the risk of doubting somebody who is telling the truth. Tesseract12 (talk) 02:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another version