How to play, scarney? (5 Viewers)

[krafticus]

Or, you must keep at least one card in your hand, and if it matches the low board, it cannot play in the high portion of the hand. in the cases where you discard 1 or more on the last card to discard, you pick one to dump, one to keep, and that's your low points.

Playing a game in which you can loose your entire hand is just .. dumb.

 

[RadicusScout]

Playing a game in which you can loose your entire hand is just .. dumb.

Yeah but you WIN... half the pot.

 

[CraigT78]

4-2-1 Scarney is the best version.

4 on the flop
2 on the turn
1 on the river

I will die on this hill.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

You were making too much sense, I knew you couldn't keep it up...

How can there be a scoop in a hi/low game when you have no hi with no cards? It's even worse than having a low only with no cards...


Canadian is the worst.
No cards and raising is second worst
No cards you scoop is THE WORSTEST

fyp

You can have no cards and still have a royal.

 

[krafticus]

You can have no cards and still have a royal.

but you wouldn't scoop. No player with a single brain cell would fold to any bet on the river by a player with 0 cards.

 

[Chippy McChiperson]

but you wouldn't scoop. No player with a single brain cell would fold to any bet on the river by a player with 0 cards.

If there's a royal on board, they know they're only getting a quarter. If you make a pot sized bet they're not getting the odds to call. Basically, a 1/2 pot bet is the break even point.

 

[krafticus]

If there's a royal on board, they know they're only getting a quarter. If you make a pot sized bet they're not getting the odds to call. Basically, a 1/2 pot bet is the break even point.

obviously I lack the brain cell to figure that out ... you're absolutely correct

 

[ChaosRock]

You can have no cards and still have a royal.

As rare as it may be, that makes it even more non-sensical to have a player with no cards still being live in the hand...

Now, I thought that when Mat mentioned that the bust out hand would scoop, he meant automatically and not in cases where the board had the nuts. If one assumes the player with no cards has the nut low (face palm!), yes, he would also be eligible for the hi when the board is nutted.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

As rare as it may be, that makes it even more non-sensical to have a player with no cards still being live in the hand...

Now, I thought that when Mat mentioned that the bust out hand would scoop, he meant automatically and not in cases where the board had the nuts. If one assumes the player with no cards has the nut low (face palm!), yes, he would also be eligible for the hi when the board is nutted.

Would this call for an odd (but interesting) house rule - Scarney, lose all your card; "No hand" nut low is not eligible for high hand? I don't hate that ruling. No hand is already pretty silly.

 

[CraigT78]

Would this call for an odd (but interesting) house rule - Scarney, lose all your card; "No hand" nut low is not eligible for high hand? I don't hate that ruling. No hand is already pretty silly.

But if you're allowing a player with no cards to win the low side, why couldn't that player play the board for the high side?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

But if you're allowing a player with no cards to win the low side, why couldn't that player play the board for the high side?

Hmmm, good point. I think its such an odd case that I wouldn't be opposed to them not being eligible. Personally we play Icelandic (that's the one where no cards = gone, right?) so I guess I'm trying to avoid the case where someone with no cards gets the majority of the pot. Allowing no cards to play for half the pot is already a unique situation, I think its reasonable to say if you don't have cards, you aren't eligible to play the board.

 

[RadicusScout]

Maybe I'm not thinking about it all the way through but I see it like a hand in hold'em where the best hand is on the board. Everyone disregards their hole cards and plays the board instead. Same situation here.

 

[CraigT78]

Hmmm, good point. I think its such an odd case that I wouldn't be opposed to them not being eligible. Personally we play Icelandic (that's the one where no cards = gone, right?) so I guess I'm trying to avoid the case where someone with no cards gets the majority of the pot. Allowing no cards to play for half the pot is already a unique situation, I think its reasonable to say if you don't have cards, you aren't eligible to play the board.

I also play Icelandic by default.

Every once in a while someone calls Scoop, and the table groans.

 

[KHarp1]

I disagree with @NotRealNameNoSir statement that is reasonable to believe that no cards in hand and you shouldn't be eligible for the board high hand pot. The whole game is ridiculous and is a complete about-face to most every other card game played, but, it is a game. I put my money in, so, I have a stake in the hand. The game is designed to have a disappearing board. What if everyone in the hand has less than 5 cards including the board, what's the best high hand? Is it a legitimate hand if there are less than 5 cards in it? The usual explanation is "your best 5 card hand on the board for the high," so is everyones high hand void since there aren't 5 cards? Then the low-in-hand is the only winner? If the board is community, I've entered the pot legally and haven't folded, why shouldn't I have a chance at playing the cards on the board as well as my empty hand? I had a hand when I started, played by the rules of the game, I earned a chance at the board as well.

Granted, it would be extremely rare that this would occur, but, it is possible.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

I disagree with @NotRealNameNoSir statement that is reasonable to believe that no cards in hand and you shouldn't be eligible for the board high hand pot. The whole game is ridiculous and is a complete about-face to most every other card game played, but, it is a game. I put my money in, so, I have a stake in the hand. The game is designed to have a disappearing board. What if everyone in the hand has less than 5 cards including the board, what's the best high hand? Is it a legitimate hand if there are less than 5 cards in it? The usual explanation is "your best 5 card hand on the board for the high," so is everyones high hand void since there aren't 5 cards? Then the low-in-hand is the only winner? If the board is community, I've entered the pot legally and haven't folded, why shouldn't I have a chance at playing the cards on the board as well as my empty hand? I had a hand when I started, played by the rules of the game, I earned a chance at the board as well.

Granted, it would be extremely rare that this would occur, but, it is possible.

We don't kill the board when they match the discard row, so it wouldn't be possible for us. There will always be a 5 card hand available. If we were discarding board cards we would replace.

Your argument seems to fall on 'that's the rules of the game', which is true, if those are the rules. My statement posits adding a house rule for this situation, so it wouldnt be the rule of the game at that point.

Why should you have a chance at winning anything at all without any cards in your hand? Why can't you bet once you have no cards? Odd rules for a very odd game. Just looking to discuss the different viewpoints.

 

[ChaosRock]

Would this call for an odd (but interesting) house rule - Scarney, lose all your card; "No hand" nut low is not eligible for high hand? I don't hate that ruling. No hand is already pretty silly.

As much as I hate that someone without any cards having the nut low, if that is how someone is playing Scarney, that player without any cards should also be eligible to share the high if the board is high nutted.

 

[KHarp1]

Absolutely, and you bring up good points. Herein lies another issue in playing different home games, how a particular group plays the game, the rules they've developed over the years.

 

[ChaosRock]

If there's a royal on board, they know they're only getting a quarter. If you make a pot sized bet they're not getting the odds to call. Basically, a 1/2 pot bet is the break even point.

True Chippy, but that wouldn't be a scoop, would it? There wouldn't be a show down for the 'scoop' if Villain folds his board hi. Hero With No Cards would just get the pot after the fold.

 

[KHarp1]

Not to derail, but, here's a similar question, what if you're playing a double board Omaha hi/lo, but, there is no low, so do you have two high hands? One for each board, or, is it just one high, no split pot? We had an incident a couple of weeks ago where someone assumed it would be two high hands, and, was severely pissed when it was deemed only one high, since the conditions for split weren't met. What say you guys?

This is one of those areas where questions need to be asked and answered before cats are dealt/ money goes in the pot. Different places handle it differently.

 

[CraigT78]

Not to derail, but, here's a similar question, what if you're playing a double board Omaha hi/lo, but, there is no low, so do you have two high hands? One for each board, or, is it just one high, no split pot? We had an incident a couple of weeks ago where someone assumed it would be two high hands, and, was severely pissed when it was deemed only one high, since the conditions for split weren't met. What say you guys?

This is one of those areas where questions need to be asked and answered before cats are dealt/ money goes in the pot. Different places handle it differently.

When we play this, if no low qualified, only the best Hi hand is paid. Single pot.

 

[allforcharity]

When we play this, if no low qualified, only the best Hi hand is paid. Single pot.

This makes no sense to me. If there's two boards, the pot is automatically split between them. Then you look to see if low qualifies for each board. If not, then high scoops its portion of the split pot.

 

[CraigT78]

This makes no sense to me. If there's two boards, the pot is automatically split between them. Then you look to see if low qualifies for each board. If not, then high scoops its portion of the split pot.

Not in Double board ultimate Hi/Lo - if there is no low qualifier, the ultimate Hi scoops.

The pot isn't split between the two boards; it's split between the best Hi and the best Lo.

 

[krafticus]

Playing Double Board PLO H/L is a nightmare waiting to happen. chopping potentially 2 boards multiple ways .. hell no

 

[KHarp1]

Not in Double board ultimate Hi/Lo - if there is no low qualifier, the ultimate Hi scoops.

The pot isn't split between the two boards; it's split between the best Hi and the best Lo.

Here's where the problem arises, we didn't say ULTIMATE hi, just dbl board hi/lo. Leaves too much open for discussion/argument.

 

[Rakrul]

Quick question; Do the players have to position their hole cards so other players can see how many you have left or can you keep them as you would a normal Hold'em hand (on top of each other)? If the latter, are you obliged to answer (truthfully) if another player asks how many cards you have?

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

Quick question; Do the players have to position their hole cards so other players can see how many you have left or can you keep them as you would a normal Hold'em hand (on top of each other)? If the latter, are you obliged to answer (truthfully) if another player asks how many cards you have?

At my table I can't make them keep their cards fanned out so you have to truthfully answer about how many cards you have. If you misrepresent then your hand is dead just like failing to discard. To be safe, most of us just fan our cards out then answer, the bourbon hurts recall.

 

[TheBigTater]

Quick question; Do the players have to position their hole cards so other players can see how many you have left or can you keep them as you would a normal Hold'em hand (on top of each other)? If the latter, are you obliged to answer (truthfully) if another player asks how many cards you have?

Yes

 

[allforcharity]

Quick question; Do the players have to position their hole cards so other players can see how many you have left or can you keep them as you would a normal Hold'em hand (on top of each other)? If the latter, are you obliged to answer (truthfully) if another player asks how many cards you have?

The very few times I played, you can ask and get a truthful answer regarding how many cards you have left in your hand. And since we're all Canadian players we apologize almost at random a lot.

 

[drdr]

Anyone clarify able to clarify variant differences?
Think that game card helper could be updated.

Regular: 6 cards.
? Does losing all 6 kill hand?

Icelandic: 5 cards, losing all 5 kills hand.

Canadian: 6 cards, losing all 6 gives nut low and can play board for hi, but can only call.
? Any penalty for no apology?

 

[CraigT78]

Here's where the problem arises, we didn't say ULTIMATE hi, just dbl board hi/lo. Leaves too much open for discussion/argument.

Oh, we play it ultimate Hi, ultimate low. I'm never playing a game where the pot is quartered by design.