![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I just thought of this earlier. I'm not sure where it stands between asinine and enlightening.
Poker: Whoever puts the most money in the pot wins it. In the event of a tie, the best hand wins. Thoughts? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Its good in its simplicity but wrong in ways. It's not just how much money you can dump into a pot, but the way in which it goes in. It also depends on what your opponent has obviously as it would be hard to push him off the nuts.
I like the saying though. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Yeah, this is where the skill of knowing when showdowns will occur, and how often our cards rate to win in a showdown, and all the other skills come in. But as intricate as poker can be, I thought taking an algorithmic view of how each pot is decided could possibly provide some insight into its nature as primarily a betting game, with cards as a forum/medium.
FWIW.. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
is the statement correct? yes.
is it usefull? no. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Aww, shucks.
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It's useful in it's own simplicity... sometimes when playing this game you need to step back and realize the complexity of simplicity.
A friend of mine was learning years ago (I was teaching him and four other guys at mini-micro stakes), and while he's not the brightest guy in the world, he does have a certain level of insight on occasion. They were college kids and had watched Rounders a few too many times, you know? Anyways, Joe had a bad streak. playing 25 cent max bets, he lost thirty dollars in about 15 minutes. Second best flush, second best full-house, etc... He stood up and looked at me with the most earnest eyes I've ever seen and said "I just lost all the money in my wallet because my little pieces of paper didn't have the right color and shape." He nodded once and walked out. It puts things in perspective. It's thoughts like these that can keep a gambler from snapping mentally. O.P.-Good qoute. Ez |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
is the statement correct? yes. is it usefull? no. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] This is true of Sklansky's Fundamental Theorem Of Poker as well. Full marks to the originator of this thread. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Why is this even true? Winning a side pot is not the same as "winning the pot".
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What side pot? Whoever puts more money than the other players in the pot, by making a bet that is not called, wins all the money that went into the pot at any time.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
[ QUOTE ]
I just thought of this earlier. I'm not sure where it stands between asinine and enlightening. Poker: Whoever puts the most money in the pot wins it. In the event of a tie, the best hand wins. Thoughts? [/ QUOTE ] I vote for asinine. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] |
![]() |
|
|