High Low Declare (1 Viewer)

[Burke]

If the goal is to limit scoops just remove the scoop option. High and low split.

yeah that’s not my goal...yes high and low always split...plus you can have both...so you can scoop (The way it’s supposed to be, ya know)

 

[ekricket]

yeah that’s not my goal...yes high and low always split...plus you can have both...so you can scoop (The way it’s supposed to be, ya know)

The ask yourself why you allow it and tailor your rules to that.
If you let donkey shit into your games then you should be prepared to deal with donkey shit.

 

[CapybaraFan]

Interesting, I think they are worse for a variety of reasons....I'll share mine

1) slows game down tremendously
2) adds an element where you can just make an educated guess of the way in which other players are declaring (mainly stud variants)
3) encourages everyone playing every hand essentially at the start (contributes to point 1)
4) makes it very hard to scoop (which goes to your point of increasing sustainability I suppose)

Re: (1): my game runs at a snail's pace regardless bc everyone is a hundred years old and wants to tell their hundred years' worth of stories all night. Makes for a fun night, but a slow enough game that we're way past the point of shooting for speed.

Re: (2): yeah that's poker. Making educated guesses and winning money.

The rest (3-4) are why declare games are better for the sustainability of the game, imo, bc they tend toward a more even distribution of the pot. The money will still ultimately gradually accumulate around the better players, but it will take more time and will keep the fish around essentially in perpetuity.

 

[Burke]

The ask yourself why you allow it and tailor your rules to that.
If you let donkey shit into your games then you should be prepared to deal with donkey shit.

Lol I don’t when I host...but I don’t tell other hosts how to run their games. If they want to do that then that’s their prerogative. My prerogative to leave obviously. Not sure why you’re putting me on blast

 

[TheBigTater]

Like i said I haven't played declare in a long time but 5-card triple draw hi/lo declare was an absolutely wild game that you really had to have steel balls to play. You really needed good player reading skills because it all came down to that. People could go anyway and yes, you could steal half the pot if you were good (or crazy enough). I've seen some crazy frickin' hands.

 

[Burke]

Re: (1): my game runs at a snail's pace regardless bc everyone is a hundred years old and wants to tell their hundred years' worth of stories all night. Makes for a fun night, but a slow enough game that we're way past the point of shooting for speed.

Re: (2): yeah that's poker. Making educated guesses and winning money.

The rest (3-4) are why declare games are better for the sustainability of the game, imo, bc they tend toward a more even distribution of the pot. The money will still ultimately gradually accumulate around the better players, but it will take more time and will keep the fish around essentially in perpetuity.

I agree on point 2 to an extent, but I’ve been in hands plenty of time and missed one way, so I obviously declare the other way and I’ve won win basically nothing...and that’s silly imo. Ymmv obviously. And I don’t fault anyone, just not my cup of tea

 

[ekricket]

Lol I don’t when I host...but I don’t tell other hosts how to run their games. If they want to do that then that’s their prerogative. My prerogative to leave obviously. Not sure why you’re putting me on blast

Just replying to your comment, no need to get all huffy and aggressive. Your free to do whatever you want t at your house, but if you drop comments here it’s not out of the ordinary for someone to reply to them. If they lack context when you post them it’s hard to infer though..

 

[CapybaraFan]

I agree on point 2 to an extent, but I’ve been in hands plenty of time and missed one way, so I obviously declare the other way and I’ve won win basically nothing...and that’s silly imo. Ymmv obviously. And I don’t fault anyone, just not my cup of tea

Results oriented thinking imo. It's just a different game. You'll still win all the money if you're the most skilled player - it will just take longer.

 

[DarkHelmet55]

Funny I would argue all 4 points made are why split pot games with a declare are better. But to each their own. Luckily I am the host and do think Player A and B split this pot. I was just seeing if anyone agreed with the other perspective that cries about it everytime it comes up. The moral of the story is if you dont think you can win both then dont try it.

 

[gmunny]

I think whether you like Declare games depends a lot on the focus of your game or what you are trying to get out of the game. I think most of us playing these declare games are more social/recreational than serious in nature. And for most of us, its a nice change a pace from Omaha or HE all night. For me, if i wanted to play seriously and win $, i'd go to a casino or local card room to play.

 

[Burke]

Just replying to your comment, no need to get all huffy and aggressive. Your free to do whatever you want t at your house, but if you drop comments here it’s not out of the ordinary for someone to reply to them. If they lack context when you post them it’s hard to infer though..

Not huffy and aggressive man...been laughing...I think it’s funny we’re saying the same thing. I appreciate the re-enforcing of how a forum works.

 

[Burke]

Results oriented thinking imo. It's just a different game. You'll still win all the money if you're the most skilled player - it will just take longer.

Yep, totally agree it’s a different game. Just like 727 (I feel like I’m playing declare in the same games when the host calls this)...just kitcheny and different. Again that’s cool. Just not what I like

 

[BGinGA]

obv declare is stupid obv

 

[ekricket]

Funny I would argue all 4 points made are why split pot games with a declare are better. But to each their own. Luckily I am the host and do think Player A and B split this pot. I was just seeing if anyone agreed with the other perspective that cries about it everytime it comes up. The moral of the story is if you dont think you can win both then dont try it.

I just have a hard time with telling one player “sorry, you tied so you get nothing” while telling the other player “you tied, so you get everything” in the same hand.

 

[ekricket]

Not huffy and aggressive man...been laughing...I think it’s funny we’re saying the same thing. I appreciate the re-enforcing of how a forum works.

Dude, why do you keep coming at me like this? We are obviously saying the same thing, so I don’t understand the attitude.

nothing worse than “ let’s play a fun variation that everyone has a different version of, and then we will make up some rules at the end” to kill the sustainability of a game.

 

[moordb]

I just have a hard time with telling one player “sorry, you tied so you get nothing” while telling the other player “you tied, so you get everything” in the same hand.

That's the risk you take when you declare both ways. Otherwise, declare one way or the other and let your cards speak for themselves.

 

[Burke]

Dude, why do you keep coming at me like this? We are obviously saying the same thing, so I don’t understand the attitude.

nothing worse than “ let’s play a fun variation that everyone has a different version of, and then we will make up some rules at the end” to kill the sustainability of a game.

lol, I don’t think either of us like chip declare...everyone here should know by now

 

[ruskba]

1. The two lows tied so they both out, neither won.
2. The straight scoops everything since both other players are disqualified.

I just have a hard time with telling one player “sorry, you tied so you get nothing” while telling the other player “you tied, so you get everything” in the same hand.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand: if you go both ways you are saying "I am going to win the high and the low outright." If you tie or lose on either side, your hand is mucked. The remaining players split the pot based on the direction they chose.

In your world, if all three players had the same hand, say an 8 high straight, one goes high, one low, one both ways. Does the pot just get completely forfeited?

 

[ekricket]

I don't know why this is so hard to understand: if you go both ways you are saying "I am going to win the high and the low outright." If you tie or lose on either side, your hand is mucked. The remaining players split the pot based on the direction they chose.

In your world, if all three players had the same hand, say an 8 high straight, one goes high, one low, one both ways. Does the pot just get completely forfeited?

If it’s so cut and dried why was this thread started? In my world we don’t play crack house poker. We don’t need to make shit up and change it midstream when it’s unclear. In my world we play poker with poker players not go fish games with children.
In your world what happens if a guy has three pairs? This shit is right up there with that.
Got shoelaces? Sorry, here slipons win ties, it’s about that smart.

 

[ruskba]

You mean to say there's never been a ruling question on any game that isn't declare? Sure, ok.

The question OP asked was pretty simply answered, but his players apparently have played with weird house rules. And weird house rules are also not unique to one variant. Keep pretending, though.

 

[CapybaraFan]

I think everyone in this thread needs to go find some edibles immediately.

 

[DarkHelmet55]

I sure didnt mean to start all of this. I just wanted to know if my rule of throwing the players hand completely out if he went both ways and tied or lost one was clear. Some players in my game have played the other way where the player who went low in that situation scoops and think it is correct. I dont.

 

[ekricket]

I sure didnt mean to start all of this. I just wanted to know if my rule of throwing the players hand completely out if he went both ways and tied or lost one was clear. Some players in my game have played the other way where the player who went low in that situation scoops and think it is correct. I dont.

Your house, your rules, just make them clear from the get go, whatever they are, and then there is no argument. It’s when you start doing things “cause they are fun” without clarifying up front what the rules are when trouble starts as evidenced above. Even the simple things like how many coins for what declare seems to be up in the air depending on what crack house you play in if you don’t clarify up front.

 

[AWenger]

The dealers choice games my group plays has several high low declare variants. Omaha variations we do not declare and just have cards speak. One issue that many of our group disagrees on is when more than 2 players reach the declare and someone goes both. We play if you go both of course you have to win both.

I've played some crazy declare hi-lo (poker & not poker) games in the past with a group from college.

That group used to have the same rule that "We play if you go both of course you have to win both", but that you had to win both outright, with no ties.

But later on, I think we revised this rule to eliminate the "outright" and allow ties to the winning hand, to someone who declared both ways.

[For example, one non-poker game in particular you were dealt 6(?) cards face down,.....there were cards revealed each round that you had to discard if you were holding, so everyone can end up with different number of cards at the end, Aces counted as 1 or 11 and Tens counted as 0 or 10, so if you're holding 2 aces and 2 Tens, you have either 2, 42, or both. In that game, if you declared both, you had to win both ways.]

 

[Rhodeman77]

Declare games will never be played in my house.

And if I was playing in a game that had a declare and didn’t explain that you can’t tie to win I’d be even more pissed.

So if player C had declared LOW only would they have chopped the low side? Or do they both lose because they don’t win outright?

 

[ruskba]

Declare games will never be played in my house.

And if I was playing in a game that had a declare and didn’t explain that you can’t tie to win I’d be even more pissed.

So if player C had declared LOW only would they have chopped the low side? Or do they both lose because they don’t win outright?

Yes, they chop the low and the high gets half. Both ways is risky, the others are totally normal.

 

[Rhodeman77]

So the “must scoop” rule if going both ways is to discourage people from trying it, even with the nut low and nut high to make sure the pot gets awarded multiple ways.

 

[DarkHelmet55]

exactly

 

[ekricket]

So the “must scoop” rule if going both ways is to discourage people from trying it, even with the nut low and nut high to make sure the pot gets awarded multiple ways.

exactly

Why don’t you just say “no scooping” if your trying to discourage it? It honestly looks like if you do this you are purposefully trying to make your game contentious. Sure it’s good for laughs at someone’s expense, nothing like pulling the rug out from under someone and laughing like hell when they smack their head. Good Times.

 

[ruskba]

I think the declare plays much better in games with shared information, like 5 and 7 card stud. You have a very good idea of where you stand, so there's some real strategy going into how you declare. With completely hidden hands like 5 card draw, I don't think it plays nearly as well.

And don't forget you can still scoop without declaring both ways.