The first impression a CL player might have after playing LL is – it’s slower and therefore less efficient. Let’s look into the strengths and weaknesses of both styles.
Note that not all these points have the same "weight".
You can save unique cards safely
True, with either value or colour if context allows
True. Value is more appreciated. You can save non-unique cards safely True, with either value or colour if context allows It depends. Therefore more sensitive to buried second copies.
Handles situations that the other style can’t handle
Play per clue efficiency
Less immediate plays.
Since you can save more easily, and saves will become plays in the longer term, play per clue ratio is not as obvious.
More immediate plays. Play per clue ratio seems more obvious, more easily observable.
Safer playstyle. Allows many clues – on chop or off-chop – that would cause bombs in CL.
This way you can save cards that are neither critical saves, nor immediately playable.
More importantly, cluing a group of cards in reverse order is situationally allowed.
More aggressive playstyle. Since saving tolerance is lower than in LL, more clues would be interpreted as plays, regardless of context. Therefore higher risk of bombing with “original” save clues. Pace
Lower % of clues that cause an immediate play.
May cause pace issues.
Higher % of clues that cause an immediate play.
Solves some pace issues.
Used very situationally – when the clue otherwise makes no sense and/or when the next player really is going to play because they have no way of knowing they shouldn’t.
Arguably better for safety and worse for pace.
Situation and history are far more important. Requires deeper analysis.
Therefore harder to master.
Much easier to teach to beginners. They can reach decent scores very quickly. Overall
More freedom in clue-giving.
More mid-term / long-term planning.
"Good engine, great brakes."
More immediate speed.
"Awesome engine, poor brakes."
Other LL links:
Suivre le flux RSS des articles
Suivre le flux RSS des commentaires