AS I NOTED, you can use a regular deck... but it's not a rook deck, and in rook, there are no aces... so again, his expression makes no sense for rook, just as it doesn't make any sense for bridge. He's the one that brought up the fact that rook uses a different deck, so he must be familiar with the game and know there are no aces in rook.
Once again, Ming is totally wrong here. I don't know which is sadder - the fact that Ming is demonstrating his ignorance of the game, or that he's staking his claim of intellectual superiority over a game he's never seen or played but looked up once on Wikipedia, after I made reference.
I don't know which is funnier. The fact that you think it's impressive, or the fact that you're simply trying to snow those who don't know better.
then provide some evidence for your claims. for both henry and elizabeth.
Leave a comment: