Game: Head-To-Head Poker

Thread: Re: Accept and raise

bd171 — 2008-02-03T14:16:12+00:00

From reading user comments here it seems others have also found the betting rules pretty vague.

Anyway from a recent session I played with betting rules, it seems to me that although a logical reading of the rules implies that Player 2, the one who didn't start the round actually plays the card after an Accept and Raise/ Accept and Call sequence of play, I think it must be Player 1, the player who started betting, who plays the card. Consider the "Split 2 variation"- You draw two cards, play one of them and give the other to your opponent. If you used betting with this variation, you would bet before playing your card, but your opponent doesn't actually a card to play yet, so that it must be you who has to play the card that turn.

If anyone can give any opinions on these betting rules then that would be appreciated. Such a shame- an easy to play and learn game that my non gaming opponents have enjoyed and it goes and shoots itself in the foot with vague rules.

Thread: Re: Accept and raise

Hector Vortac — 2008-01-30T11:05:15+00:00

bd171 wrote:
..........

But what happens in this kind of situation?

Player 1: "I bet $50" (places $50 on Common card)
Player2 : "Accept and raise $50" (Places $100) on Common Card
Player 1: "Accept and call"

So who plays the card on the second Accept and Call? Player 1, because he started the betting round and is his turn, or Player 2, who although did not start the betting and it is not his turn, is being "called" to play a card?

Sorry if this seems elementary, but I still don't know very much about Poker betting! Thanks in advance for any help

I can try to bluff my way through this.
I don't know how Head-to-Head Poker plays specifically as a game, and it's possible that the designers put in some creative mechanisms to make their game work. When you say "who plays the card.." this is something I don't recognize from poker, as all cards come from a common deck. Is this something different in HtHP? Intuitively from a poker viewpoint the player 1 should remain player 1 until that hand of cards is concluded. So that's my guess; if some card is played from someone's hand it would be player 1.

Now I'll have to find this and try it.

Thread: Re: Upping the Ante: Does it matter where you play afterward

bd171 — 2008-01-28T15:50:37+00:00

It never even occurred to me that you would play on any other row other than the one you bet on, but I suppose the rules are worded so that you have the other possibility. I probably think that the rules were intended so that you should play the card on the row you bet on, but playing other variations are not out of the question. If it's fun and it works, then why not try it?

Thread: Upping the Ante: Does it matter where you play afterwards?

Kwyjibo — 2008-01-26T18:16:15+00:00

You up the ante before you play your card for the turn. After betting has ceased and you are to play your card, are you bound to playing the card to the row (hand) on which you bet or are you allowed to play it on any row (hand).

I think the element of bluff would be much stronger if you could play your card to any row (hand) after a bet has been called.

Why are these rules so damn unclear.

Thread: Accept and raise

bd171 — 2008-01-21T12:35:54+00:00

I got this a few days ago and so far my opponent and I are enjoying it. She has no poker experience at all, I've played some poker only on a PC Casino game against computer opponents. But there is a rule in Head To Head Poker that I'm a bit confused over. The rules say, when you place a bet your opponent does one of three things;

1) Decline.

2) Accept and Raise. Your opponent immediately matches your bet, then adds more to it. You must then do one of the following:

*Accept and raise by matching the total bet and raising it even higher. Play continues.

*Accept and call

*Decline

3) Accept and call.

But what happens in this kind of situation?

Player 1: "I bet $50" (places $50 on Common card)
Player2 : "Accept and raise $50" (Places $100) on Common Card
Player 1: "Accept and call"

So who plays the card on the second Accept and Call? Player 1, because he started the betting round and is his turn, or Player 2, who although did not start the betting and it is not his turn, is being "called" to play a card?

Sorry if this seems elementary, but I still don't know very much about Poker betting! Thanks in advance for any help

Image

ZiggyZambo — 2007-12-05T00:35:01+00:00

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T20:05:32+00:00

Three Completed Hands

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T20:02:55+00:00

The First Deal - 3 Cards And $200 To Win On Each Card

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T20:00:46+00:00

A Full House Beats A Flush

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:55:32+00:00

Sample Cards - Standard Style, But More Squat/Square

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:52:46+00:00

Card Backs And Score Cards (The Cards Are Smaller And More Sqaure Than Standard Decks)

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:50:41+00:00

Box Front (Higher Res)

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:49:29+00:00

Box Back (Higher Res)

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:48:19+00:00

Board (Higher Res)

Image

gamephotos — 2007-09-27T19:46:47+00:00

Betting On The Last Hand

Thread: Re: Unable to call.

Marqos — 2007-03-08T08:45:54+00:00

At that point, your opponent has two options: He can fold, or he can sign over to you the deed for his home/car/family farm.

In fact, every time I've seen this happen, the person gets 24 hours to scramble madly around town and muster the resources to call your bet.

Seriously.

Thread: Re: Unable to call.

generalpf — 2007-03-08T02:11:51+00:00

Gola wrote:
Shooter wrote:
I don't think this is covered in the rules. If I raise 100 dollars and my opponent doesn't have 100 dollars, what happens. Do I win the hand that I placed the bet on?
I'm pretty sure the rules state that you can't bet more money than your opponent has.
They do.

Thread: Re: Unable to call.

Gola — 2007-03-07T23:43:13+00:00

Shooter wrote:
I don't think this is covered in the rules. If I raise 100 dollars and my opponent doesn't have 100 dollars, what happens. Do I win the hand that I placed the bet on?
I'm pretty sure the rules state that you can't bet more money than your opponent has.

Thread: Unable to call.

Shooter — 2007-03-07T23:08:01+00:00

I don't think this is covered in the rules. If I raise 100 dollars and my opponent doesn't have 100 dollars, what happens. Do I win the hand that I placed the bet on?

Thread: Re: Betting limits

Gola — 2006-10-05T19:02:48+00:00

EvilTimmy wrote:
There is a maximum bet of $200 per card per round ($600 maximum in round 1, $800 in round 2, $1,000 in round 3)
I am completely confused by this

Does it mean:

a) That is the total maximum (period!) that can ever be on the card for the round, including the starting chips?

b) That is the maximum amount that can be added to the card for both players combined per round?

c) That is the maximum amount that a single player can add to a card per round?

d) Something else entirely?
I interpreted this as meaning B, but I could see how someone might argue C. Regarding A, it doesn't seem like you could call the starting chips a "bet."

I think you could play it either way and be fine. I'm guessing that the purpose is to idiot-proof the game and make sure that no one bets the farm and loses the game in the first round. Regardless, it's annoying to have to stop everything and count the chips to see how much more you can bet.

You could probably get away with ignoring the rule entirely, I'd think. Whatever you do, don't let it get in the way of playing the betting game--it's a lot more fun.

Also, can you continue to bet on a row after it was bid on once before and just called? e.g One player bets $20, the other calls. The max hasn't been reached, so can it be bet on again later? I assume so.
I assumed so as well.

Thread: Bluffing Variant

MacBeth — 2006-07-30T15:42:16+00:00

When playing this game, I realized that the most important element of poker is missing: bluffing.

The rules are the same as the betting version, except for the following:

1) For each row, each player may choose to play 1 of his cards facedown. (A max of 1 facedown card per player per row.)

2) A player make look at any facedown card on their side of the board at any time.

3) When a row is complete and there is at least 1 facedown card in the row. a new round of betting begins. The player who played the last card starts the betting. If he does not want to bet, the other player may choose to start. There is a max bet/raise of $100 with a maximum total of $200 wagered in the round by each player. When a bet is called, the cards are revealed and the winner takes the pot. If the bet if folded, the player who did not fold wins the pot and each player may decide if they want to reveal their cards or not.

4) If a 2 is rolled, the card given to your opponent must be played face up.

5) If a 5 is rolled, play is as follows. The first player draws five cards, plays one of them and hands the rest to his opponent. The second player then plays one card and hands the remaining 3 to the first player. The first player then plays one and hands the remaining 2 to the second player who plays 1 and puts the last card on the bottom of the deck without showing it to the first player. Players alternate going first.

6) If a 6 is rolled, play with the "crazy" rule with the additional rule that any card played on your opponents side of the board must be played face up.

I tried creating a no-limit version but decided that losing an all-in bet is too much to come back from.

I would love to hear some feedback about this. Thanks.

Thread: Re: "Guts" betting variant

drasher25 — 2006-07-23T01:17:24+00:00

After drawing, before playing a card!

Thread: Re: "Guts" betting variant

MacBeth — 2006-07-23T00:57:45+00:00

Sounds good. I am going to have to try it. One question: Do you bet before you draw or between drawing and playing.

Thread: Re: Betting limits

drasher25 — 2006-07-22T21:59:23+00:00

Okay, I posted my "Guts" betting variant over in the variants forum. Comments are welcome!

Thread: "High Stakes" betting variant

drasher25 — 2006-07-22T21:56:52+00:00

Head-to-Head Poker
“High Stakes” Betting Variant

At the beginning of the game, each player receives half of the chips ($1950).

Round selection and card play follow the standard rules.

At the start of each round, each player antes $50 onto each common card*.

Each player must bet every time it is their turn. The minimum bet is $10, the maximum is $100. The player bets after drawing, but before they play their card.

The other player may:
- Decline to bet, in which case the first player takes all but $50 from the card. This row may no longer be bet on this round.
- Call the bet, placing chips of matching value on the card.
- Raise the bet up to $100 more. The first player may then call or decline (he cannot reraise).

There is no maximum amount of chips that can build up on one card (although the rules above limit the betting to $200 per player per turn).

Once all the spots in a row are full, the player with the best hand collects all remaining chips in that row.

If a player runs out of chips to bet with, no further bets may be made until that player collects some chips.

At the end of three rounds, the player with the most value in chips is the winner!

Tournament mode:
Play a series of 3-5 games as described above. At the end of each game, record the final chip counts of each player. At the end of all the games, the player with the highest cumulative total wins!

We created this variant to spice up the betting, as the provided “Up-the-Ante” rules, shall we say, lack excitement. This variant is intended to force players to really think about their odds of completing their target hands, and makes the betting much more intense and meaningful (plus, the $10 and $50 chips actually get some use). There’s also a lot more opportunity for bluffing and slow play, especially during the “Hold 3” and “Play 4” rounds. Tournament mode adds some strategy because it becomes much better to lose by a little than to lose by a lot!

Comments are welcome!

*If a player doesn’t have enough chips to ante fully, he may choose which rows to ante on, and the other player must only match ante on those cards. Only those rows can be bet on that round. However, if it comes to this, it’s probably a foregone conclusion who’s going to win, so you might just want to call the game unless you’re playing in Tournament mode.

EDIT 7/23/06: Added Tournament mode

Thread: Re: Now $5 at TRU...

generalpf — 2006-07-03T01:14:23+00:00

Just picked up my copy this weekend at a TRU in Fargo, ND for $2.98. Nice chips; they're the same chips (but in different colours) from Sharp Shooters.

Thread: Re: Betting limits

tigermuppetcut — 2006-06-29T20:03:43+00:00

Also when does the dealer change, at the start of each round, afte reach deal of a card?

And when EXACTLY do you bet. For example if you roll a 2 and end up drawing two cards playing one and passing 1 to the opponent, I know you look at the card before betting, but do you pass one on for the opponent to look at before they get to call or raise you or fold etc? We played that yes they got to see it (otherwise it seemed crazy (blind betting every other round).

Also on my turn let's say I bet 20 my opponent matches that and raises 10, if I fold do I thne play a card or does my opponent, what if I matched (called) him would I play a card or him? We played that on your turn regardless of what happens withthe betting you will play a card, this seemed right.

All in all that section is a horrific mess and is holding back game mechanics which seem really good.

Thread: Re: Betting limits

EvilTimmy — 2006-06-29T17:26:30+00:00

drasher25 wrote:
I've been working on a variant that I think improves the betting component. I hope to post it here once I've had a chance to test it some more.
No, you are required to post it here once you've tested it!

Thread: Re: Betting limits

drasher25 — 2006-06-29T13:43:09+00:00

Yeah, it's kind of a mess. I think the proper interpretation is that only $200 can be added to each row. However, I think the betting part of the game is pretty weak as written regardless. The only chips that ever see any use are the $100 chips (making a small bet almost never happens), and there aren't even enough of $100 chips included! I've been working on a variant that I think improves the betting component. I hope to post it here once I've had a chance to test it some more.

Thread: Re: Betting limits

tigermuppetcut — 2006-06-28T23:48:23+00:00

I just picked this up in the Woolies sale and am baffled by this.

Is it $200 maximum on a card (a per card, card specific pot limit of $200) or is it $600 in round 1 that can all go on one card, ending the betting on other cards or does it mean that you can keep betting on a card as long as you like but only in $200 increments each time? AAAARGH!

Also does that include the 2 x $50 token on there. If you were to play for real money would each player put 1 $50 chip in (like a blind?)

How would the pot limit per card even work e.g.
Player A puts $100 on a card. There is now $200, what can player B do, can he see that bet, call it with $100 of his own, but uh-oh that puts the pot at $300.

Is it $200 per player per card? I just can't believe how poorly written this part is it's driving me insane!

Thread: Re: Betting limits

Glamorous Mucus — 2006-06-21T19:10:23+00:00

This has also confused me. I have no idea what is intended. Any insights or theories from BGGers would be appreciated!

Thread: Re: Betting question

EvilTimmy — 2006-06-04T03:18:42+00:00

drasher25 wrote:
On another note, I'm not sure what they mean when they say "There is a maximum bet of $200 per card per round". I assume that means that there cannot be more than $400 (inital $200 + $200 in bets) on any card?
I posed the same question and it has yet to be answered:
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/111761

Thread: Re: Betting question

drasher25 — 2006-06-04T00:06:27+00:00

EvilTimmy wrote:
TMJJS wrote:
Where do you get the $50 chip from? When I read the rules it says to place two $100 chips on each card each round.
In the betting version of the rules you start with two $50 chips on each card. The non-betting version uses two $100 chips.

Hmmm - my rules say "the dealer places two $100 chips on each Common card" in the first paragraph of the "Up-the-Ante Gameplay" section.

On another note, I'm not sure what they mean when they say "There is a maximum bet of $200 per card per round". I assume that means that there cannot be more than $400 (inital $200 + $200 in bets) on any card?

Thread: Re: 2 $100 chips

EvilTimmy — 2006-05-26T15:17:06+00:00

TMJJS wrote:
I have only played twice and each time without betting. Why are there two $100 chips on each common card if 1) you only win one of them each round and 2) the chips are cleared at the end of the round?

Where do you get that you only win one chip each round?

The no-bet rules state:
The player with the higher five-card combination wins the two $100 chips from the Common card.

Thread: Re: Betting question

EvilTimmy — 2006-05-26T15:12:00+00:00

TMJJS wrote:
Where do you get the $50 chip from? When I read the rules it says to place two $100 chips on each card each round.
In the betting version of the rules you start with two $50 chips on each card. The non-betting version uses two $100 chips.

Thread: 2 $100 chips

TMJJS — 2006-05-26T12:07:36+00:00

I have only played twice and each time without betting. Why are there two $100 chips on each common card if 1) you only win one of them each round and 2) the chips are cleared at the end of the round?

Thread: Re: Betting question

TMJJS — 2006-05-26T12:06:25+00:00

Where do you get the $50 chip from? When I read the rules it says to place two $100 chips on each card each round.

Thread: Betting limits

EvilTimmy — 2006-05-26T05:24:16+00:00

There is a maximum bet of $200 per card per round ($600 maximum in round 1, $800 in round 2, $1,000 in round 3)
I am completely confused by this

Does it mean:

a) That is the total maximum (period!) that can ever be on the card for the round, including the starting chips?

b) That is the maximum amount that can be added to the card for both players combined per round?

c) That is the maximum amount that a single player can add to a card per round?

d) Something else entirely?

Anyone?

Also, can you continue to bet on a row after it was bid on once before and just called? e.g One player bets $20, the other calls. The max hasn't been reached, so can it be bet on again later? I assume so.

Thread: Re: Betting question

Blackwind — 2006-05-24T18:05:10+00:00

This is how I play it.

Thread: Re: Betting question

EvilTimmy — 2006-05-24T17:39:33+00:00

tool wrote:
...the way I have been playing, if your opponent declines a bet or raise, you get all chips on the row except one of the original $50 chips. If you win the row, then of course you get all the chips on the row.
Thanks. That's my understanding.

Anyone else want to chime in here?

Thread: Re: Betting question

tool — 2006-05-24T16:47:34+00:00

The rules aren't very clear on this point. I don't know what was intended, but they way I have been playing, if your opponent declines a bet or raise, you get all chips on the row except one of the original $50 chips. If you win the row, then of course you get all the chips on the row.

Thread: Betting question

EvilTimmy — 2006-05-24T16:06:09+00:00

I assume that when you 'win' a bet for a row that you get one of the $50 chips as well as all other chips that may have been played in the course of betting and raising.

I ask this only because the rules lawyer in me sees that the printed rules state that if your opponent declines your bet/raise that you get one of the $50 chips "as well as your betting chips from the Common card."

If your opponent raised or called then they would have chips in that pot, right? Normal poker would dictate that you get all those chips, not just yours. Otherwise, the betting doesn't really make sense.

Am I crazy, or are the rules a little foggy there?

Thread: Re: Knizia's poker challenge

droolster — 2006-04-01T15:36:58+00:00

Actually, Knizia does get credit for this game, both on the box (on the back next to the triangle with the lion's head on it), and on the back of the instruction sheet.

Thread: Re: Now $5 at TRU...

Verkisto — 2006-03-16T20:53:50+00:00

Reiner Knizia dropped by the house yesterday and gave me mine, along with the Alea/RGG versions of Taj Mahal and Ra.

Yeah, I know: Old joke. So what?

Thread: Re: Now $5 at TRU...

Zambo — 2006-03-16T20:22:27+00:00

Got mine for $3 at Wal-Mart last night.

Thread: Re: Now $5 at TRU...

skrebs — 2006-03-16T19:55:58+00:00

... and K-Bee.

Thread: Now $5 at TRU...

engelstein — 2006-03-16T18:59:59+00:00

and certainly worth picking up for that price.

Geoff

Thread: Re: Scoring Hierarchy and the Straight Flush

apotheos — 2006-01-13T16:52:01+00:00

Seems we've just been playing poker by the wrong rules (not that a straight flush has ever come up and thus actually been an issue).

Thread: Re: Scoring Hierarchy and the Straight Flush

supertris — 2006-01-13T08:20:17+00:00

IIRC in normal poker scoring the hands are ranked in order of likelihood of just being dealt in a given 5 card draw hand.

This leads to a situation where in some variant games it is actually easier to get a higher ranked hand. In texas hold'em, straights are rarer than flushes, but are still ranked lower.

The conventional full ranking list is as follows:

Straight Flush
Four of a Kind
Full House
Flush
Straight
Three of a Kind
Two Pair
Pair
High Card

With Royal Flush being the highest ranked type of Straight Flush, but without any extra rules applied to it.

Thread: Re: Scoring Hierarchy and the Straight Flush

apotheos — 2006-01-13T07:02:21+00:00

myopia wrote:
A straight flush does not beat a full house or a four of a kind and a royal flush is a straight flush albeit a straight flush with A-k-q-j-10.

...and a Royal Flush does beat a full house or a four of a kind, wheras the other straight flushes do not.

But thats not whats in the game rules.

Thread: Re: Scoring Hierarchy and the Straight Flush

myopia — 2006-01-13T06:59:16+00:00

A straight flush does not beat a full house or a four of a kind and a royal flush is a straight flush albeit a straight flush with A-k-q-j-10.

Thread: Scoring Hierarchy and the Straight Flush

apotheos — 2006-01-13T06:28:27+00:00

Has anyone else noticed that this game lists Straight Flush as the highest hand possible? As far as I know, thats not correct. Straight Flush beats a flush but loses to a Full House or Four of a Kind as well as the actual best hand - the Royal Flush.

Is this a deliberate Kniziaism relevant to play or just someone being stupid?

Thread: Review of Head-To-Head Poker

spamspam2 — 2005-12-30T17:43:29+00:00

Hello, my first review. Let's get under way.
So this is another game by the great Knizia. I've only been playing actual games (i.e. not monopoly) for about 5 months now, and one the first things I have learned is to buy pretty much anything designed by Knizia. So when I found out that this is a Knizia game, that it cost about $10, and I can get it at any Wal-mart, I was on a mission to acquire this game. I have enjoyed Knizia game in the past, and I can say that this game is no different.

With this game, you get a completely superfluous(sp?) gameboard, a pack of cards, a die, rules, and a bunch of poker chips. If you know someone who owns the game, and you have the bits, you could play it without buying the game. But if you want to support good games getting money, then go ahead and buy without feeling ashamed. But as an aside, it's best if the pack of cards you use are small in size because the row of cards do get a bit long.

The game is played as such. I will give you the non-betting version, because A) it's quicker to explain and B)I haven't played it yet. There are three different rounds. In the first round you have 3 rows, the second 4, the third 5. Before play begins, a card is layed in the middle of the table corresponding to the amount of rows in the round. So three cards in the first round and so on. These three cards are used by both players in deciding their hand. So, this card will be used by you in making a five-card hand and by your opponent in making their five-card hand. A marker is placed on each of these cards A) to make it easier to tell which are the communal cards, and B) to be given to the person who has a better hand using that card. When you play, you play only on your side of the field. So to drive home the point, each person decides who had the better hand by looking at the communal card and the 4 cards on their side of the board. Whoever has the better hand, wins the chip. The one with the most chips at the end of the game wins.

Shuffle up the cards for the draw pile. Then roll the die. This roll determines how the game is played for that round. The die is rolled again at the beginning of the next round.

1-draw one from the draw pile and play
2-draw two from the draw pile, play one, give other to opponent who playes it
3-3 card hand in which you play and then replenish hand from draw pile
4-4 card hand in which you play one at a time until expired, then deal out another
5-5 face up cards, used by both players, which are played until expired, then deal out another
6-crazy

When a 6 is rolled, you are then allowed to play on your opponents side of the table. The die is rolled again until something other then a six to determine how play continues.

How is the game? I really like it. The game is about 20-30 minutes long, but play is very fast and tense. This game is also very light and very easy to teach. Strategy is simple, but deep. Since you always see the cards that the other person is laying down, you see how strong that persons hand is. You must therefore change your tactics to try and win that hand. This game really reminds me of Coloretto in a lot of ways. Not so much in a strict mechanical sort of way, but in the feel of the game. You must always weigh against helping yourself or hurting your opponent. Do I use this card to help myself, or that card just so they can't use it? And many times you just have to put a card where you don't want to, just because you are out of options.

By no means is this game perfect. I would love for someone to come up with a way to decide draws (6 markers to 6 markers). And just most other card games, luck plays a factor in winning. I don't feel it is very much of a hinderence, but I'm someone who really doesn't mind.

There are betting rules, but I have not played them so I cannot comment.

In conclusion, this is a very enjoyable game. It is light, fun, easy to teach. Yet it is full of enough hard decisions to keep you playing.

Josh Koenemann
Card Gamer

Thread: Betting limits and "crazy" designation

peterschell — 2005-10-22T02:25:17+00:00

The rules limit betting to only an additional $200 per center card. When I first read this, I thought it meant that only $400 in chips max could be placed on a single card. I felt this really limited the comptetitive betting possiblities.
Now I play with an OVERALL betting limit of $200 per center card on the board. For example, the first round has three hands to bet on with a center card for each. Players can keep track on paper how much has been bet total during that round. That way it is possible for just one of the hands to have up to $600 in extra bets at stake on it in addion to the $200 placed on it at the start of the round.
Also, instead of waiting for a "six" to come up on the die to designate "crazy" rounds where players can put cards on either their side of the board or the opponent's side, have the losing player decide whether the next round will be "crazy" after the die roll but before the cards are drawn or dealt.

Thread: Knizia's poker challenge

RandallPeek — 2005-08-11T09:25:07+00:00

I was quite interested to find that this game, which is located in just about every WalMart in America, was designed by BGG resident god, Reiner Knizia. Moreover, it is almost unknown to the denizens here. This is probably due to its mainstream America appeal, the fact that Knizia is not hailed on the box as the designer, and the fact that most BGGers probably see a poker variant as being something less than a 'real' game.
I am no poker buff, and have only played a handful of times in my life. Nevertheless I find this entry to be a worthy addition to my massive game collection, and one that will likely see some play. The game consists of a nearly superfluous board, a deck of small and rather shabby playing cards, a pile of Hasbro's standard plastic poker chips, a standard die, and a rules booklet. Component-wise, it isn't that impressive, but it doesn't cost much either so it seems a fair trade-off.
Gameplay is strictly one on one, hence the name. The game is played over three rounds. In each round a number of common cards are dealt in a column down the center of the board. Each card will be the common card to a poker hand to be constructed by each of the players, with each player adding four cards to it, one at a time. The play is reminiscent of Schotten-Totten, in that cards are added one at a time to any of the three to five rows until the maximum number of cards is located in each. The big difference here is how the cards are decided upon.
In each round, the die is rolled and the instuctions are referenced to see which special rule will be used in deciding how cards are played. A '1', for example, means that a player draws a card from the deck and then plays it to his or her side of the board. A '2' means that the player will draw two cards and place the card of their choice, giving the opponent the other card which is then placed. Each number between 1 and 5 has a simple rule like this which is tied to the number of cards that will be available. If a 6 is rolled it means that it will be a 'Crazy' round and players can play cards to their opponent's side as well as their own.
In the basic game, each round ends when the final row is filled. As each row is filled, the player with the winning poker hand is rewarded with the 200 points in chips placed on it. The winner at the end of three rounds is the player with the most points in chips. The advanced game allows players to bet with an initial stake of chips, and lends much more of a true poker feel to the game with its raising, calling, and bluffing. Folding early will result in the loss of 100 of the initial 200 stake on each hand as well as any chips bet on it. The final 100 on the common card is rewarded to the player who actually does wind up with the best hand, even if that player had dropped out.
While the game is by no means terribly original it is also not without its own charms. If you enjoy poker and want a good two-player game based on it, then this is well worth your time and attention.