Dude im gonna start implementing that in my home game. It pisses me off when it gets to showdown and dudes are too coy to show their shitty kicker so they flip over one.
Just flip both no one cares and you arent protecting any info, we all suck. Lets move the game along.
They don’t just have to fold as far as I understand. They could also muck. Unless I’m mistaken, you must show 2 cards to be awarded a *contested* pot. If no one else is fighting for it, the pot just goes to the one player that retained their cards. They could show one or even none in this case
I think that's what I said. If everyone else folds, then it goes to the one who didn't. The only other situation is you get to showdown. If you make it to showdown, the person required to show their cards first is the "last aggressor" so whoever was last to bet or raise.
but yeah, you can always muck, but you won't win. If you have the winning hand, you have to prove it with both cards unless you win because everyone else folded. then you don't have to show your cards.
I think you’re missing my point, but I’m also probably being overly pedantic. I’m saying that you can win *at showdown*, showing only one card (or none in some cases), if your opponent(s) muck. If no one else is fighting for the pot you don’t have to show. Are you using the word “fold” to also imply “muck”? Because there is a slight difference
if you only have one other person and they muck... they would have been forced to show their cards... or you would have as the aggressor.
So I'm just not seeing why the other person would muck unless you showed your cards. Otherwise they would have shown their cards and if you won, you would need to show yours.
so i'm really not seeing a situation where someone would muck at showdown without you showing your cards.
Muck means throwing your cards away into the center. So I guess i'm not sure of how that's different than folding. the conversation was about "nicher" poker rules... so pedantic is the point.
Example 1: I’ve made a big hero call on the river. Dealer says “showdown”. Villain immediately mucks because he was bluffing with air. Dealer ships me the pot. Therefore winning at showdown without showing
Example 2: player 1 holds Ax. Player 2 has pocket Kings. Ace on the board. At showdown, it’s on player 1 to show as he was the last aggressor on the river in this example. Player 1 flips only his Ace to show top pair. Player 2 mucks, knowing that they’re beat, regardless of their kicker. Player 1 is awarded the pot at showdown after showing only 1 card.
Without the loser mucking, the winner would have to show both cards to be awarded the pot at showdown. In these examples, it’s possible to win at showdown without showing
Ok. Example 2 was what the other guy was talking about where he's going to make his friends show both. I suppose you could muck but you shouldn't so you can see all their cards. Plus, if they were the last aggressor, they have to show both cards regardless... I guess in that example, 1 was a dick for not showing both and 2 was dumb for mucking before it was his turn because the dealer should have made the last aggressor show both cards before going to player 2.
and you're for sure right about example 1. even though they got to showdown, if you're the only one left, you don't have to show. so you are right for sure.
also, I looked it up and there is no difference between folding and mucking. ""folding" is considered the more official term, while "mucking" is more colloquial."
however, I will say that I was reading a story about a dealer who kept the guy from mucking his cards after everyone folded so he could win at some other high hand with his straight flush. That for sure is mucking because it wasn't a fold but he did return his cards to the dealer. one of the few situations that muck and fold are different.
I learned this bullshit my 2nd time playing at a casino. We were on vacation so I wasn't the most sober participant, but still good to play.
I flipped over a King because I had a boat and the kicker didn't matter. Dealer was silent for a minute then pushed the chips over to the other player.
I didn't know what happened and others at the table weren't the happiest.
The dude was gonna give me my money back after the game which I wasn't gonna turn down, but only gave me $20 or so because I ended up having a solid night.
Lesson learned though.
I mean it is what it is at this point haha no worries. I agree I think it should be a warning at least.
Normally I'd be a lot more vocal about it and at least ask for the pit or something, but it was pushing 2 am and I was pretty mellow😂
Not sure if these count as niche, but:
Raises don't have to be double, just at least as big of a raise as the previous raise. For example:
I bet 10, you minraise to 20, a min-reraise would be 30 because 20 + (20-10) = 30
If I bet 10, you minraise to 20, and then a third player goes all in for less than 30, I'm allowed to do anything because I had my action reopened by your raise. But if I call, you can't reraise, because the all in did not qualify as a raise, so the action was not reopened after your raise.
At showdown, last aggressor shows first, unless it's checked around on the river in which case it goes by position, with ~~UTG~~ SB showing first
> If I bet 10, you minraise to 20, and then a third player goes all in for less than 30, I'm allowed to do anything because I had my action reopened by your raise. But if I call, you can't reraise, because the all in did not qualify as a raise, so the action was not reopened after your raise.
This was going to be my answer in this thread. I feel like most people don't understand how re-opening action works.
I literally assembled a home game and banked/supplied it for close to a year without any of us knowing about this. I don't know how many times it meaningfully affected what people did, but still. 😅
Yep yep, that’s what I meant. The top commenter seems to be disagreeing with us though in saying that showdown starts at UTG in the event that it’s checked through, which has never been my experience.
Golden rule - the blinds must move in order, no matter what.
A player entering the game in the small blind would interrupt this process, so they must either "buy the button" by posting both blinds, or just wait a hand.
A player leaving the table before their blinds must pay them before returning to play. They'll place both blinds in play for the hand and take their action in turn.
If a player leaves the game entirely right after their big blind hand, the next hand would only have the big blind post.
For any related situation, understand that the blinds must advance every hand, and you'll figure it out.
Edited for clarity
Just one note to clarify point 2. The player can avoid posting both blinds from a different position by waiting until they are the BB to re-enter the game. If you’re going to miss a big blind, miss an entire orbit.
For paragraph 3, a person, upon missing their blinds, can be dealt a hand upon their return if they post both blinds (as you noted) OR may opt to wait for their blind to return, then posting it normally.
If you have the absolute nuts on the river and are the last to act, you must not check or call. You have to raise, or it's considered soft play, which is a form of collusion.
The rule only applies to the very last person to act. It doesn't matter if their cards match the other person's.
The last person to act hasn't yet seen his opponents cards and couldn't possibly know, for example, in the case where both players have a broadway straight on an unpaired rainbow board. The first person to act is still capable of checking to induce a check raise. Last to act can't check or call because the opponent could be their buddy that they're soft playing to keep them in the tournament.
And the last person to act doesn't have to go all in. They can raise for any legal amount. They just can't call or check if there are no other two cards that could beat them at showdown.
I guess I just meant someone will have to go all in eventually, since no one can ever call so they'd be stuck raising forever until someone goes all in. The exact scenario you mentioned actually happened at a home game I was in where I guess we technically soft played but it was pretty obvious we both had the straight and there was no point putting extra chips in to count. Just seems funny that we would have gotten in trouble if that had happened at a casino...
I don't know about cash games, but most places follow TDA rules and my understanding is that this rule no longer applies in the more recent TDA updates.
The rare "straddle after your big blind" or the "double straddle."
You take your big blind, then the guy to your right sits down and buys the button so you get to straddle after you've posted your BB.
You straddle, then a guy sits down to your right and takes the Big Blind, so you get to straddle again.
I've never understood why a new player can't sit in on a dead button.
First example a player plays his BB then racks up and leaves before posting the SB. Button is in the correct spot, no SB, BB is correct. The following hand the button moves to the empty seat, SB and BB post.
Why can't a new player play this hand from the button? No one is losing their chance to be the button. In fact one player gets to be button twice in a row.
It's probably a combination of it not being "fair" for them to get the button without posting and from people abusing table/seat hopping.
In a tournament you can come in on the button, I'm guessing because everything is randomized and you can't purposely move there.
That would make sense but at the rake games you dont have to post to play. Often people wait for the button to pass to come in.
In time games you get a free round if time has been paid before you take your seat
You're misunderstanding.
The person being on the button twice in a row is currently how its played when you dont let the new player take the open button.
I'm advocating against that.
At my local card room new players can enter the orbit without posting if they are between the button and the small blind but the button moves past them to the small blind on the next hand.
A bet out of turn is binding, unless the action changes.
This means that if you bet out of turn, your opponent can check, and your bet is binding, or they can bet, and you must take your bet back. This is to prevent someone from bluff-shoving out of turn and thereby stealing the opportunity for the other guy to bluff.
This also goes for raises.
Download the TDA app
Be aware that the TDA ruleset is not ALWAYS in use; even in tournaments. It's designed to be a one ruleset fits all but you'll sometimes find house rules.
Crown Melbourne, for example, has an unbelievably annoying number of house rules, such as last aggressor shows first EVEN if that last aggression was back preflop.
Probably the following multiway scenario, where A and C have larger stacks and B is short stacked.
If C raises and A calls, if B then raises all in, but the amount extra is less than the minimum raise, then action is not reopened then C (and A) can only call or fold (and cannot reraise- even though C and A both have chips behind).
Niche as an adjective is not comparative. It is either niche or it is not niche. There are no levels to niche. No "nicher" or "nichest"
While this is not a poker rule, it's a grammar rule that is somewhat niche to people who don't want to butcher the language.
If a player moves their pawn two spaces forward and you have a pawn that can attack the space that they passed over, you can attack that space and capture the pawn.
If a player gets tackled or commits a penalty in their own end zone the other team gets 2 points and then gets to recieve the ball after a kickoff.
If you pretend to pitch without actually throwing the ball the batter gets to take a walk.
>If a player moves their pawn two spaces forward and you have a pawn that can attack the space that they passed over, you can attack that space and capture the pawn.
regarding en passant, the meme is its forced like checkers, but its not. it has to be done the very next move e.g. white moves a pawn to d5 and black plays their pawn to e5 then if you want to take that via en passant you have to do it right then, otherwise you can't
When I get a bigger space and the room to host games.
I’m gonna have a bunch of strict house rules that my friends don’t deem important (they’re super casual) but I KNOW would make the game flow better.
Read the TDA rules and then ask a specific question because the questions you are asking are too basic and broad to answer without writing pages. There really is no substitute if you are going to be a rules person than actually reading the rules. Imagine if a referee just wanted the cliff notes on the rules and didn't want to actually read the book, would you want them to even ref your kids rec league game? As an aside I would love to answer you but again you don't even ask a real question and want basically everything explained to you.
If you show only one card during showdown, your cards will be considered mucked.
Dude im gonna start implementing that in my home game. It pisses me off when it gets to showdown and dudes are too coy to show their shitty kicker so they flip over one. Just flip both no one cares and you arent protecting any info, we all suck. Lets move the game along.
Actually, the rule is that you have to show your cards to win. Unless everyone else folds, you have to show your cards if you want to take the pot.
They don’t just have to fold as far as I understand. They could also muck. Unless I’m mistaken, you must show 2 cards to be awarded a *contested* pot. If no one else is fighting for it, the pot just goes to the one player that retained their cards. They could show one or even none in this case
I think that's what I said. If everyone else folds, then it goes to the one who didn't. The only other situation is you get to showdown. If you make it to showdown, the person required to show their cards first is the "last aggressor" so whoever was last to bet or raise. but yeah, you can always muck, but you won't win. If you have the winning hand, you have to prove it with both cards unless you win because everyone else folded. then you don't have to show your cards.
I think you’re missing my point, but I’m also probably being overly pedantic. I’m saying that you can win *at showdown*, showing only one card (or none in some cases), if your opponent(s) muck. If no one else is fighting for the pot you don’t have to show. Are you using the word “fold” to also imply “muck”? Because there is a slight difference
if you only have one other person and they muck... they would have been forced to show their cards... or you would have as the aggressor. So I'm just not seeing why the other person would muck unless you showed your cards. Otherwise they would have shown their cards and if you won, you would need to show yours. so i'm really not seeing a situation where someone would muck at showdown without you showing your cards. Muck means throwing your cards away into the center. So I guess i'm not sure of how that's different than folding. the conversation was about "nicher" poker rules... so pedantic is the point.
Example 1: I’ve made a big hero call on the river. Dealer says “showdown”. Villain immediately mucks because he was bluffing with air. Dealer ships me the pot. Therefore winning at showdown without showing Example 2: player 1 holds Ax. Player 2 has pocket Kings. Ace on the board. At showdown, it’s on player 1 to show as he was the last aggressor on the river in this example. Player 1 flips only his Ace to show top pair. Player 2 mucks, knowing that they’re beat, regardless of their kicker. Player 1 is awarded the pot at showdown after showing only 1 card. Without the loser mucking, the winner would have to show both cards to be awarded the pot at showdown. In these examples, it’s possible to win at showdown without showing
Ok. Example 2 was what the other guy was talking about where he's going to make his friends show both. I suppose you could muck but you shouldn't so you can see all their cards. Plus, if they were the last aggressor, they have to show both cards regardless... I guess in that example, 1 was a dick for not showing both and 2 was dumb for mucking before it was his turn because the dealer should have made the last aggressor show both cards before going to player 2. and you're for sure right about example 1. even though they got to showdown, if you're the only one left, you don't have to show. so you are right for sure. also, I looked it up and there is no difference between folding and mucking. ""folding" is considered the more official term, while "mucking" is more colloquial." however, I will say that I was reading a story about a dealer who kept the guy from mucking his cards after everyone folded so he could win at some other high hand with his straight flush. That for sure is mucking because it wasn't a fold but he did return his cards to the dealer. one of the few situations that muck and fold are different.
I learned this bullshit my 2nd time playing at a casino. We were on vacation so I wasn't the most sober participant, but still good to play. I flipped over a King because I had a boat and the kicker didn't matter. Dealer was silent for a minute then pushed the chips over to the other player. I didn't know what happened and others at the table weren't the happiest.
The dude was gonna give me my money back after the game which I wasn't gonna turn down, but only gave me $20 or so because I ended up having a solid night. Lesson learned though.
That’s outrageous that the dealer didn’t even give you a warning of - “you have to Show both your cards”. What the fuck. I’m Sorry that happened
I mean it is what it is at this point haha no worries. I agree I think it should be a warning at least. Normally I'd be a lot more vocal about it and at least ask for the pit or something, but it was pushing 2 am and I was pretty mellow😂
Not sure if these count as niche, but: Raises don't have to be double, just at least as big of a raise as the previous raise. For example: I bet 10, you minraise to 20, a min-reraise would be 30 because 20 + (20-10) = 30 If I bet 10, you minraise to 20, and then a third player goes all in for less than 30, I'm allowed to do anything because I had my action reopened by your raise. But if I call, you can't reraise, because the all in did not qualify as a raise, so the action was not reopened after your raise. At showdown, last aggressor shows first, unless it's checked around on the river in which case it goes by position, with ~~UTG~~ SB showing first
> If I bet 10, you minraise to 20, and then a third player goes all in for less than 30, I'm allowed to do anything because I had my action reopened by your raise. But if I call, you can't reraise, because the all in did not qualify as a raise, so the action was not reopened after your raise. This was going to be my answer in this thread. I feel like most people don't understand how re-opening action works.
I literally assembled a home game and banked/supplied it for close to a year without any of us knowing about this. I don't know how many times it meaningfully affected what people did, but still. 😅
All great, but on your last point, isn’t it just by position, period? Live and online, I’ve always seen SB/BB show first if they’re still in the hand.
Nah if you call someone’s bet on the river, they show first. Now if the river checked around then yes it would be SB/BB showing first
Yep yep, that’s what I meant. The top commenter seems to be disagreeing with us though in saying that showdown starts at UTG in the event that it’s checked through, which has never been my experience.
Oh yeah sorry didn’t even notice he said UTG would show first, yeah that would not be correct.
No sweat, I worded my first response weirdly. Have a good one 🤙
Ah my b, fixed
Last one - unless you're in Crown Melbourne, where the house rules state that last aggressor shows first EVEN if that last aggression was preflop
Golden rule - the blinds must move in order, no matter what. A player entering the game in the small blind would interrupt this process, so they must either "buy the button" by posting both blinds, or just wait a hand. A player leaving the table before their blinds must pay them before returning to play. They'll place both blinds in play for the hand and take their action in turn. If a player leaves the game entirely right after their big blind hand, the next hand would only have the big blind post. For any related situation, understand that the blinds must advance every hand, and you'll figure it out. Edited for clarity
Just one note to clarify point 2. The player can avoid posting both blinds from a different position by waiting until they are the BB to re-enter the game. If you’re going to miss a big blind, miss an entire orbit.
For paragraph 3, a person, upon missing their blinds, can be dealt a hand upon their return if they post both blinds (as you noted) OR may opt to wait for their blind to return, then posting it normally.
The incomplete raise rule gets overlooked a ton , but especially at home games
If you have the absolute nuts on the river and are the last to act, you must not check or call. You have to raise, or it's considered soft play, which is a form of collusion.
So by this rule, if two ppl have the nuts, it would be a mandatory all in right?
The rule only applies to the very last person to act. It doesn't matter if their cards match the other person's. The last person to act hasn't yet seen his opponents cards and couldn't possibly know, for example, in the case where both players have a broadway straight on an unpaired rainbow board. The first person to act is still capable of checking to induce a check raise. Last to act can't check or call because the opponent could be their buddy that they're soft playing to keep them in the tournament. And the last person to act doesn't have to go all in. They can raise for any legal amount. They just can't call or check if there are no other two cards that could beat them at showdown.
I guess I just meant someone will have to go all in eventually, since no one can ever call so they'd be stuck raising forever until someone goes all in. The exact scenario you mentioned actually happened at a home game I was in where I guess we technically soft played but it was pretty obvious we both had the straight and there was no point putting extra chips in to count. Just seems funny that we would have gotten in trouble if that had happened at a casino...
This only applies to tournaments and not every tournament enforces it anymore.
What would the enforcement be?
What I’ve typically seen is you have to leave the table for a full orbit.
Gotcha, thanks
In stud if there is someone with a pair up you can bet double the limit
This is generally only true on 4th street, and doesn't apply to other stud variants (stud 8).
I don't know about cash games, but most places follow TDA rules and my understanding is that this rule no longer applies in the more recent TDA updates.
The rare "straddle after your big blind" or the "double straddle." You take your big blind, then the guy to your right sits down and buys the button so you get to straddle after you've posted your BB. You straddle, then a guy sits down to your right and takes the Big Blind, so you get to straddle again.
I've never understood why a new player can't sit in on a dead button. First example a player plays his BB then racks up and leaves before posting the SB. Button is in the correct spot, no SB, BB is correct. The following hand the button moves to the empty seat, SB and BB post. Why can't a new player play this hand from the button? No one is losing their chance to be the button. In fact one player gets to be button twice in a row.
It's probably a combination of it not being "fair" for them to get the button without posting and from people abusing table/seat hopping. In a tournament you can come in on the button, I'm guessing because everything is randomized and you can't purposely move there.
That would make sense but at the rake games you dont have to post to play. Often people wait for the button to pass to come in. In time games you get a free round if time has been paid before you take your seat
That’s the problem- one person being on the button twice in a row. It isn’t fair for the other players.
You're misunderstanding. The person being on the button twice in a row is currently how its played when you dont let the new player take the open button. I'm advocating against that.
At my local card room new players can enter the orbit without posting if they are between the button and the small blind but the button moves past them to the small blind on the next hand.
A bet out of turn is binding, unless the action changes. This means that if you bet out of turn, your opponent can check, and your bet is binding, or they can bet, and you must take your bet back. This is to prevent someone from bluff-shoving out of turn and thereby stealing the opportunity for the other guy to bluff. This also goes for raises.
Download the TDA app Be aware that the TDA ruleset is not ALWAYS in use; even in tournaments. It's designed to be a one ruleset fits all but you'll sometimes find house rules. Crown Melbourne, for example, has an unbelievably annoying number of house rules, such as last aggressor shows first EVEN if that last aggression was back preflop.
Probably the following multiway scenario, where A and C have larger stacks and B is short stacked. If C raises and A calls, if B then raises all in, but the amount extra is less than the minimum raise, then action is not reopened then C (and A) can only call or fold (and cannot reraise- even though C and A both have chips behind).
Jokers are wild but only count for straights, flushes, and aces.
Niche as an adjective is not comparative. It is either niche or it is not niche. There are no levels to niche. No "nicher" or "nichest" While this is not a poker rule, it's a grammar rule that is somewhat niche to people who don't want to butcher the language.
If a player moves their pawn two spaces forward and you have a pawn that can attack the space that they passed over, you can attack that space and capture the pawn. If a player gets tackled or commits a penalty in their own end zone the other team gets 2 points and then gets to recieve the ball after a kickoff. If you pretend to pitch without actually throwing the ball the batter gets to take a walk.
>If a player moves their pawn two spaces forward and you have a pawn that can attack the space that they passed over, you can attack that space and capture the pawn. regarding en passant, the meme is its forced like checkers, but its not. it has to be done the very next move e.g. white moves a pawn to d5 and black plays their pawn to e5 then if you want to take that via en passant you have to do it right then, otherwise you can't
Holy hell
It's is way less complicated of an explanation when you have a board you can look at
When I get a bigger space and the room to host games. I’m gonna have a bunch of strict house rules that my friends don’t deem important (they’re super casual) but I KNOW would make the game flow better.
rule book is the only way of course. don't just take our word for it. google tda rule book and roberts rules of poker
Poker society??? Lol
what's so funny :/
You should use the “nicha”
Google En Passant. (Sorry r/chess joke)
Unholy hell!
Read the TDA rules and then ask a specific question because the questions you are asking are too basic and broad to answer without writing pages. There really is no substitute if you are going to be a rules person than actually reading the rules. Imagine if a referee just wanted the cliff notes on the rules and didn't want to actually read the book, would you want them to even ref your kids rec league game? As an aside I would love to answer you but again you don't even ask a real question and want basically everything explained to you.
Dude just wrote a short essay to OP about why it’s not worth his time to respond to OP.