Vegas & The Aftermath - Diary

[tikay]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

I don't know why, but i do disagree with it, i think if you are all in then the cards should be on there backs, regardless of tournament or cash game.

A view we both share, then.

I'm really interested in why the difference, though. It also intrigues me how come poker players - & we are, collectively - geeky, argumentative & prepared to challenge the most basic of concepts - readily accept these mysteries without question.

When I was a youngster, I used to work in a Betting Shop on a Saturday, & mark up the prices & Results on the white-board or "sheets". Even then, I was "awkward" & inquisitive to life's anomolies & oddities, and any horse or dog which was quoted or returned at 6/4 I used to write on the sheet/board as 3/2. Folks would say "hey, that's wrong, it's 6/4", (!) which is of course exactly & precisely the same thing, & we always use the lowest common denominator in SP's. Imagine a 2/1 shot being called 4/2, or a 9/4 shot being written as 18/8!

Except when it's 3/2, in which case they call it 6/4. Explain THAT!

[Rookie (Rodney)]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

I don't know why, but i do disagree with it, i think if you are all in then the cards should be on there backs, regardless of tournament or cash game.

A view we both share, then.

I'm really interested in why the difference, though. It also intrigues me how come poker players - & we are, collectively - geeky, argumentative & prepared to challenge the most basic of concepts - readily accept these mysteries without question.

When I was a youngster, I used to work in a Betting Shop on a Saturday, & mark up the prices & Results on the white-board or "sheets". Even then, I was "awkward" & inquisitive to life's anomolies & oddities, and any horse or dog which was quoted or returned at 6/4 I used to write on the sheet/board as 3/2. Folks would say "hey, that's wrong, it's 6/4", (!) which is of course exactly & precisely the same thing, & we always use the lowest common denominator in SP's. Imagine a 2/1 shot being called 4/2, or a 9/4 shot being written as 18/8!

Except when it's 3/2, in which case they call it 6/4. Explain THAT!

LOL, yes me and Dad have spoken about silly stuff like this recently a few times!

He says that many people have become lazy nowadays using silly odds..

Evens used to show as Evs, but now its 1/1!

100/30 - 10/3

He also told me of the "newer" odds, which weren't exactly needed, just thrown in there to complicate things some more!

Also decimal odd's users are just lazy IMO

[tikay]

I've not forgotten I need to answer Simon Galloway's Post, & Question, that'll be later.

For now, though, a Question for everybody.

In any well run CardRoom - I'll use DTD as an example, where the Dealers are perfectly trained & consistent - but it applies to any good Poker Playing Venue.

When the Dealer is about to be changed at a Table, he/she fans the deck of cards out, face-down, in that sort of semi-circle-arcy thing. And THEN they do an odd thing - they turn ONE CARD face up.

Today's question is - why?

I've asked almost every Dealer I ever saw do it, & not one knows the answer - except, often, "because that's the way we are trained to do it". Fair enough - but why?

Oh - I don't know the reason either. I'm just curious. Some would say I'm very curious. Odd, even.

Dunno if this the reason they do it, but I know a couple of the dealers at DTD were betting on whether they could find the Ace of spades? Bit of fun maybe?

Good try, but nope, sorry, don't buy that. Almost all of them confess that they are trained to do it, & obliged to do it, but don't know why. They DO try & find an Ace (at Walsall they often turn TWO cards over, & try to hit a Pair), so yes, they see it, perhaps, as a bit of fun - but that's not why they do it, not at all. They do it because they are trained to. But they don't know why that should be so.

I'm just curious, that's all, not being in any way critical of them. I'm also curious as to how anyone would readily & without question accept an instruction the purpose of which is not obvious!

[turny]

6/4 was used instead of 3/2 to make people bet bigger.

loved the old prices like 100/6 and 100/8 again made to encourage people to bet more

[tikay]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

I don't know why, but i do disagree with it, i think if you are all in then the cards should be on there backs, regardless of tournament or cash game.

A view we both share, then.

I'm really interested in why the difference, though. It also intrigues me how come poker players - & we are, collectively - geeky, argumentative & prepared to challenge the most basic of concepts - readily accept these mysteries without question.

When I was a youngster, I used to work in a Betting Shop on a Saturday, & mark up the prices & Results on the white-board or "sheets". Even then, I was "awkward" & inquisitive to life's anomolies & oddities, and any horse or dog which was quoted or returned at 6/4 I used to write on the sheet/board as 3/2. Folks would say "hey, that's wrong, it's 6/4", (!) which is of course exactly & precisely the same thing, & we always use the lowest common denominator in SP's. Imagine a 2/1 shot being called 4/2, or a 9/4 shot being written as 18/8!

Except when it's 3/2, in which case they call it 6/4. Explain THAT!

LOL, yes me and Dad have spoken about silly stuff like this recently a few times!

He says that many people have become lazy nowadays using silly odds..

Evens used to show as Evs, but now its 1/1!

100/30 - 10/3

He also told me of the "newer" odds, which weren't exactly needed, just thrown in there to complicate things some more!

Also decimal odd's users are just lazy IMO

Exactly!

Though, to be fair, I can understand Evens being quoted in these Internet & Spreadsheet days as 1/1, "Evens" does not work numerically.

But 100/30 was another that I used to confuse the hell out of everyone with, because I always wrote it as 10/3. Which is, in fact, quite similar to 100/30......

But 100/30 ("£100 to £30 please") was a typical Bet with a Rails Bookie, so the origin of that is clear. Not so 6/4 relative to 3/2.

I got really difficult one day & wrote 5/2 as 10/4, & they all said it was wrong, as indeed it was. I agreed, then asked why it was OK to use 6/4. Blank looks, next case.......

[turny]

for years after 100/8 and 100/6 were done away with id still everytime iwanted to back a 14/1 or 16/1 horse/dog id always ask for 100/8 or 100/6 thus giving me that added value. i was never once refused.

[Rookie (Rodney)]

for years after 100/8 and 100/6 were done away with id still everytime iwanted to back a 14/1 or 16/1 horse/dog id always ask for 100/8 or 100/6 thus giving me that added value. i was never once refused.

If you managed to get 100/8 or 100/6 on a dog you was probably looking at the wrong race :s lol

[turny]

for years after 100/8 and 100/6 were done away with id still everytime iwanted to back a 14/1 or 16/1 horse/dog id always ask for 100/8 or 100/6 thus giving me that added value. i was never once refused.

If you managed to get 100/8 or 100/6 on a dog you was probably looking at the wrong race :s lol

was common place in those days before greyhound racing bookies started tightening there odds! books to 105% were common place more like 145% now!

i remember many races were 4/1 the field and even some 9/2 the field.

[tikay]

6/4 was used instead of 3/2 to make people bet bigger.

loved the old prices like 100/6 and 100/8 again made to encourage people to bet more

That logic might fit in the case of prices before the Event, but it's hardly the case with "after the Event" Results! Good point, though, & almost certainly correct.

And yes, I used to adore the old 100/8, which of course got diluted to 12/1, & 100/6, which then reduced to 16's. And yes, that's how they originated, giving a Bookie £6 or £8 & getting a nice round £100 for it. 

I trained as a Settler with Wiliam Hill in the pre-computer, pre-Genie days, we had to do it all in our heads, & I always found 85/40 (just over 2's but just shy of 9/4) an awkward one to work out.

On the Exam we had to sit, they guaranteed a job in a Betting Shop to anyone who got over 70%, & a Managers Job if you scored 90%. I was in my newly-discovered & still a novelty to me stage of having a penchant for mental arithmetic, & I hacked up, scoring 99.3%. To this day, 40 years on, I'm still bitter that they docked me 0.7 marks for the tinsy-winsiest of errors. The one question that did me, & I remember it to this day, 4 decades on, it went something like this.....

Two shillings & sixpence each-way, tax-paid on, on the (un-named) favourite in a 6 runner race, (thus 1st & 2nd only) with a 2 shillings in the £ Rule 4 deduction for an at-the-post withdrawal after the market was formed. Two Horses began as 9/4 joint favourites, & one of them dead-heated for 2nd........

[turny]

6/4 was used instead of 3/2 to make people bet bigger.

loved the old prices like 100/6 and 100/8 again made to encourage people to bet more

That logic might fit in the case of prices before the Event, but it's hardly the case with "after the Event" Results! Good point, though, & almost certainly correct.

And yes, I used to adore the old 100/8, which of course got diluted to 12/1, & 100/6, which then reduced to 16's. And yes, that's how they originated, giving a Bookie £6 or £8 & getting a nice round £100 for it. 

I trained as a Settler with Wiliam Hill in the pre-computer, pre-Genie days, we had to do it all in our heads, & I always found 85/40 (just over 2's but just shy of 9/4) an awkward one to work out.

On the Exam we had to sit, they guaranteed a job in a Betting Shop to anyone who got over 70%, & a Managers Job if you scored 90%. I was in my newly-discovered & still a novelty to me stage of having a penchant for mental arithmetic, & I hacked up, scoring 99.3%. To this day, 40 years on, I'm still bitter that they docked me 0.7 marks for the tinsy-winsiest of errors. The one question that did me, & I remember it to this day, 4 decades on, it went something like this.....

Two shillings & sixpence each-way, tax-paid on, on the (un-named) favourite in a 6 runner race, (thus 1st & 2nd only) with a 2 shillings in the £ Rule 4 deduction for an at-the-post withdrawal after the market was formed. Two Horses began as 9/4 joint favourites, & one of them dead-heated for 2nd........

done this training myself tikay 22 years ago with mecca bookmakers still have the certificate with 90 odd %

to make the answer to your exam question above 2 shillings would have been refunded. want to tell me why?

[Royal Flush]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

In tournaments it is to prevent chip dumping.

[tikay]

6/4 was used instead of 3/2 to make people bet bigger.

loved the old prices like 100/6 and 100/8 again made to encourage people to bet more

That logic might fit in the case of prices before the Event, but it's hardly the case with "after the Event" Results! Good point, though, & almost certainly correct.

And yes, I used to adore the old 100/8, which of course got diluted to 12/1, & 100/6, which then reduced to 16's. And yes, that's how they originated, giving a Bookie £6 or £8 & getting a nice round £100 for it. 

I trained as a Settler with Wiliam Hill in the pre-computer, pre-Genie days, we had to do it all in our heads, & I always found 85/40 (just over 2's but just shy of 9/4) an awkward one to work out.

On the Exam we had to sit, they guaranteed a job in a Betting Shop to anyone who got over 70%, & a Managers Job if you scored 90%. I was in my newly-discovered & still a novelty to me stage of having a penchant for mental arithmetic, & I hacked up, scoring 99.3%. To this day, 40 years on, I'm still bitter that they docked me 0.7 marks for the tinsy-winsiest of errors. The one question that did me, & I remember it to this day, 4 decades on, it went something like this.....

Two shillings & sixpence each-way, tax-paid on, on the (un-named) favourite in a 6 runner race, (thus 1st & 2nd only) with a 2 shillings in the £ Rule 4 deduction for an at-the-post withdrawal after the market was formed. Two Horses began as 9/4 joint favourites, & one of them dead-heated for 2nd........

done this training myself tikay 22 years ago with mecca bookmakers still have the certificate with 90 odd %

to make the answer to your exam question above 2 shillings would have been refunded. want to tell me why?

Easy-peasy. In fact, as there were co-favs, it's actually one shilling & threepence each-way on each of the two. That's sub-divided again, as an each-way bet is actually two bets, (a win bet & a place bet) into 4 bets of seven pence & one halfpenny on each of the four Bets. Three of those bets lost, one "won", (i.e, placed), so it's full place stake (placed, quarter the win odds) to half the odds, (or was it half-stake to full place odds), but then we have to deduct two shillings in the pound (10%) from the stake..... oh bugger it - no, I don't know.

[tikay]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

In tournaments it is to prevent chip dumping.

...but Cash-Game players can chip-dump, pass chips, collude, &, working as a pair, squeeze out others, too.....

[turny]

6/4 was used instead of 3/2 to make people bet bigger.

loved the old prices like 100/6 and 100/8 again made to encourage people to bet more

That logic might fit in the case of prices before the Event, but it's hardly the case with "after the Event" Results! Good point, though, & almost certainly correct.

And yes, I used to adore the old 100/8, which of course got diluted to 12/1, & 100/6, which then reduced to 16's. And yes, that's how they originated, giving a Bookie £6 or £8 & getting a nice round £100 for it. 

I trained as a Settler with Wiliam Hill in the pre-computer, pre-Genie days, we had to do it all in our heads, & I always found 85/40 (just over 2's but just shy of 9/4) an awkward one to work out.

On the Exam we had to sit, they guaranteed a job in a Betting Shop to anyone who got over 70%, & a Managers Job if you scored 90%. I was in my newly-discovered & still a novelty to me stage of having a penchant for mental arithmetic, & I hacked up, scoring 99.3%. To this day, 40 years on, I'm still bitter that they docked me 0.7 marks for the tinsy-winsiest of errors. The one question that did me, & I remember it to this day, 4 decades on, it went something like this.....

Two shillings & sixpence each-way, tax-paid on, on the (un-named) favourite in a 6 runner race, (thus 1st & 2nd only) with a 2 shillings in the £ Rule 4 deduction for an at-the-post withdrawal after the market was formed. Two Horses began as 9/4 joint favourites, & one of them dead-heated for 2nd........

done this training myself tikay 22 years ago with mecca bookmakers still have the certificate with 90 odd %

to make the answer to your exam question above 2 shillings would have been refunded. want to tell me why?

Easy-peasy. In fact, as there were co-favs, it's actually one shilling & threepence each-way on each of the two. That's sub-divided again, as an each-way bet is actually two bets, (a win bet & a place bet) into 4 bets of seven pence & one halfpenny on each of the four Bets. Three of those bets lost, one "won", (i.e, placed), so it's full place stake (placed, quarter the win odds) to half the odds, (or was it half-stake to full place odds), but then we have to deduct two shillings in the pound (10%) from the stake..... oh bugger it - no, I don't know.

wrong!


ok il tel ya.

2 shillings refunded because each way bets weren't accepted on unnamed favourites and as far as im aware still aren't.

so it becomes easy a shilling to win on each favourite at 9/4 less the 10% r4 deduction plus the 2 shillings refunded for the void part of the bet.

[Royal Flush]

Next daft question.

In Tournament Poker, when both or all players are all-in, we have to turn our cards face up on the table. It's pretty much, so far as I know, a Universal Poker Rule, one of the few which is consistent everywhere, certainly in Europe.

In Cash Games, we have no such obligation. Again, Universally observed, no question, so far as I am aware.

Why is that? What makes one so very different to the other?

In tournaments it is to prevent chip dumping.

...but Cash-Game players can chip-dump, pass chips, collude, &, working as a pair, squeeze out others, too.....

Chip dump in cash games? What are you smoking there is no need as a player can just reload.

Yes people can collude in cash games, and if you feel that might be happening you are allowed to ask a supervisor to look at the cards.