Large Mahal

Sam was (is) unable to attend the usual Tuesday meet, so he sent out a call for a Monday get-together. Ian and I (Andrew) were able to make it.

First, we played Taj Mahal, a game of trick-taking set in the North-West of Iandia, although the map is somewhat lacking in detail or atmosphere and I noted it might as well be set in Staffordshire. It’s a game that doesn’t get to the table very often here at GNN towers but, when it does, it’s usually a treat.

Sam and I needed a big rule refresh, and Ian hadn’t played it at all, so Sam took the risk of getting Explainer’s Curse and went through the rules. It’s a nice trick-taking game of quitting while you’re ahead, but it would’ve been nice if it had been a little bit more in character. As we moved around the twelve unnamed provinces, taking anonymous cities and fortresses, it all seemed a bit shallow. Sam commented Taj Mahal would get played more if it looked nicer.

We also had to stop halfway through when we realised we hadn’t been scoring for links between provinces. We’d assumed that it was some big end of game bonus, but when Sam double checked the rules, he found we should have been doing them as we went. We spent a few minutes trying to recreate our moves, and readjust our scores accordingly.

In the end, it was the elephants what won it. Ian and I went for economic power, while Sam when for chains. Ian snuck it right at the death. Grrr.

Ian 61
Andrew 60
Sam 42

After this, we wondered what to play to finish the evening off. We chose Citadels, figuring that with three players, it wouldn’t be that long. Sam explained the rules to Ian, and we were off. The assassin seemed to have quite a grudge against the merchant and, as such, it was not a quick game. Halfway through, I suggested we finish on the seventh building, not the eighth and happily, Sam and Ian agreed.

But eleven o’clock, I was in a position to build three shitty districts and trigger the end of the game. It wasn’t quite enough, though. Sam only build six districts but they were all high-scoring and he got the rainbow bonus, putting him in first and cocking a snook to Explainer’s Curse.

Sam 27
Andrew 26
Ian 25

Three hours of play, and only two games. I won’t be fooled by Citadels again.

Hmm, the moment I get some free time, I’ll have to sort out the Form Table...

Growing pains

On the trip back to the train station Paul admitted that he had been very tired this evening. We speculated that this might have been the reason why he had been in such fine playing form, posting two wins on the night. Was it possible that his weariness meant he had no other energy to draw and deflect away attention from formulating efficient strategies?..... Maybe.

We started off the first of tonights Bracknell league games with the crop building card game Nile. We had never played it with three before as it had previously always been a bit of a 2 player filler. James and I struggled to get crops planted of a diverse enough nature, whereas Paul gave a summary demonstration of crop rotation. I got stuck with a hand full of Papyrus and no chance to lay it as flood after flood of Papyrus came off the deck to prevent me from planting. After the third deck had been worked through our final harvest decks were revealed. Paul got at least two of everything where I was lacking in one type and James in two.

Paul - 2
Chris - 1
James - 0

Table cloth thematically sound

7 Wonders was happily unboxed next and the executive board decision was taken to use the B sides of the wonders. James got Giza with its appetising 20 points, Paul the Colossus of Rhodes, with only 2 stages, and mine was the Temple of Artemis with it's fairly uninspiring victory points.

Players strategies took a familiar path as sciences where largely ignored (By the end of age 2 I was the only player to have one) buildings quickly gobbled up and, Paul and I vying over the military.  In the third age Paul took the best guild which gave points for neighbours buildings and I was taking the best blue cards owing to the fact I was the only person that could use glassware. Luckily for me everyone was still ignoring sciences so I was able to add to my solitary one to make three of the same type and a valuable nine points.

Chris - 47
James - 41
Paul - 40

Finally we took on another game that up until now had only been played as a two player, Citadels. James and I were just working up to something that might have resembled tactics, if you cocked your head to one side, squinted and jumped up and down in a figure of 8 when Paul laid his 7th and 8th buildings. James and I had 4. Damn.

Paul - 27
Chris - 20
James -13


The table so far - Paul and James are joint second only separated by the order of the alphabet.

	Gold	Silver	Bronze
Chris	4	4	2
James	3	3	4
Paul	3	3	4

Wonders and Citadels

Just a couple of short games, they said. It won’t last long, they said. But tonight, GNN was caught out by a game that seemed short when you remembered it, but lasted a long time when you played it.

But that’s all to come. We began with Anja and Hannah upstairs talking about babies or whatnot while three fellows (me, Steve and Jon ) played 7 Wonders downstairs. It was short and we all knew the rules (more or less) and we got stuck in. Although our memories were a little rusty, with a little reference to the rules, and Steve made a mistake which he didn’t realise until a few turns later. He didn’t ask to take it back, though, saying it was “ancient history” which got an appreciative chuckle from the other two players.

Marilyn the bunny admires my still-unstarted wonder

As it turned out, I ran out of money at the start of round three – a disastrous place to be broke. Jon and Steve were cash rich, but Steve was a late convert to the joys of war and science, while Jon was scoring in all categories. In the end, I was saved by some cheap blue buildings and my “copy guild” super power.

Jon 50
Andrew 46
Steve 40

After this game, Anja and Hannah came down with the baby and, after a little discussion and rule-telling and exchanging of babies, we were ready for our next quick game of the evening: Citadels.

Now, when I remember previous games of Citadel, they do seem fairly short. But then, they are usually two or three player affairs. It turns out that five-player Citadels is a bit of a beast. Everyone suffered a bit of AP, and the game took a little longer than we expected.

Citadels: not a photogenic game

Both Anja and Steve suffered from consecutive assassinations, and Hannah had her money stolen twice by Jon, but despite all that and having to feed his newborn child, Steve came out on top. Jon fell just short, and the eternal Warlord (which is why she kept being assassinated) Anja squeezed into third by attacking Hannah on her last go. An action which saw me earn fourth.

Steve 32
Jon 30
Anja 22
Andrew 20
Hannah 17

And so it was that our "two short games" ended at half past eleven in the evening. All of this means that Jon leaps up to fourth, while the three absent leaders enjoy another week in the penthouse suite of the Form Table.

						Points
Joe	1	1	2	1	2	7
Sam	2	1	1	2	3	9
Adam	1	2	4	3	1	11
Jon	2	1	2	3	5	13
Anja	3	1	1	3	5	13
Hannah	5	2	1	4	2	14
Andrew	4	2	3	3	3	15
Steve	1	3	4	4	4	16
Quentin	2	2	3	5	5	18
Will	3	3	5	5	5	21

And since it's the end of the month, it's time to look at The Division. Well, the core four are rewarded for their loyal attendance, by taking the top four places but that shouldn't detract from Adam's stunning run of form which has put him on top of the table. And Sam is the new Mr Consistency, having never placed outside the top three. It's very much between those two for the top of the table. In terms of Points Ratio, it's a little more clear cut, with Anja a full 0.92 above her nearest rival Steve.

Italy, the 16th Century

Plagues of battle-hardened Italians jostle for power in a land made of several city-states that sometimes ally themselves, and sometimes fight. It's a dirty, dirty war, full of intrigue, death and well-dressed smart-alecks.

London, the 21st Century. The complex time described above has been neatly packaged up in a teeny cardboard box and labelled Condittiere, after the manipulative bastards who led the mercenary armies. Having read the rules and found their brevity to my liking, I invited Andrew over to play last night.

The game is fairly simple. As players you're representing the Condittieres and trying to occupy a certain number of regions on a map of Italy to win - with two players it's 6 regions, or 4 adjacent ones. And to do so you simply line up the mercenary troops (valued 1-6 in the main, but there are some much-valued 10's as well) from your ten-card hand and try and outscore your opponent. Having done so, you place a marker in the region to say it's yours, and having been occupied, that region may not be contested again.

But wait. What sounds like a rather ambitiously themed Top Trumps game is made more subtle with the 'special cards'; of which there are many. The Bishop gets rid of the highest-level mercenary on display, the Scarecrow allows you to nab a card back into your hand (either having bluffed someone out of play or to save it for another day if you foresee defeat). The Surrender card allows you to end a battle immediately - and somewhat perversely, win it, if you have the strongest troops on show. Those crazy Italians, eh!

There is also Winter and Spring cards that can weaken or strengthen troops, the Drummer doubles the power of any mercenaries, the Courtesans who add a bit of power to your army but more importantly, if you have the most of them, allow you to choose the next battleground, and finally the Heroine, who scores ten and is kind of unstoppable, unaffected as she is by any of the other special cards.

There's also a 'Favour of the Pope' counter that protects an unoccupied region from battle (which you move by playing a Bishop) to add a little extra smattering of strategy.

We were intrigued. Aesthetically there's a weird imbalance between the Renaissance-art of the cards and the slightly ugly board. Mechanically we liked the speed of it, and the fact it can play up to six. But for two players it felt a little bit luck-heavy - sure, you can be as canny as you like early on, but if you're fighting over a region that will win somebody the game, it can basically come down to who has the best hand - which was how it felt as Andrew won the first game and I the second. I think though, with 3 or 4 players this downside would be negated, as there'd be more than one person trying to stop an imminent victor.

We also played Citadels, which I won by being a sneaky mo'fo.

Sam 36

Andrew 22

Torres Redux

As ever, when Thursday arrives my early morning thoughts of hitting the sack 5 minutes after the kids do have dissipated by the time evening rolls around. The games cupboard calls my name, and like a sailor dashed on the rocks, lured by a siren's wail, I respond.

So does Andrew. I guess we're the ones with bugger all else to do.

So tonight we revisited Torres as a 2-player game, having discovered on Tuesday that one pertinent rule about knight placement had eluded us. We'd enjoyed it the first time; this time it was even better. We played the 'Master' version: Adam might like to know that this eliminates the chance element of Action Cards, as each player starts with their own set - and it also supplies you with the option of gaining a bonus from a 'Master' card drawn randomly at the start of the game - in this case the bonus available was 40 points if you had all your knights orthogonally adjacent at the third and final scoring round.

I started well, but just as with our first two-player game Andrew outscored me in round two, moving just a few points behind me on the score track. Come the third and final round I sacrificed scoring Andrew's castle to line up my knights and go for the bonus. But having made it I realised I would have scored more sticking with the castle and building upwards - Andrew picked up 54 points compared to my 40. I also lost out on the King's bonus, but did manage to put together 81 points for the biggest castle - 9 tiles high x 9 area. But it wasn't enough to win - Andrew's more nomadic knights brought home the scoring bacon in the tightest finish possible:

Andrew 268

Sam 267

We'd raced through Torres so fast it was a wonder any of the castles stayed upright, but having done so we had time for Citadels. Again I established an early lead; again Andrew's canny play won the day. I was nowhere contemplating the finish line when he suddenly - courtesy of the architect - built three buildings to end the game, and left my wayward assassin twiddling his butter-fingered thumbs:

Andrew 31

Sam 21

If Endersby can bring this form to Tuesday nights we may have a new aspirant to the ratio throne...

Digging up the Past.

"I would like to play something with a board." Paul answered when asked what he would like to play for the final game. Previously in the evening we had steamed across America in Ticket to Ride, but it was another outing of Citadels which prompted Paul's plea. On the journey to Bracknell station Paul reflected that he doesn't really get on with games that don't have a board to put all your stuff on.

I surveyed my modest stack of games and caught Stone Age coyly winking at me. As much as I love the old flirt (SA, not Paul) I thought maybe tonight was it was time for a change. Tikal had been lurking around in my attic for several years, unplayed, until I noticed some months back that it had 2 players written on the side. This game, it must be said, was always well received and it's surprising it never received more plays.

In Tikal you adopt the role of a director on an expedition intent on uncovering Mayan sites located in the dense Jungle. You take turns to reveal tiles which may have any one of a blank space, a temple, an artefact haul or a Volcano! (Quite how you would miss seeing a bloody great volcano is beyond me). The latter tile sparks off (pun intended) a scoring round, of which there are four in the game. The tiles can be laid in any adjoining space that allows a path back to the start and are revealed in a semi random fashion.

Each player gets 10 action points to spend on ...err actions. They can be dig for treasure, develop a level of temple, add expedition members, create a new base camp and so on. The essence of the game is to get yourself in positions of power around the temples so that you may gain the points during the scoring round.

Unfortunately it wasn't until the second Volcano had come and gone that I realised we hadn't been doing the scoring rounds correctly. Crucially, both players are allowed 10 action points before they score however we just played whoever it was that got the tile. Me. Although I was slightly ahead Paul graciously turned down my offer of equalising the scores.

The game played out as I expected it would, like a a mad trolly dash to grab the abundant goodies with little to prevent you doing it. The 3 and 4 player game (Like so many of this type) have a limiting effect on resources. The rules did not have amendments for 2 players which I felt it needed. In the end I ran out the winner due to my well excavated temples!

Final scores on the night went as follows
TTR
Chris 127
Paul 106

Citadels
Chris 31
Paul 13

Tikal
Chris 172
Paul 153

On Monday I met up with James again and we managed to squeeze in 3 games, two Citadels and one Carcassonne : Discovery.

It was a whitewash and he won all Three.

Dang! A trip to the games shop in January I feel to expand the collection..

A few acres of tiles

With Ashton (recovering from a chest infection) and Ava (Normal bedtime) happily tucked up in bed and dinner out the way by 18.50, an inviting 4 hours of gaming was available. Paul suggested that this week we might try to play as many quick games as possible after last sessions time eating monster A Few Acres Of Snow. Seizing my opportunity I quickly plopped Citadels, a new game to us, on the table. Although there would be a rule learning session and the obligatory "Open Hand" I thought we would probably get a game in under the hour benchmark stated on the box.

The rules didn't seem overly complex but the powers that the characters held required constant referral. For two Citadels newbies the interaction between the characters and what was a "Good" move remained elusive until near the end. Realising that I had built a whole bunch city cards and was near to closing out the game I began to choose my characters a lot more carefully. It would seem that some cards like the Bishop, Warlord and Assassin become a lot more sought after as the game progresses. It's then that you see how neatly balanced this game really is. I managed to negotiate my way through to an eighth city card and that was that. I really liked it but I could see Paul was left a little cold by it and so we hurriedly moved on to our next game....

Chris 30
Paul 16

Which was Stone Age! Oh no everybody groans..... Well I won so there, and I did so without my new tactic of throwing Paul's workers under the washing machine panning out as I had planned.

Chris 243
Paul 200

The time was 21:45, the night was still young! So we unboxed Carcassonne the Discovery. Paul hadn't played it in at least 10 years but hadn't lost any of his skill as a tile laying magician. In fact if anybody needs their bathroom doing then Paul's your man. Although you will have to be happy with a perfectly tessellated satellite picture of a fictional medieval country as thats all he does apparently. We were neck and neck all the way through but this was all balanced by whether one of Paul's early mountain dwelling meeples would be lucky enough to find the piece of land which had two corners mountain opposite two corners grassland. Twice I picked the ideal tile and quickly placed far far away. Fortunately for Paul his meeple got the map turned the right way and found the perfect tile, scoring 18 points (A lot in this game) and taking any chance of a comeback away.

Paul 117
Chris 103

We had managed to get all three in by 22:45 and not have to break any traffic laws getting Paul to his train on time. Hoorah.

Name Played Won
Chris 18 12
James 7 3
Paul 11 3

<ilayer src="http://www.mail2web.com/cgi-bin/banner/ad.asp?zone=110"><a href="http://myhosting.com/" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.mail2web.com/images/banners/defaults/zone110.gif" width="160" height="600" align="top" border="0" alt="" /></a></ilayer>

Bite my finger

The call went out this afternoon for potential gamers since Sam found he had an evening to himself. Myself (Andrew) and Dan (a gamer from the pre-GNN period of our history) were available. And in our eagerness to get as many names on the leaderboard as possible, Sam and I decided that this was an official GNN evening. So we got out the referee’s armbands, whistles and timepieces and got down to work.

We chose Citadels as our game. Easy to learn, yet tense enough to make you mistrust your fellow man. We explained the rules to Dan, and the game commenced. I found myself on the receiving end of both the assassin and the thief in round one, effectively giving the other two an one-round head-start. But that’s all part of the game, isn’t it? Dan generously missed a go in the next round when he forgot he was the thief until it was far too late. Sam built lots of green buildings but then was too scared to chose the Merchant since he figured it would be a prime target for the assassin.

I battled back, with two “six coins for eight points” cards boosting my score, and Sam went for an early shut-out by building a lot of lesser cards. In the end, the game was surprisingly close. If the Bishop hadn’t been killed in the final round, I would have won. Meanwhile Sam discovered in some post-match analysis that he could have come first if he’d used his Warlord instead of building. But in the event Dan came away winner.

Dan 35
Sam 34
Andrew 31

A “quick” game of Trans-America was suggested. Again, Dan was a newcomer to the rules, but this is a game that needs barely any introduction, and he was soon up to speed. I started well, winning the first two rounds, but then I was stung for nine points in the third. Sam won the last two rounds to take first place overall.

Sam 5
Andrew 13
Dan 14

Oh, and the explanation for the post title? During the evening, Dan told us about some unused footage from the documentary about monkeys he’s currently making, which involved an alpha male monkey bumming another monkey while a third monkey pushed his finger in his mouth in some weird primate fetish. Unfortunately, some people taking photos can clearly be seen at the edge of the screen. Otherwise it may have been usable.

Bloody tourists.

The leaderboard...

	Played	Points	Ratio
Sam	5	21.5	4.3
Andrew	5	17.5	3.5
Adam	3	14.5	4.83
Joe	3	10.5	3.5
Dan	2	8	4

Bonjour Bristol

I go away for two weeks, and we have branches? At least it's not factions.
If this continues we'll be able to have a Eurovision style contest - 'Wilkommen, Bracknell - can we please have your scores for Ticket to Ride'?
But really, the more the merrier. If I'd had internet access out in France I'd have joined in. But I didn't, so I couldn't. I did manage to get some games played though.
I was only allowed a small-ish bag of games, so I took my box of card games, Stone Age, Thurn and Taxis, Pergamon, Dixit and Battle Line.

However, the Thurn and Taxis box also contained Settlers of Catan.
In the Pergamon box I'd managed to find space for Notre Dame and Aton, and secreted within the capacious Stone Age box were Alhambra and Lost Cities.
The Battle Line box also held Haggis, Row Boat and Citadels, and the Posion box is far too big for the game itself; much better with Tichu, For Sale, Mu, No Thanks and Coloretto in there for company.

And what did we play?

If it was up to Bea (9), we'd have played nothing but Dixit. It was in fact one of the game highlights of the holiday, playing Dixit in the garden with the girls and my parents-in-law.
I can't think of another game that could be played by six people aged 7 to 70, first-time and seasoned gamers alike, that would be such fun, and a proper game - it's a worthy Spiel Des Jahres winner, and a very unique game.

My father-in-law William is always up for a game, and I had high hopes for Aton, mine and Sam's current two-player favourite. We played once, but it didn't really grab him.
We played a few games of Battle Line, a great Reiner Knizia two-player card game of war in the ancient world - very thematic, even though you're basically making poker hands. But the one that William really took to was Lost Cities; RK again, and a game that really deserves its classic status - everyone I've introduced it to 'gets' it within a single round, and wants to master it. It may be less strategic than Battle Line, but easier to grasp, pick up and play.

Matilda's go-to game was Coloretto, and I played a few games with all the girls; despite the fact that their main strategy was fighting over who got to collect pink, I consistently lost . . .
In exchange for taking them swimming one gloomy afternoon, Matilda and Bea agreed to a game of Thurn and Taxis; Bea won, but they haven't asked to play again. Funny, I thought Matilda might find it an interesting step up from Trans Europa.
Again at Matilda's request, we played a game of Alhambra, and I was reminded of what a great game for three or four it is; and what a long one too, for kids.

And in the evenings, Charlotte and her mum were persuaded to join us menfolk. That's when I realised I'd brought too many games. I couldn't decide what to play; the first night we played Tichu, which didn't go down a storm. I should have learned to avoid card games after that, but the next night, despite showing them both Pergamon and Notre Dame, I ended up suggesting Mu. I found a good teaching method, but we started too late, and it was a giant flop.

Everything changed, however, after I sniffed out a games shop in La Rochelle . . .
I couldn't resist Martin Wallace's new game, A Few Acres of Snow; it's a two-player game based on the battle for control of Canada by the British and the French, which uses a Dominion-style card-drafting mechanic. No, Charlotte didn't play it; and by the time I'd got to grips with the rules, William had headed back to London.

But while I was there, I picked up Pickomino - the Reiner Knizia dice game some of us played at Stabcon with Hammy (he called it Heck Meck). It turns out that if you're allowed to play it yourself, rather than being told what you should do on each roll (Hammy's preferred method), it's really rather good fun. We played it with Charlotte's parents, and I played it with the girls. And finally, we all played it together; in fact we played it every day of the holiday after I bought it.

It's a good little push-your-luck dice game, the pieces are very tactile and lovely, and the worms give it that extra hook for the kids. There's an awful lot of luck, but that's perfect for what it is; and when the dice-gods smile on you, and hand you the single, solitary worm you so desperately need on your eighth dice, well, you smile right back at them. Would make a nice game to end a tuesday night . . .

So Dr Knizia does it again - I could have just packed Pickomino, probably.
Except the box is so small, I couldn't possibly have squeezed the other games in there. JB

"Your purples are fine," the doctor said

The gap between an early games evening (brought forward to Monday) and a late one (put back to Thursday) is long indeed, so it was no surprise to see the four regulars (myself, Sam, Joe and Adam) eagerly arriving at Chez Joe for some table-top action.

First up was Citadel. Since it was the first time since Stabcon that we’d played it, there was a quick run through of the rules before we launched ourselves into a world of medieval town planning in the face of a constantly shifting monarchy and a shockingly high crime rate of thefts and murders.

It’s a game that encourages suspicion and double-crossing. The Architect, for some reason, was particularly picked upon by thieves, while the assassin roamed unchecked. Meanwhile, Sam was building a wide and varied selection of buildings, and quickly became the person to attack. Of course, he then took defensive measures to protect his lead. In the last round Adam used a warlord to take out one of my buildings, thus giving him second spot.

Sam 36
Adam 26
Andrew 22
Joe 19

Citadel had been suggested by Joe as a quick opening game, but it proved to be surprisingly lengthy, taking a little over an hour for the game to end. Not to be deterred, though, we chose Tinners’ Trail as the next game. Adam was quickly told the rules, but perhaps not quickly enough judging by how quickly he grew accustomed to them.

I chose to score big in round one, and then not score at all in round two. That was my strategy, but it failed in the face of three other more measured approaches. With no capital to buy more mines in round two, I was left behind in terms of mining capacity in rounds three and four. Adam, meanwhile, took to the game like a duck to water and soon became Cornwall’s own Rockefeller with six mines to call upon in the last round.

The tensest moment of the game, though, concerned the track used to decide whose go it was. Joe said that the counters moved up to the highest available space and that’s how we played it before, whereas Sam and I expressed surprise since we hadn’t played it like that in our first game at all: instead everyone kept to their original track. Joe firmly insisted we had, sparking a brief debate about how we'd played it before. But when Joe went to the toilet a quick conflab between me and Sam confirmed our original memories: we hadn’t played like that. We didn’t press the matter though, since even if we had played it our way (which, according to Joe, we hadn’t) we were wrong, and the rule book was quite clear on this. This controversy was perhaps the closest that our little games night has come to fisticuffs, but any unpleasantness was avoided by simply not mentioning it again and watching Adam win while the rest of us tussled for the minor positions.

Adam 81
Joe 76
Sam 76
Andrew 73

So now it was eleven o'clock: time for Sam to head back to get enough sleep in order to face his two young sons the next morning. But Joe had other ideas. He suggested a new game: Poison by Reiner Knizia. Just the mention of that name is enough to make grown men happily submit to sleep deprivation, and Sam is no exception. He agreed to a brief one-round taster but after the first round Joe just happened to mention that a full game would last only another three rounds. Sam was already hooked and saw out the game to the end.

In this card game, picking up cards and scoring points is bad but if you really have to pick them up, then it helps to specialise in picking up one particular colour so if you had the most, they wouldn’t count against you. It’s this kind of cunning twist that we expect from Reiner Knizia, and this is where this post's title came from. At the end of one close round, I reassured Joe that "your purples are fine," by which I meant: he had the most purple cards. These innocent words were twisted such that I appeared to be talking about Joe's plums, and much hilarity ensued.

Once the laughter had died away, Joe mentioned that, according to the internet, there didn’t seem to be any strategy. But having already played a few rounds against his super-intelligent children, Joe clearly had an advantage against us newbies. Adam made the early running, but was undone when his strategy suddenly stopped working in round four. So much so, that it pushed him from first to last! Sam and myself, meanwhile, managed to erase the humiliation of our first round with a clean zero-point last round, putting us in joint second.

Joe 23
Andrew 27
Sam 27
Adam 32

This doesn't change the Leaderboard in terms of points scored but, as usual, I already find myself drifting to the back of the pack regarding points ratio: in this category only 0.06 of a point separate first from third.

The Leaderboard...

	Played	Points	Ratio
Sam	8	37.5	4.69
Andrew	8	32.5	4.06
Adam	6	28.5	4.75
Joe	5	23.5	4.7