PDA

View Full Version : Comments on "The Cincinnati Kid"


Daliman
03-10-2003, 03:18 AM
I did like this movie, although not overwhelmingly, but dag nabit if a few things about it didn't stick in my craw. Some of these things have been hashed over already, some not, but here goes:

1. EVERYONE in the movie plays 5 card stud WAY too loose.
I found it especially amusing when a railbird exclaims in astonishment "Shooter folded a king!" on 2nd st, notwithstanding the fact that an ace brought in the action.

2. Shooter (Karl Malden's character) states specifically before dealing, as he's stating the rules, "No string bets", yet on at LEAST 5 occasions "I'll see your $XXX and raise you $XXX more". Umm, isn't this the very DEFINITION of a string bet? Yet another case of filmakers not having ANY comprehension of the subject.

3. There were too many instances of huge hands beating big hands. For those not in the know on 5 card stud: 2 pair is huge, and trips is gigantic, yet i consistantly saw these hands going up against each other.

4. Far too many instances of people betting into an obvious better hand with only a straight or flush draw. Rarely does anyone stick around for that type of hand, unless they are a total fish or the cards in their hand which are straightening or flushing are higher than any upcards.

5. On what planet are people allowed to bet more than the other person has on the table and force a call for a shot at the pot, and on this planet, do they also allow other people to front money mid-hand?

6. The climactic hand was even more ludicrous than I had heard. Like a player who's supposed to be "The Man" is going to call $100 on 2nd st with J8d, then raise $1000 when the other player is showing A10 when he catches a Qd. His 4th st play was equally reprehensible, and of course, the chances of thes 2 exact hands (Aces full of tens vs 8-Q straight flush)happening in 2 handed 5 card stud i guess has been calculated at about 52,000,000,000,000 to 1 or so. I'd venture to guess that maybe once in history 2 handed has a full house gone up against a straight flush, and it DEFINITELY didn't come off like this hand, if it did happen.

7. The way everyone acts as if the kid actually got outplayed by Lancey is ridiculous. If I were the kid, I'd borrow every penny I could from anyone who would loan it to me to continue playing, as long as Lancey played just as he did all night. The way it played out, Kid slaughtered Lancey in strategy, and got unlucky is all.

8. This is more of a question than a comment, but has it ever been standard practice to rip up cards after playing with them, as Shooter does at least 5 times during the film.

9. Interesting, although not really implausible that while Shooter has spent 25 years making his sterling reputation, he also just happens to be the best mechanic around. I suppose that could be chalked up to knowing how to do it to spot it and prevent it from happening to you, but I don't give the screenwriter's that much credit of forethought.

Finally, and most importantly...

10. ANN-MARGRET WOULD NEVER GO FOR KARL MALDEN!

Al Mirpuri
03-10-2003, 10:22 AM
Daliman,

I really liked your post.

'The Cincinatti Kid' is good cinema but poor poker.

I'm really into 5stud right now. It sounds as though it is your game.

Al.

Daliman
03-10-2003, 12:59 PM
Actually, it's really not "My" game, but I have a pretty good grounding in most any game that's spread in a casino, online or otherwise, and have played a decent amount of 5 card stud. Most of my obverations seemed obvious to any person who plays poker halfway-seriously at all.

**MR.MANHATTAN**
03-11-2003, 01:29 AM
you r right ..mostly.....i have had a strt flush vs a full house...heads up.......30yrs ago........hahaha....yes ripping up cards when they were paper was common.....go to the bike or commerce in l.a. and u see it everytday......tho they just crumple,they r plastic now.........it was a stretch....but if u knew not poker,,,,,,a dammmmmmm good movie,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, /forums/images/icons/spade.gif /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif /forums/images/icons/heart.gif /forums/images/icons/club.gif

TwoPair1958
03-14-2003, 04:04 AM
This is one of my favorite movies. However, I think you lost some perspective on the story.

This is the chance for "The Kid" to play "The Man".

Not everyone plays correctly or "perfect" poker in real games either. There wouldn't be a game if everyone played well. The movie is set in the 30's. Poker is played better today by more people than then.

I dont think it would be a string bet or raise if it is declared.

Big hands do get beat...there are called "bad beats"

Too many instances of people betting into "obvious" better hands. Do you realize this game goes on for a few days?
Players are tired and don't play as well as the two main characters.

In home games..or big ones like this one...people may front money..or ask for a marker....if it's agreed.

I think your odds calc. is incorrect...its is possible and does happen. Besides...If "The Man" draws out on "The Kid" not only does he win the pot...he retains his title and his reputation.

The Kid was out played by Lancy. Thats the point. "Making the wrong move at the right time."

Yes...in this case they do rip up cards.

Shooter was a good poker player and dealer...until he went over to the dark side. His gambling debts have forced him to fix games for the loan shark (Rip Torn). This is demostrated in the movie when Rip Torn character tries to buy off the Kid. Shooter is there to fix it for the Kid...but the Kid tells him to sit out. Lady Fingers takes over.

Ann-Marget character doesn't go for Shooter. He loves her..but it's obvious she is there because she is taken care of. (Thanks to the Rip Torn character)

The Kid asked for and received a marker from Lancey. The game was over.

Chris Alger
03-14-2003, 07:21 AM
Nice point about Malden the flawless cheat that everyone trusts, and how the Kid is supposed to "know" what no one else would ever suspect.

And there's the amount of time it took the Kid to decide whether to call that last bet. Aces full versus the Jd that can only be there after an insane semibluff? Tough one.

WTF
03-14-2003, 08:15 AM
Nice post,

I do like this movie, but like with most gambling movies ("The Hustler" w/Paul Newman comes to mind) I can only watch it on video with my finger never far from the fast-forward button. I find the manditory love-interest formula (here with Tuesday Weld) to be absolutely torturous.

Clarkmeister
03-14-2003, 12:16 PM
If you've ever played 5 card stud, you'd realize just how silly that scene is. Its not simply a matter of playing poorly, its playing AWFULLY. Even a total fish quickly figures out that if you can't beat the board you fold right away. That holds true in 1930 or 2003.

andyfox
03-14-2003, 01:17 PM
"Wrong move at the right time."

I hope to play poker in heaven someday with Edward G. Robinson and Steve McQueen. Talk about cool!

andyfox
03-14-2003, 01:19 PM
I had always hoped Tuesday Weld would marry Joe Friday. . .

Vehn
03-14-2003, 01:36 PM
I thought the best part was that they were playing no-ante, high card brings it in, and yet everyone was still playing every hand on 2nd street.

I love that "Shooter folded a king!" line, I use it occasionally at the table when someone exposes an ace when folding and I get weird(er) looks /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

TwoPair1958
03-15-2003, 04:10 AM
Ok. I haven't played five card stud. But you see the movie is telling a story. It's not about what happens physically in the movie or story...it's about the forces that are coming together. How would u protray putting it all on the line? Showing card players folding?

Daliman
03-15-2003, 07:11 AM
Regarding your comments on my comments...

I don't expect "perfect" poker play; what I do expect, however, is better play from 2 people who are supposed to be among the best in the world to play better than my uncle Bob and his friends Cooter, Cletus, and Jethro.

If someones says "I see your bet, and raise you $$$", yes that IS a string bet. I'm not sure what game you play in where this is allowed, but in most casinos, not only is this a string bet, but verbal is binding, therefore, the initial "call" is the action solely. This is to prevent people from "calling", with the intention of raising, but hoping to get extra information from the opposing player, such as a tell or even the player showing his hand to the call.

I DO realize big hands get beat, just not like it happened in the movie, not by expert players.

The two main characters in PARTICULAR are who I'm talking about with the betting into obviously better hands, although other players in the movie do it much more often.

Front money and markers are fine, but it doesn't happen mid-hand. ANy person who agrees to a marker on a specific hand who is allowed one by the opposing player is obviously an idiot if he were to call anyways.

My odds are not mine; I saw them in a book, and even stated that I might have been a bit off in remembering, but, yes, I am right in that the odds of THIS hand happening are more than astronomical. If he draws out, sure he wins and keeps his title, but if he doesn't, which, given the hands the way they played out, will happen about 1 out of every 500 times he does it, he gets his butt kicked.

Your point about the KId being outplayed by LAncey is just plain wrong. He said "making the wrong move at the right time" to explain his own bad play. he got exceeding lucky, plain and simple, and Kid beat on him all night until that hand.

Shooter's debt problem causing him to get under Rip Torn's thumb was obvious. THe way the movie set it up, though, was that Shooter was a paragon of integrity, beyond reproach, with 25 years cultivating such a reputation. He was portrayed as only doing this this one time.

I'm not sure what movie you were watching. Ann-Margret character doesn't go for shooter because SHE'S MARRIED TO HIM! Other than the fact that the comment I made concerning this was tongue-in-cheek, I didn't get the impression that Rip Torn was Shooter's main benefactor, just a customer with a lot of extra pull.

Daliman
03-15-2003, 07:21 AM
I disagree with your "Hustler" reference. The Hustler is less a movie about pool and more a movie about man's struggle against himself and his demons. The love interest portion plays more of a role in outlining Eddie's lack of character than the pool sessions, in my opinion. It's not until he gets himself straightened out that he can beat Fats, even though he always had more talent, which is often the expert players lament, given any game. More of a battle of man vs. himself at the highest levels than man vs. man, since the talent is so close at the upper echelons. Just ask Stu Ungar. The Cincinnati Kid, however, is a movie about poker, that's all.