Talk:Calculation (card game)

i am doing this game, but i can'nt resolve some of those class. So every one can give me the source for this game pls, thx

Rules

According to every source I know (e.g., Mott-Smith and Morehead, Cadogan, Gibson), there is no tableau, only a single wastepile, the top of which is available for building on foundations. My bad! I got my wires crossed. The description given in the article is entirely correct, even according to the sources I give--and is in fact the way I always play it, except that I like to play without putting out the foundations first, but only as they become available in the course of the deal. This, of course, makes the game more difficult, but not unreasonably so. Without making it a rule, I give myself extra brownie points if I succeed in reserving all four kings for last.

Kostaki mou 01:38, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

This is an excellent solitaire which rewards very careful play. I hope someone will challenge the win-rate estimates I edited in recently, but let's find a secure solitaire server and place our wagers in escrow.  :-)

Jamesdowallen 05:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I find the "at least nine of ten" estimate to be hard to believe. I am reasonably skillful and get 50-60% consistently over trials of dozens of games, much better than "1 in 5 with normal play" (whatever that is). Both claims should be deleted without a solid mathematically rigorous source for the upper estimate and some statistical basis for the lower one. Jszigeti (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

I've removed this estimate of winning chances entirely; sources on Calculation give wildly different estimates but none gives any justification to judge who might be right. David Parlett (Card Games for One) says that the player's chances are no better than in Sir Tommy, for which he gives 1 in 10 for skilled players; Peter Arnold (Chambers Book of Card Games for One) says 1 in 7; Morehead (Hoyle's Rules of Games 3rd ed.) says 1 in 5; Galt (101 Great Card Games) says "with a little practice ... you can frequently win". Various people online give much higher estimates – this guy claims to win 70% of his games; this substack post claims that every game of calculation is winnable (though its version of the game is easier than the standard one). Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:56, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Waste

I've just added a paragraph to say that Aisleriot uses a waste pile, whereas the "Four Kings Solitaire" page describes a game which does not. The "Four Kings" version is consequently a little more difficult, but is there any reason to use one or other as the default here? Aoeuidhtns (talk) 00:18, 3 July 2019 (UTC)