Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Leeds & Dwight versus Foster

Expand Messages
  • Todd Martin
    I have two copies of R. F. Foster s Complete Hoyle. One is the original (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the copyright years were 1897,
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment

      I have two copies of R. F. Foster's Complete Hoyle. One is the original (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the copyright years were 1897, 1909, 1914, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1937, 1946, and 1953. I don't know if any other copies were printed afterwards but Law 40 in the two versions I have, 1897 and 1953, read exactly the same and differ from Leeds & Dwight's Law 83.  Robin mentioned that Leed's & Dwight's rules were the standard for Euchre Laws for years to come.  Foster modified Leeds & Dwight's Law 83 in his Law 40. Was it to strict? Why was it modified? Or was it just to shorten it? Why were specifics taken out?

      The 1888 Leeds & Dwight Law 83 reads as follows.

      If any one, prior to his partner's playing, should call attention to the trick either by saying that it is or is not his, or by naming his card or by drawing it without being asked to do so, or call on his partner to take or not to take the trick, the adversaries may require that opponent's partner to play his highest or lowest of the suit led, or to win or lose the trick.

      Foster's Euchre Law 40 1897/1953reads as follows.

      A player calling attention in any manner to the trick or to the score, may be called upon to play his highest or lowest of the suit led;  or to trump or not to trump the trick during the play of which the remark was made.

       

       

    • Todd Martin
      I overlooked that Foster added or to the score. He didn t specify the bridge just the score. ... original ... the ... taken ... the ... to ... to ... to ...
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 1, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        I overlooked that Foster added "or to the score." He didn't specify the
        bridge just the score.


        --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Martin" <jtmwingnut@...>
        wrote:
        >
        >
        > I have two copies of R. F. Foster's Complete Hoyle. One is the
        original
        > (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the copyright
        > years were 1897, 1909, 1914, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1937, 1946, and 1953. I
        > don't know if any other copies were printed afterwards but Law 40 in
        the
        > two versions I have, 1897 and 1953, read exactly the same and differ
        > from Leeds & Dwight's Law 83. Robin mentioned that Leed's & Dwight's
        > rules were the standard for Euchre Laws for years to come. Foster
        > modified Leeds & Dwight's Law 83 in his Law 40. Was it to strict? Why
        > was it modified? Or was it just to shorten it? Why were specifics
        taken
        > out?
        >
        > The 1888 Leeds & Dwight Law 83 reads as follows.
        >
        > If any one, prior to his partner's playing, should call attention to
        the
        > trick either by saying that it is or is not his, or by naming his card
        > or by drawing it without being asked to do so, or call on his partner
        to
        > take or not to take the trick, the adversaries may require that
        > opponent's partner to play his highest or lowest of the suit led, or
        to
        > win or lose the trick.
        >
        > Foster's Euchre Law 40 1897/1953reads as follows.
        >
        > A player calling attention in any manner to the trick or to the score,
        > may be called upon to play his highest or lowest of the suit led; or
        to
        > trump or not to trump the trick during the play of which the remark
        was
        > made.
        >
      • robin neill
        I don t see a whole lot of difference between the two author s rule on this except foster include the score. However, I suspect Foster was avoiding
        Message 3 of 5 , Oct 1, 2010
        • 0 Attachment
          I don't see a whole lot of difference between the two author's rule on this except foster include the "score." However, I suspect Foster was avoiding "plagiarizing" Leed's laws word for word and condensing the rules down to 40. 

          --- On Fri, 10/1/10, Todd Martin <jtmwingnut@...> wrote:

          From: Todd Martin <jtmwingnut@...>
          Subject: [EuchreScience] Re: Leeds & Dwight versus Foster
          To: EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Friday, October 1, 2010, 5:47 PM

           

          I overlooked that Foster added "or to the score." He didn't specify the
          bridge just the score.

          --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Martin" <jtmwingnut@...>
          wrote:
          >
          >
          > I have two copies of R. F. Foster's Complete Hoyle. One is the
          original
          > (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the copyright
          > years were 1897, 1909, 1914, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1937, 1946, and 1953. I
          > don't know if any other copies were printed afterwards but Law 40 in
          the
          > two versions I have, 1897 and 1953, read exactly the same and differ
          > from Leeds & Dwight's Law 83. Robin mentioned that Leed's & Dwight's
          > rules were the standard for Euchre Laws for years to come. Foster
          > modified Leeds & Dwight's Law 83 in his Law 40. Was it to strict? Why
          > was it modified? Or was it just to shorten it? Why were specifics
          taken
          > out?
          >
          > The 1888 Leeds & Dwight Law 83 reads as follows.
          >
          > If any one, prior to his partner's playing, should call attention to
          the
          > trick either by saying that it is or is not his, or by naming his card
          > or by drawing it without being asked to do so, or call on his partner
          to
          > take or not to take the trick, the adversaries may require that
          > opponent's partner to play his highest or lowest of the suit led, or
          to
          > win or lose the trick.
          >
          > Foster's Euchre Law 40 1897/1953reads as follows.
          >
          > A player calling attention in any manner to the trick or to the score,
          > may be called upon to play his highest or lowest of the suit led; or
          to
          > trump or not to trump the trick during the play of which the remark
          was
          > made.
          >


        • Todd Martin
          or by drawing it without being asked to do so, If I play second to a trick, and place my card on the table in front of me keeping my finger on the card and
          Message 4 of 5 , Oct 2, 2010
          • 0 Attachment
            "or by drawing it without being asked to do so,"

            If I play second to a trick, and place my card on the table in front of
            me keeping my finger on the card and my card played is winning the trick
            and keep my finger on the trick and 3rd plays his trick and my card is
            still the winner and I still have my finger on my winning card would
            this be considered a penalty?


            --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Martin" <jtmwingnut@...>
            wrote:
            >
            >
            > I have two copies of R. F. Foster's Complete Hoyle. One is the
            original
            > (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the copyright
            > years were 1897, 1909, 1914, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1937, 1946, and 1953. I
            > don't know if any other copies were printed afterwards but Law 40 in
            the
            > two versions I have, 1897 and 1953, read exactly the same and differ
            > from Leeds & Dwight's Law 83. Robin mentioned that Leed's & Dwight's
            > rules were the standard for Euchre Laws for years to come. Foster
            > modified Leeds & Dwight's Law 83 in his Law 40. Was it to strict? Why
            > was it modified? Or was it just to shorten it? Why were specifics
            taken
            > out?
            >
            > The 1888 Leeds & Dwight Law 83 reads as follows.
            >
            > If any one, prior to his partner's playing, should call attention to
            the
            > trick either by saying that it is or is not his, or by naming his card
            > or by drawing it without being asked to do so, or call on his partner
            to
            > take or not to take the trick, the adversaries may require that
            > opponent's partner to play his highest or lowest of the suit led, or
            to
            > win or lose the trick.
            >
            > Foster's Euchre Law 40 1897/1953reads as follows.
            >
            > A player calling attention in any manner to the trick or to the score,
            > may be called upon to play his highest or lowest of the suit led; or
            to
            > trump or not to trump the trick during the play of which the remark
            was
            > made.
            >
          • Todd Martin
            or by drawing it without being asked to do so, OR If I play second to a trick, and place my card on the table in front of me (removing my hand from touching
            Message 5 of 5 , Oct 2, 2010
            • 0 Attachment
              "or by drawing it without being asked to do so,"


              OR


              If I play second to a trick, and place my card on the table in front of
              me (removing my hand from touching my card) and my card played is
              winning the trick and 3rd plays his trick is and my card is still the
              winner and I put my finger on my card before my partner plays his card
              would this be considered a penalty? Also, suppose the cards are mixed in
              a 3 card bunch and I take my finger to pull my winning/or losing card
              out to show which card is mine, would that be considered a penalty,
              without being asked?

              --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Martin" <jtmwingnut@...>
              wrote:
              >
              >
              > "or by drawing it without being asked to do so,"
              >
              > If I play second to a trick, and place my card on the table in front
              of
              > me keeping my finger on the card and my card played is winning the
              trick
              > and keep my finger on the trick and 3rd plays his trick and my card is
              > still the winner and I still have my finger on my winning card would
              > this be considered a penalty?
              >
              >
              > --- In EuchreScience@yahoogroups.com, "Todd Martin" jtmwingnut@
              > wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > I have two copies of R. F. Foster's Complete Hoyle. One is the
              > original
              > > (I think) of 1897 and another of 1953. In the 1953 copy the
              copyright
              > > years were 1897, 1909, 1914, 1922, 1924, 1927, 1937, 1946, and 1953.
              I
              > > don't know if any other copies were printed afterwards but Law 40 in
              > the
              > > two versions I have, 1897 and 1953, read exactly the same and differ
              > > from Leeds & Dwight's Law 83. Robin mentioned that Leed's & Dwight's
              > > rules were the standard for Euchre Laws for years to come. Foster
              > > modified Leeds & Dwight's Law 83 in his Law 40. Was it to strict?
              Why
              > > was it modified? Or was it just to shorten it? Why were specifics
              > taken
              > > out?
              > >
              > > The 1888 Leeds & Dwight Law 83 reads as follows.
              > >
              > > If any one, prior to his partner's playing, should call attention to
              > the
              > > trick either by saying that it is or is not his, or by naming his
              card
              > > or by drawing it without being asked to do so, or call on his
              partner
              > to
              > > take or not to take the trick, the adversaries may require that
              > > opponent's partner to play his highest or lowest of the suit led, or
              > to
              > > win or lose the trick.
              > >
              > > Foster's Euchre Law 40 1897/1953reads as follows.
              > >
              > > A player calling attention in any manner to the trick or to the
              score,
              > > may be called upon to play his highest or lowest of the suit led; or
              > to
              > > trump or not to trump the trick during the play of which the remark
              > was
              > > made.
              > >
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.