In Spades, when someone is forced to takes a trick on a nil bid, some-times, players keep giving away their high cards.

In which situations it is better to try to take tricks and in which it is better to avoid taking more tricks?

  • 4
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because the question inquires as to the motivations of unspecified unknown players of the game. Commented May 25, 2019 at 0:59
  • 1
    I think that after my edit the question is on-topic
    – Cohensius
    Commented May 26, 2019 at 7:03

2 Answers 2


It's perfectly possible that having failed in the nil, your hand is still pretty weak in trick-taking value and plays better by trying to sandbag your opponents rather than trying to make them fail their bid (particularly if the hand was grossly underbid). Your partner presumably needs little assistance to make his.


The question you should ask yourself is: can we set the opponents?

If the nil bidder have a chance of setting her opponents then it is good idea to try and take tricks, however when she realize that the chances of setting the opponents are slim then there is no point in collecting bags*. Sum of bids equal to 10 is my cutoff point, when the sum of bids is lower than 10, usually I don't go for the set. When sum is 11 or more I will try.

*Note that takes of the nil-bidder does not count toward her partner's contract.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .