Lord Douchebag (DSHBAG), way too well-connected to embroider fanciful anecdotes, happening to be near West Covina in the late '90's, and wanting to learn what the fuss was about, dropped into The National half an hour before Showdown was scheduled. He was informed that he would not be provided a box, but he was offered this consolation: "You could join the research team." The pecking order apparently didn't make allowance for property lawyers not licensed in California.
Since this conversation has morphed, on what is a Six thread, to Showdown, I might grow terse.
Personally? I don't care how I score, so long as I answer every question I can intuit correctly. I encourage other players to join me.
I was kinda hoping that someone would show up on this thread to say, yes, I'm happiest when I'm playing in a small group, the conversation is general, and we all trust each other. And I wasn't disappointed.
Merkin wrote:
At Walsh's we have 2-4 players playing two boards each.
zog741 wrote:
Chicago Sam's has three or four core players who play two boxes, plus several frequent players who generally play one box each. We only have 10 boxes total; I wish we had more, but at least all of the boxes work (for now). Our core players cover five of the Six categories; I wish we had a strong Sciences player.
In response to ZOG and MERKIN:
You've nailed it.
Best results occur where everyone is comfortable with everyone else. ANON and BLZBUB deserve enormous credit for fostering collegial groups in Showdown.
But I'm an introvert, and it's really difficult to mediate groups where the conversation isn't generally shared. The Fellowship and Ragged Rascals deserve all the credit in the world.
The best groups start out small, with a couple of not very good players, players who enjoy each other's company.
I was good as a tournament bridge player, but it ate me up. I was good as a pool player, but the money was insignificant. I ended up playing Buzztime, because the conversation was so much better.