|
||
|
||
|
Server Time: 2/10/2012 9:09:58 PM PACIFIC |
 who won, oscar, 25. Feb 2003 12:57 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| House rules in the regular game have been that in a High/Low game if a player declares both ways he must win both ways. In a recent game of 7 card stud H/L one player went H, one went L, and one both ways. The player who went both ways beat the other low but tied with the other high. Who was the winner(s) and what percentage of the pot would the winner(s) get? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, Nathaniel Brous, 25. Feb 2003 13:31 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| If you play with house rules, then they will have to be clearly defined before the game starts. If your house rules "only" state that a player must have the best hand for high and low to declare and win both, then that player should be awarded three quarters of the pot. The fact that someone else also had the best hand for high should not negate his hand. - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, stdioh, 25. Feb 2003 13:59 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 25. Feb 2003 13:31 Nathaniel Brous wrote: > If you play with house rules, then they will have to be clearly defined before the > game starts. If your house rules "only" state that a player must have the best hand > for high and low to declare and win both, then that player should be awarded three > quarters of the pot. The fact that someone else also had the best hand for high > should not negate his hand. - Nathaniel Brous Indeed, declaring hi/lo and drawing for either or both is still winning it, so the high gets split between the double-declarer and the high hand. This does not prevent the double declarer for claiming his low pot as well. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, oscar, 26. Feb 2003 08:56 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| Given that the rule stated was that u must win both ways, and that there was no mention of the "best" hand, do think still think the player that went both ways should receive 3/4 of the pot? | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, stdioh, 26. Feb 2003 09:14 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 26. Feb 2003 08:56 oscar wrote: > Given that the rule stated was that u must win both ways, and that there was no mention of the > "best" hand, do think still think the player that went both ways should receive 3/4 of the pot? Having the same hand and chopping is a question of both players winning, not of neither player winning. If two players chop the low in a non-declare game, the high doesn't end up scooping. A chop is a win, split two ways, so I would say that unless specifically stated otherwise, he should get 3/4 of the pot. And if I were playing in a game that did specify otherwise, I would protest that it was a stupid rule and should be changed. There's no way that you should be able to get nothing when holding the nuts (in this case the nut high and nut low), period. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, Nathaniel Brous, 26. Feb 2003 11:32 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 26. Feb 2003 08:56 oscar wrote: > Given that the rule stated was that u must win both ways, and that there was no mention of the "best" hand, do think still think the player that went both ways should receive 3/4 of the pot? I guess this is beating a dead horse at this point, but yes I do. Your rule did not state that the player must win both ways "outright (alone)." I have played declare a number of ways, but always knew where I stood. This will be the last time you have this problem, so in a way it is a good thing. I hope the hand was not overly significant to anyone. This reminds me of the first time my wife and I played Rummy. Each of us had played the game the same way all our lives and it turned out that we played with different rules (variations). It took quite some time for us (me actually) to relearn the game. We were both convinced that our way was the proper one. Eventually it dawned on me that it really didn't matter as long as when we played from then on, we were on the same page. - Nathaniel Brous | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, Big Frank, 26. Feb 2003 05:50 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| In my home game, we had the same issue, but we were more harsh. If you pig, you MUST WIN both ways, a tie isn't a win, and the double declarer (pig hand) is out of it completly therefore the high only hand that tied wins the whole pot. We played that there is no backing in when you pig a hand. We've since softened the rules, but we are very clear. if you tie one way, typically the low, and win the high, you win 3/4, but we "changed" the rule on that. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, shorn, 26. Feb 2003 06:27 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 26. Feb 2003 05:50 Big Frank wrote: > In my home game, we had the same issue, but we were more harsh. If you pig, you MUST > WIN both ways, a tie isn't a win, and the double declarer (pig hand) is out of it > completly therefore the high only hand that tied wins the whole pot. We played that > there is no backing in when you pig a hand. > We've since softened the rules, but we are very clear. if you tie one way, typically > the low, and win the high, you win 3/4, but we "changed" the rule on that. We have kept the same standard in our game that if you go both ways and don't outright win both, you lose both. No questions asked. | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Our pig rule allows back-ins = no collusion, Easy E, 26. Feb 2003 09:12 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| The pig is treated as if s/he never played, so the remaining highest high and low split the pot and the pig is SOL for being greedy. Note that, if there are more than one matching high and/or low, then after the pig is "removed", they split their half as expected. I like this softer rule better, because it cuts down on collusion possibilities... and I don't think it makes sense to give the entire pot to a high or a low that had no chance to win the other way, EXCEPT for the pig bumping out the opposite side, ESPECIALLY in a home game | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| Re: who won, Mike Caro, 26. Feb 2003 10:19 | ||
| View ( Message | Thread ) | Return to Thread List | |
| on 25. Feb 2003 12:57 oscar wrote: > House rules in the regular game have been that in a High/Low game if a player > declares both ways he must win both ways. > In a recent game of 7 card stud H/L one player went H, one went L, and one both > ways. The player who went both ways beat the other low but tied with the other > high. Who was the winner(s) and what percentage of the pot would the winner(s) > get? Hi, Mark -- I've played this two different ways, and that's just another reason why -- in home games -- it's important that the rules be universally known and understood and that ones that are likely to cause confusion should possibly be put in writing. One rule is that if a player declares both high and low and ties one way, he loses both ways. So, if the player ties for low, he loses the low hand to the opponent he tied with, AND he is INELIGIBLE for the high hand, thus the next-highest hand wins that half of the pot. The other way is that if a player declares both high and low and ties one way, he loses only the tied portion and can still win the other half. I'd speculate that there is even a third interpretation that allows the both-ways declarer to split with anyone he ties with and still win or split the other half, too. I can't remember playing it that way, though. Straight Flushes, Mike Caro | ||
| Return to Thread List | ||
| POKER FORUM HOME | POKER FORUM | LINK TO US | ARCHIVE | ONLINE POKER | Copyright 2002, United Poker Forum |
|
Getting Started |
UPF Tournaments |
Poker News, Views, Rules |
Poker Strategy & Psychology |
Money and Bankroll Poker Bonuses & Promotions | World Series of Poker (WSOP) | Play Online Poker | Poker Odds & Statistics | Tournament Poker | Poker Books, Videos & Learning Tools Looking for a Poker Game | Poker Bad Beats | Not Quite Poker | Quizzes and Polls | Forum Suggestions & Bugs |
|
|
|
|
Interesting Links: Online Poker | Free Poker Games | United Poker Network | Find Vancouver Businesses |
|