Board & Card Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people who like playing board games, designing board games or modifying the rules of existing board games. It only takes a minute to sign up.
Sign up to join this community
At Pagat's website, it says game of Hearts (the card game) ends when a player reaches 100 points or more: http://www.pagat.com/reverse/hearts.html#scoring
This implies that the game ends even if two players are tied for first place. I've always played it this way.
But recently someone told me that they use a rule so that you must continue playing until there is a single first-place finisher (i.e. single low-scorer).
Is there a clear rule for this, or does it vary a lot?
I cannot recall encountering this situation. I reckon that ties are not common, and that there is not a clear rule.
How it is handled would depend on the scoring system in use. For example, the description in Hoyle lists three settlement methods: "Cumulative scoring" and "Howell Settlement" avoid the issue, whereas in the "Sweepstake" method, if two players are clear then they divide the pot.
Pagat does refer to it in the section about variations of scoring. It does say "may" continue, so i suppose that each game should declare whether the low points are shared or whether the game plays on. (Pagat does not mention those other settlements.)
If a player reaches or exceeds 100 points and there is a tie for low score, additional hands may be played until there is a clear winner.
In real life games, we did not bother with settlement: as soon a someone blew it, then end of game, move on to the next. Online games would need to utilise settlements, especially if doing rating.
Do you have any statistics from your online game, regarding how often this situation occurs?
Ties can be relatively common in Hearts, depending on the difference in skill levels between participating players. If you're playing for fun it might not seem right. If you're playing for wagers, it simply means that those who are tied receive an equal share of the pot.
As Joe W points out in his comment, you can 'win' at hearts by not losing. This can lead to 3 players pinning nearly all the points on a single, weaker player. I've played on a site where this was common practice, the remaining 3 would usually be very close to each other in terms of scoring and occasionally tie for first (or second) place. There is no real incentive to break this tie position.
