Oh Hell or Oh Shit is an extremely interesting card game. The basic rules are described in many places (see Wikipedia and playohsit.appspot.com). Please read those descriptions if you are not familiar with the game. This page discusses the finer points of the game in more detail, including the variation that I have found to work the best.
There are many appealing aspects of the game:
In most card games, each player eagerly examines the cards they have been dealt, hoping to see a profusion of valuable cards. E.g., in poker, to see a promising three of a kind. In bridge, to see many aces and kings. (Duplicate bridge is a notable exception to this pattern.)
In Oh Hell, by contrast, a hand with many strong cards can often be very hard to play. E.g., say that each player has received ten cards. One player's hand has many trumps and high cards, and the player expects to win five tricks, maybe six. Should that player bid five or six? Say that the player bids five, but wins six tricks, because a low trump unexpectedly wins. Hence the player loses the scoring bonus. By contrast, a player who has just two strong cards can usually get exactly two, and thus get the scoring bonus. So having two strong cards is often better than having five strong cards!
Here are the playing rules that I have found to work well, leading to a more exciting and entertaining game.
The same suit should always be trumps. I use spades as the trump suit, just because that is the highest suit in bridge.
Many versions of the rules specify that trumps should be chosen by turning over an extra unplayed card. Say there are four players, and each should get 10 cards. So forty cards are dealt for play. Then an extra card is turned over, visible to all, and the suit of that 41st card becomes the trump suit. The 41st card has no further role in the play.
There are two disadvantages to this procedure. The principal disadvantage is that it reduces the number of cards in play that are trumps! In the example I gave, after 40 cards are dealt, there are 12 remaining cards. Say that, by chance, in the 40 cards dealt, there were only 8 diamonds. Then in the 12 remaining cards, 5 are diamonds. So a diamond is more likely to be the next card turned over, precisely the suit that has fewer cards in play.
In general, the trump suit chosen in this manner is likely to be the suit with few cards in that suit that were dealt to the players. Each suit constitutes 25% of the cards. When trumps are chosen in this manner, however, only about 23.4% of the cards in play will be trumps, as I determined empirically. The relative paucity of trump cards in play makes the game less exciting.
The other disadvantage is relatively minor: the need to have an extra card to turn over means that 4 players cannot play a round with 13 tricks, utilizing the full deck of 52 cards.
Because of these considerations, I suggest that spades always be the trump suit.
The scoring method I use is very simple: if you win as many tricks as you bid, your score increases by that amount. Otherwise your score decreases by how much you were off.
Here's an example: Say that your score is currently 7.
On the next round, you bid 3.
When the round is played, if you win exactly 3 tricks, then your score increases by 3, from 7 to 10.
If you win just 2 tricks, so that you are off by 1, then your score decreases by 1, from 7 to 6.
Similarly, if you win 4 tricks, so that you got one more trick than you wanted, then your score again decreases by 1, from 7 to 6.
If you won just 1 trick, so that you are off by 2, then you lose 2 points, going from 7 to 5.
Similarly, if you won 5 tricks, so that you are again off by 2, then you lose 2 points, going from 7 to 5.
Here's a summary of this example, based on the old score being 7:
| Tricks Bid | Tricks Won | Change in score | New Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 1 | -2 | 5 |
| 3 | 2 | -1 | 6 |
| 3 | 3 | +3 | 10 |
| 3 | 4 | -1 | 6 |
| 3 | 5 | -2 | 5 |
This shows the importance of getting exactly what you bid, because it makes a massive difference to your score.
The same rule is applied consistently for bids of 0. Say that, on some round, you have bad cards, and bid 0 tricks. When the round is played, if you win 0 tricks, then your score is unchanged. By some vagary, if you win 1 trick, despite not wanting any, then you lose one point.
Here's a summary, again based on the old score being 7:
| Tricks Bid | Tricks Won | Change in score | New Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 0 | Unchanged | 7 |
| 0 | 1 | -1 | 6 |
| 0 | 2 | -2 | 5 |
This scoring system is very simple, provided you are not confused by negative numbers, as it is common for a player's score to be negative at some times during the game.
How is this scoring system better? The distinctive feature of "Oh Hell" is bidding what you expect to win, and then playing to get exactly that. The above scoring system reflects that: you get a bonus for bidding and playing accurately, otherwise you get a penalty based on how much you were off.
Many of the scoring systems described elsewhere do not have this property. Say that in one round, Alice bids one trick, and Bob also bids one trick. When the round is played, Alice wins 2 tricks, and Bob wins 3, because both under-estimated the strength of their hands. The scoring system in Wikipedia says "players score 1 point per trick and a bonus of 10 points if they achieve their bid." Under this scheme, Alice would gain 2 points, and Bob would gain 3 points. This would be simply a reflection of the strength of the hands that they were dealt. It unfairly rewards Bob, despite Bob's bid being more inaccurate than Alice's bid.
By contrast, under my preferred scoring system, Alice loses 1 point, for a somewhat inaccurate bid; and Bob loses 2 points, for a more inaccurate bid. Bob's bid was more inaccurate, so he lost more points. This emphasizes the distinctive feature of "Oh Hell", viz., the primary importance of bidding and playing accurately.
Why does my scoring system reward higher accurate bids? E.g., Alice bids 3 tricks, and gets exactly that; and Bob bids 2 tricks, and also gets exactly that. In that case, Alice gains 3 points, and Bob gains 2 points. This is because (as discussed earlier), it is harder to exactly bid and win a larger number of tricks. So the score gained accounts for that difference in difficulty.
Randomness is very important in this game. The order of play can make a significant difference. E.g., if Bob is seated to play immediately after Alice, then Bob can choose a card to play based on Alice's prior play, possibly giving Bob an advantage over Alice. E.g., Bob may know that Alice often tries to finesse a trick.
To address this, the seating of players should be randomized, and the first person to play should also be randomized. This can be determined by drawing cards, throwing dice, or by using some random number generator. Any fair random procedure can be used.
This randomization procedure should be done before the players have settled down comfortably in seats!
For similar reasons, the deck of cards should be well-shuffled each time, and cut by somebody other than the first person to be dealt a card.
The cards should be dealt one at a time to each person, in rotation. I.e., if each person should get 7 cards, deal one card to each person, four cards in all; then deal another card to each person, another four cards; then repeat five more times (rather than dealing 7 to one player, then 7 to the next player, etc.). This increases the randomness of the cards.
The game can be easily adapted to a varying number of players. But having four players works very well. Three players is not really enough. With five or more players, there is too much randomness. E.g., an ace that is led often gets trumped because another player had a void in the suit led. This makes the game less interesting. If you have five people, I suggest having one person act as just the dealer and scorer for the other four players.
In each round, the first person to bid is also the first person to play. This rotates each round. E.g., in the above example, Gina is the first person to bid (and play). On the next round, Harry is the first person to bid (and play). Then Frank, and then Irene. Then Gina again, and so on.
Each round consists of a number of hands dealt and played. E.g., one round may consist of each player getting 7 cards, for 28 cards dealt in all. The play consists of 7 tricks (each trick containing 4 cards, one from each player).
The winner of each trick should gather the four cards, turn them face-down, and keep them in a neat pile near themselves. Once the next trick is started, nobody can look at the cards in prior tricks.
Changing bids or cards is permitted, before any information is supplied by a later player. E.g., say that Alice bids 2, and the next player Bob does not bid immediately. Alice can then interject and change his bid.
Similarly, say that Alice plays the 6 of diamonds. Bob follows suit, and plays the Ace of diamonds. The next player Carol does not play immediately. In that case, Bob is allowed to take back the Ace of diamonds, and play another legal card, such as a low diamond.
The guiding principle is that Bob can change his play until the subsequent play by Carol reveals information to Bob. The hesitation by Carol is not considered actionable information!
Similarly, say that Bob is the last to play on some trick. He wins the trick by trumping with the six of spades, puts away that trick, and leads the ace of diamonds for the next trick. Even at this point, he can retract the ace of diamonds, and also retract his play of the six of spades on the prior trick. Instead, he can play another card for the prior trick, maybe the queen of hearts, so that the prior trick is won by another player. All this is allowed because Bob made these changes without getting the benefit of any actionable information from the other players.
By contrast, a player is allowed to use actionable information from a prior player. Say that Alice plays the two of diamonds. The next player is Bob. But the third player, Carol, plays out of turn, and drops the Ace of diamonds, presumably expecting to win the trick. Bob then plays a spade. Carol is allowed retract the Ace of diamonds and play a lower diamond instead. This is because Carol can ordinarily wait until after Bob to play, so Carol is entitled to make use of the information supplied by Bob.
Another way to think of it is that Carol is allowed to reveal some or all of his cards, if he believes that is beneficial to him.
After one round is completed, all 52 cards are collected and shuffled. Then the next round starts, with the player who is first to bid/play rotating one spot around clockwise. The dealer can also rotate. Or one person can always serve as the dealer.
As Ravindu Samarasekera and I found out, using two packs of cards speeds up the game considerably. One player shuffles one deck while another player deals the cards from the other deck. Many packs are sold with different coloured "backs" on the cards, so that the decks can be easily kept separated.
A complete game consists of several rounds. The players should agree beforehand about the rounds in the complete game. If you have enough time, you should play from 1 trick, upto 13 tricks, then back down to 1 trick, for 25 rounds in all. This works very well. The first few rounds are mostly just fun, and help newcomers understand the game. As the number of tricks increases, each game becomes more consequential, culminating in the full game with 13 tricks. Then the number of tricks decreases, with the players' positions solidified, ending with a few final fun rounds.
A complete game can be played in about 90 minutes, using two packs of cards. If you have less time, a partial game can be played. E.g., start with 7 tricks, go up to 13 tricks, then back down to 7 tricks.
The game may be more enjoyable if each player has the objective of trying to maximize their own score (rather than trying to beat the other players). Then the only element of competition between the players is confined to the necessity of complying with the hook, described below.
In each round, the last person to bid is constrained in their choice of bid, as the total of the bids must differ from the number of tricks (this is called the hook by Wikipedia). E.g., say that the first game involves just 1 card each, with the bids as follows:
| Order | Bid | |
|---|---|---|
| Alice | First | 1 |
| Bob | Second | 0 |
| Carol | Third | 0 |
| David | Fourth | ?? |
In this case, David is the last to bid, and is required to bid 1.
The next round involves two tricks, and Bob is the first to bid/play:
| Order | Bid | |
|---|---|---|
| Alice | Fourth | ?? |
| Bob | First | 0 |
| Carol | Second | 1 |
| David | Third | 0 |
In this case, Alice is the last to bid. The bids by the other three players total 1. If Alice bid 1, that would make the total be 2, which is not allowed. Instead, Alice must bid either 0 or 2, depending on whether he prefers to have an overbid round, where at least one player would get fewer than the desired tricks; or an underbid round, where at least one player would win a trick that they do not want to win.
This is the commonest case where a player exclaims "Oh Hell": in an underbid round, the final unwanted trick is won by some tiny inoffensive card such as the 3 of diamonds, because another player ducked with the 2 of diamonds, and the other two players were void in diamonds and trumps.
The play in a round is very different based on whether it was overbid or underbid. An overbid round for ten tricks may have the bids totalling eleven. Then each player tries to win every possible trick, guarding their intended likely winners, because they know that at least one player will get fewer tricks than their desired bid.
By contrast, an underbid round for ten tricks may have the bids totalling nine. At least one player will get an unwanted trick, won by a card not intended to be a winner. If that happens early, then the other players can relax, because each can hopefully get their intended number of tricks.
Of course, not every round goes so neatly. Even in an overbid round, one or more players may get more than their bid. Here's an example, in a round with ten tricks:
| Player | Tricks Bid | Tricks Won |
|---|---|---|
| Alice | 3 | 3 |
| Bob | 4 | 2 |
| Carol | 1 | 2 |
| David | 3 | 3 |
Total | 11 | 10
| |
Alice and David got what they bid. Carol got one extra trick, and Bob got two tricks fewer than his bid.
Similarly, even in an underbid round, one or more players may get less than their bid.
In more extreme cases, the round may be overbid or underbid by two tricks, or even more. The most extreme case I've seen is a round with all cards in play, for thirteen tricks, where the bids totalled seventeen, so overbid by four! In that case, all four players ended up one trick short, so each player had been a little too optimistic, with the blame spread equally.
Here's how I typically score a full game. Each individual round gets one row. Each player gets one column, with two values in each column: the bid, and the running total. There is an extra column on the left, giving the number of tricks for that round. Thick horizontal lines mark each set of four rounds.
Say that the initial bids are as shown above. David bids last, and is forced to bid 1, because of the hook. The bids are entered as follows, each number written towards the left of its column:
| Tricks | Alice | Bob | Carol | David |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| 2 | ||||
| 3 | ||||
| 4 | ||||
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 |
When the hand is played, Bob wins the single trick. So Bob, Carol and Alice got their bids, while David is one off. The successful bids are circled. Then the resultant score for each player is written towards the right of each column.
| Tricks | Alice | Bob | Carol | David |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 1 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 1 -1 |
| 2 | ||||
| 3 | ||||
| 4 | ||||
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 |
On the next round, for 2 tricks, play rotates to the left. So Bob bids first, then Carol, and then David. The position of the round between the thick horizontal lines helps to determine who should bid first for that round.
Say these are the bids, with Alice still to bid:
| Tricks | Alice | Bob | Carol | David |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 1 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 1 -1 |
| 2 | ? | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 3 | ||||
| 4 | ||||
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 |
The first three bids total 1. Alice is the last to bid, so he cannot bid 1, because that would make the total be 2. He bids 2 instead:
| Tricks | Alice | Bob | Carol | David |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 1 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 1 -1 |
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| 3 | ||||
| 4 | ||||
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 |
When the round is played, Alice wins both tricks. For each player, the running score is updated as follows: Alice gains 2 points, Bob & David are unchanged, and Carol loses one point:
| Tricks | Alice | Bob | Carol | David |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1 1 | 0 0 | 0 0 | 1 -1 |
| 2 | 2 3 | 0 0 | 1 -1 | 0 -1 |
| 3 | ||||
| 4 | ||||
| 5 | ||||
| 6 | ||||
| 7 | ||||
| 8 |
As you can see, it's common for some scores to be negative!
Here's a scoresheet of a complete game:
This game was played on September 5th and 6th, 2022. Rounds 1 to 12 were played on the first day, indicated by the thick line in the left-most column, between 12 and 13. Then rounds 13 back down to 1 were played on the next day.
Just like a tennis player may have a good day or an "off" day, the same can happen with Oh Hell. In the above game, Player 1 had an extremely good "streak" on the first day, winning in every round but one. But on the second day, Player 1 had only a middling game, losing many rounds, and only gaining two more points, from 16 to 18.
The highest final score I have ever seen is 43. That is truly exceptional. In a typical game, if everything goes well, the average final score should be 25. This is computed as follows:
Consider round 12, played with 12 cards each. On average, everybody should bid and make 3. But the last person cannot do so, because of the "hook". Say that the first three players bid and make 3, while the last player is off by 1.
In general, in a round with k tricks (such as 12), three players should bid and make k/4 (3 in the example), while the fourth player is off by 1. So the total gain/loss per player is (3k/4 - 1)/4. Summing that for k from 1 to 13 back down to 1 gives a total of 25.4375. So if everything goes well, a complete game should end with each player having a score of around 25. Of course, that hardly ever happens! On a round, one player may get an extra trick even in an overbid game, with another player getting two fewer tricks. Or two, three or even all four players may not get what they bid. This leads to lots of exclamations of "Oh Hell", and many acrimonious recriminations!
I have spent many many enjoyable hours filling books with scoresheets like the above. I hope that you do so as well!