I've figured out a solution that would make it more fair. How about reducing the time remaining bonus points by 25-50 points for each hand you lost? (But bonus never being less than zero.) Thus a player who doesn't lose a hand but times runs out should score > than someone who quickly lost 3x.

Next, Fool is going to tell me it's MY fault for getting loaded down with 20 cards. I mean games where right from the start they are nailing you several times in a row with "DRAW's", before you even get a chance to play a single card. If you tough it out, your final score will likely be lower.

Fool said, "Try that strategy out and see if it works, I doubt it actually." ACTUALLY, I AM trying it out for the times where early in the game they load me up with 4 or 5 "DRAW's" before I ever even get a chance to play a card, and now I AM seeing better results in this scenario. That's just wrong.

Ultimately, what I'm saying is, you should be rewarded MORE for sticking it out and scoring ACTUAL IN-GAME POINTS, than losing the hand quickly and picking up clock points. I don't believe the current scoring system adequately rewards players who tough it out, and it should.

They may stay at only a few cards while you simultaneously work to get rid of your 20. If you eventually win, you may score only a handful of points compared to the dozens of points you lost from time lost. Thus, throw that "bad hand" quickly, move on to the next round, and get points for the clock.