Talk:Texas hold 'em/1

All players put in a blind bet. I understand, but I don't suspect you and I can resolve this difference on our own. Possibilities are straight and flush draws. Heads-up both players are dealt a pair and both hit quads. There's only ONE drawing possibility -- you either flop your set, or you don't. Talk pages with reference errors. Fashion this nifty poker table runner from green felt and extra poker chips to cover your playing surface.

Runner Runner - Casino Runner

Odds of Aces v. Aces

A card that completes a longshot two card draw. If chips are not available when they are needed, it can slow down or stop the action. The dealer may be forced to stop running the game for a few moments, to sell chips from his tray or to make change from bills. Some casinos do not allow bills to play, and they may also restrict dealers from selling chips from their tray.

In these cases, when chips are not available on time, the game can stop completely until chips arrive. The house wants to prevent this from happening. Since they typically make their money by taking a collection from each pot, if the action slows or stops, it costs them revenue. It is also bad for the game for the action to falter. It is annoying for the players, because most of them want to gamble and will prefer fast action to slow action.

Management understands this and is keen to prevent slowdowns or stoppages in the action. In fact, keeping the action going smoothly is so important that floormen are taught that their first priority is to keep the action going at all times, and to never let the game stall.

A stalled game takes priority over most other incidents that regularly occur on the poker floor. Add to the party theme by embellishing your party decor with poker-related items.

Here, we used store-bought shot glasses with card designs as vases for red carnation stems and display them along the buffet table. Make a poker-theme container to hold whatever you need—chips, cards, or snacks—with a few extra poker chips and a bit of hot glue. Separate your chips by color and glue them onto a plastic cup, starting at the bottom row and continuing until you've reached the top. Serve simple cocktails in glasses that are perfect for the occasion. To make the cocktail shown called a Mr.

Bob Cocktail , fill the bottom quarter of a large pitcher with fresh or frozen fruit. Top with one-part gin and three-parts lemonade; add ice and serve. Think you've got a good hand? Here's a guide to the cards, from best to worst. If you don't have a poker table, don't worry. Fashion this nifty poker table runner from green felt and extra poker chips to cover your playing surface.

Cut the felt with pinking shears and punch holes in the felt 1 inch apart. Use a drill to make holes in extra poker chips, and hang them from the felt with paper clips.

Dress up a drum light fixture to hang above your poker table with a set of unused cards. Wrap the lampshade with red ribbon, using glue to secure the ends on the lampshade's seam. Punch holes in the tops of cards you'll need about a deck, depending on the size of your lamp and use paper clips to hang them from the ribbon. Coming over the top to trap someone is also something you're more likely to see in pot-limit and no-limit than limit play.

Also, the part about pot-committal is a bit misleading. Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as being "pot-committed"; it is a fictitious concept. So, to say that you're "trapping" your opponents by making them think they're pot-committed is assuming that they're poor enough players that they even believe in the concept of "pot-committal" in the first place, which is a big assumption. Also, I don't know what "they usually know they cannot win because of the money in the pot" is supposed to mean.

Strictly speaking, the amount of money bets in the pot has nothing to do with your evaluation of whether you have the best hand, a priori. Of course, the more money in the pot, the heavier the betting, the more likely someone has a monster hand. Still, someone who guesses the strength of their hand based on the size of the pot alone is misguided.

The advice is doubly misleading, because often as the size of the pot increases, it becomes more correct to call, even if you strongly suspect you do not have the best hand. This is because you do not need to be correct very often.

This is why "fold as soon as you cannot win" seems likely to cause people problems Their problem is usually the opposite — namely, calling too often preflop and on the flop, not the river. I think someone probably copied the first few hands from baby Sklansky without taking into account he was thinking of a particular type of game.

BTW, for a full limit table, the order of hands is roughly correct, regardless of whether it's loose or tight. I think the concept of "pot-committal" is not ficticious but is used in different contexts to mean different things, some misguided and some perfectly acceptable.

The "fictitious" concept you speak of is one I readily agree with i. The decision to continue a hand should be made from street to street. However, this is not the only way the term "pot-committed" is used. Sometimes the street to steet decisions are decided ahead of time because, for instance a flush draw, will always get the odds to draw in certain contexts where stack size and pot size converge to make not folding for the rest of the hand an optimal play: The reason the latter and the former are often seen as the same is that sometimes ones own bet creates this pot-to-implied-future-bets ratio on its own so it looks as though you chasing your nickel when in fact you are playing optimally.

Another legitimate use of "pot-committed" is when it applies simply to your or your opponents call on the hand. In other words, given your read of your hand and your opponents you think that seeing it to the showdown is likely to win you the pot, then you are pot-committed. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water, because the term is useful for decribing certain contexts where you have eliminated folding in all but a few outcomes.

I do agree however that it isn't specific to hold'em and that it should be more clear that money in the pot is nobody's money anymore except don't tell that to my opponents. Wikipedia is inconsistent as to whether it should be "hold 'em" or "hold'em" -- with a space or without. For example, in Wikipedia, it's Texas hold 'em , but Omaha hold'em. Perhaps we should make up our minds. In the example of a tie that is given on the page, it mentions that the two remaining players are forced to use the Ace of Spades that turned up as the River card in their hand.

However, no where else in the rules listed does it say players are forced to use the River card. As a matter of fact, in the first example, not all of the players used the 5th card in their hand.

Something should be included in the rules to instruct on when and if players are forced to use the River card. It's confusing for me, and I was tying to learn how to play. Is it an optional rule? Does it only come into play at certain times? Would we agree, though, that one shouldn't generally bluff at these people? I once saw just such a player triple his stack simply by calling all the time if he had any part of the flop at all.

So many people were bluffing at him. Article says 22, I think Well, the game as played on the internet is real Texas Holdem, but doesn't need burn cards. I think either answer is correct The primary game you're referring to when you say Texas Hold'em is a card game.

The internet simulation of that card game may be slightly different. That is to be expected. But the card game is what the article is about, and the internet game is the variant that can be explained in the article. For the purpose of this article, 22 is the correct answer, and 23 is trivia that could be added as an answer for certain variants if someone cares to do so.

I'll also say that I wouldn't play a live game where no cards are burned. This is getting needlessly pedantic, although as I have stated above, burn cards are not part of the definition of "Texas hold'em".

But to keep everybody happy, I'm putting in a compromise. While this is a minor part of the article it has attracted some wildly false additions. Just to nip this sort of thing in the bud in the future TV tournaments are heavily edited, and commentary is added after the fact. The World Poker Tour for example shows approximately 75 minutes of poker in each show, but the six-handed final tables normally last much longer than that.

For example this report http: Some events have run much longer. I think raising with these big pairs is certainly correct, for the reason doesn't agree with: It wouldn't matter if you were guaranteed lots of action whether you're ahead or not, but the problem is that the pot will typically only become big when you're beat.

So as the famous proverb goes, you'll either win a small pot or lose a big one. I think this is especially true if you fail to raise pre-flop Why are we writing a Hold 'em advice column anyway? Isn't this supposed to be an encyclopedia with no original research? I think we need to chuck half this article, and restrain ourselves to objective facts that come from reputable sources. However, those same 20 players would probably all agree that slowplaying big pockets against a large field, overbetting sets against a straight or flush board, etc are mistakes that novices tend to make.

The idea of the "novice mistakes" section wasn't to sneak in one's personal philosophy of poker, but to summarize very basic hold 'em strategy, which was fine within the context of this article.

Unfortunately, the Wiki geeks cried out "original research" and carved it up, which is a shame, since I felt that save for someone's persistent edits, my "novice mistakes" section was quite well written lol. I simply ripped out the "basic strategy" and "novice mistakes" sections. It cuts the article length heavily but I really don't think the sections could be salvaged. I think the spectator sport aspect of hold'em is part of it's popular culture. Feel free to be bold and just do it if you agree.

I think we need a "See Also" section for this article very badly. We have articles for virtually every poker style and term in Wikipedia. We also shouldn't need to link to an external glossary; we probably should set one up internally. I would set both up and begin to populate them, but don't have time today. Thought I'd mention this as the most recent edit was a link to an external glossary. Phil Gordon, et al, are just trying to sell books here with this "bibliography" as an excuse.

I say scrap the "bibliography" section entirely. I'm looking around the internet trying to find the origin of the name, "Texas Hold 'em". My guess is, it's not really from Texas. Anybody have a finite answer to this? Does it make sense in the sample hand that Ted is folding pocket kings?

The two main variations are:. All players put in a blind bet. One player puts in a big blind, and every other player places an equal small blind. After receiving their cards, the small blind players must then either match the big blind or raise to be in, or fold to go out.

Navigation menu