I recall reading this description and agree this would create a random shuffle. But remember this was posted several years before the major conversion.
I highlighted a portion because I’m still uncertain if the deck is cut before the deal and cards are burned because this is not addressed. Not doing this would change every hand outcome which we’ve seen on here. Before someone questions my last statement, I still play on here because everyone faces the same conditions but still feel it should be done.
Right, but we don’t know they have the nut flush, and we don’t know if they’re going to call if we jam even when they do. In the opponents spot, would you expect someone to snap jam with the K high flush? They probably should heads up, but what about Q or J high?
For napkin, there are hands here that are close between call and raise, call and fold and also raise and fold, because there are decent bluffs on this board too. When there are a lot of hands that require careful consideration, you should take a similar amount of time with every hand.
You seem to be confusing a couple of very different concepts here. Slow Playing has nothing to do with how long you take to make an action. It’s a term that refers to taking a passive action instead of an aggressive one when holding a very strong hand.
Slow Rolling is taking forever to call on the river facing and all-in when you know you have the best hand.
Stalling is not a poker term (as far as I’m aware), I was using it to describe when you have already arrived at a decision but wait to take that action. It doesn’t matter what the reason is, this is part of the game and always acceptable, as is slow playing. It’s only slow rolling someone that’s a problem.
This is actually completely irrelevant. If you think about it, cutting the deck and dealing from the top is exactly the same as just dealing from a random spot in the deck.
Picking randomly from a random deck is exactly the same as picking in any set order from a random deck, they both give you random cards - which also means burn cards are completely redundant online (although they probably still do it)
I was 60/40 sure he had an Ace or King since the Queen hit the board. His 600-chip raise put him at about 50% of his starting stack. This was HU.
I was pretty sure he would call any raise.
I feel … if you’re playing good players… You have to take them out of their comfront zone.. in order to beat them… you cant just sit back and let them play their game… and if you can irritate a player by staling… till they make a mistake… its a tool … and replay did put a time limit on the hands to stop that kinda… but thats just how i fell.
I think it would be more helpful for me to respond to you if you don’t keep taking my replies out of context. I was replying to something different than apparently what you’re thinking. I was replying to number 2 of lihiue’s post.
Absolutely. Also, if you’re playing a good player and you’re only taking a long time with the tough decisions and always acting quickly with the easy ones, you’re giving them a really powerful tool to help beat you.
Outside of that, I often find myself acting too instinctively and not fully considering all options. The way to correct that for me is to try and slow down a bit in every spot.
I also want opponents that will use the clock tactically too, because I want tough competition. The way NH uses the clock here should be encouraged IMHO.
(1) I’m not sure I understand your position on this about burning cards are redundant. My position is it would’ve changed every outcome we’ve ever seen. Let’s use the Flop from Heaven as an example to illustrate my point since we’ve been watching it several times already.
As Shown:
(H) Qh3d (V) As2d Board QsQc3s5s7s
If cards are burned:
(H) Qh3d (V) As2d Board would’ve been Qc3s5s (?)(?)
(?) are unknown cards because of the burned cards which would change the outcome, IMO.
(H) would’ve had at least 2 pair instead of a boat. (V) most likely wouldn’t have had the nut Flush and I’m unsure how he would’ve bet.
(2) What does this mean, I’m not following? Are saying they do burn the cards.
Right, whatever they’re doing now, if they’d been doing the opposite, every outcome would be different, and that hand never happens, so it’s pointless to speculate at what the outcome would have been.
Think about this:
why should they be burning cards?
if I gave you every card replay ever dealt, how would you tell if they’d been burning cards or not?
Burn cards weren’t always a part of poker. They were introduced at some point. Why if a casino reverted back to not burning cards would players stop playing? (give a reason that also applies to online)
Burn Card
This is done before community cards are dealt in games like Texas Hold’em and Omaha, as a means of ensuring fairness and preventing cheating.
In a live poker game, it’s possible for players to mark the cards or gain some knowledge about the cards based on dealer’s handling. By burning a card, it ensures that even if a player has gained some information about the top card, it will not affect the game as that card gets discarded
As you wrote it was introduced at some point and is now customary to do it. My understanding is it helps prevent cheating and probably other things when playing live.
