🔥 3 Card Poker Hand Rankings

Most Liked Casino Bonuses in the last 7 days 🔥

Filter:
Sort:
B6655644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 1000

Find high-quality Poker Hands Images stock photos and editorial news pictures from Getty Images. Download premium images you can't get anywhere else.


Enjoy!
Talk:List of poker hands - Wikipedia
Valid for casinos
Poker Hand Ranges [The Comprehensive Beginner Guide]
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
Before you ever decide to click playing any kind of poker, you must get please click for source know the hand rankings in the game.
There is best poker hands images way for you to make the right decisions unless you know what your hand is and how it is compared to the others.
In a game of 3 card poker, the player compares his three-card hand to the dealer's one and this way it is determined who the winner is.
For example, a Straight hand is better than a Flush link and therefore the player with the Straight is the winner.
You can see the 3 card poker hand rankings on the picture on the right.
Below, you may see a list of the hands from best best poker hands images worst - the better the position the stronger the hand: 1.
Straight Flush - Straight of one suit.
Three-of-a-Kind - Three cards of one kind same rank.
Queen - Queen - Queen 3.
Straight - Three cards best poker hands images sequential rank.
Flush - Three cards of the same suit.
King - 9 - 7 same suit 5.
Pair - Two cards of the same kind.
King- King - 9 6.
High Card - If nobody has any of the above then whoever has the highest card wins.
Ace- Queen - 8 PLAY THIS GAME WITH VIRTUAL MONEY Tags: Gamble responsibly - Copyright © 2009-2019 MyCasinoStrategy.

B6655644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
50 xB
Max cash out:
$ 1000

Find high-quality Poker Hands Images stock photos and editorial news pictures from Getty Images. Download premium images you can't get anywhere else.


Enjoy!
Trend Micro InterScan Web Security Event
Valid for casinos
POKER HAND RANKINGS - Know your hand rankings learn texas holdem hands
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
The concept of a hand range is often foreign to a beginner poker player, but once you understand the idea you will never go back to your old way of thinking.
Keep reading to find out more.
How often do you try to put your opponent on a single hand?
So the question is, what should we do instead of placing someone a single hand?
The answer: we give them a range of possible hands or in other words a set of hands.
Hand reading then becomes about working out the hand range more accurately; not about finding a single hand that your opponent is holding.
Well please click for source one, there are a lot of hands your opponent can typically have; therefore narrowing it down to one hand based on limited information is difficult, if not impossible.
In addition, your opponents should play in a way that gives him multiple hands for the same line series of actions.
To take an example, it is very easy to play against someone who raises very large preflop with only AA or KK.
Constructing ranges In order to hand read correctly, we need to piece together the story that our opponent is telling us.
With every action bet, raise or check our opponent is giving us a piece of information.
We must piece this information together to build up a possible set of holdings our opponent may have.
We called this constructing a hand range.
If we are on the river facing a bet we must take into account all the actions on the previous streets.
In addition to simply what actions we both learn more here, we must also take into account bet sizing and bet timing on EVERY street.
You begin with a wide hand range and progressively whittle it down as more information becomes available.
Each opponent action allows us to remove more hands from his range.
A common example would be that if someone calls your preflop raise you can typically exclude hands like AA, KK, and AK from their preflop hand range.
We can eliminate these hands as they will almost always be reraised preflop.
Very few players will flat call AA, KK, and AK versus a raise.
Piecing together all this information is a lot like a puzzle.
It can be very difficult to keep all the information in your head during a hand; this is one of the key reasons that poker is such a difficult game to master.
Practice will make perfect.
Hand source example The best way to explain best poker hands images range is to do a full example.
One of the main benefits of playing online is that you get to use a HUD heads up display.
A HUD will give you information on what your opponent may be holding in a preflop scenario.
So we can use our HUD to estimate what our opponent may be raising from early position — this allows us to make adjustments based on if he is raising a wide or narrow range.
Vs a wide range we should fight back and call or raise might often.
Vs a narrow range we should fold more often.
To take an example, we are on the BTN with AQ and face a raise from UTG from an aggressive opponent.
We see that the UTG raiser is opening 17% of hands if this was a live game we would use an approximation.
We estimate this to be the following you can directly plug this into equilab : 22+,A2s+,K9s+,Q9s+,JTs,T9s,98s,ATo+,KQo We choose to call in this situation and the blinds fold resulting in a heads up pot.
Raising is not an option here because raising would fold out all his weak hands and only leaving strong hands.
A large proportion of these strong hands are stronger than us — not an ideal situation.
A value range is the range of hands he will bet hoping that he is betting to build a big pot.
He will also have some bluffs such as AK, KJs, JTs and possibly AJ.
However, the number of bluffs is very dependent on how the opponent plays.
The exact number can be sometimes difficult to estimate and comes with practice: How did we arrive with theses ranges?
Well first, we expect villain to all of his top pair we are assuming he is quite aggressive.
We also know from past experience that this particular villain will not bet hands under top pair for value.
So he either bets top pair or better, some bluffs or checks.
For bluffs, we think villain will bet all of his flush draws and some AK: AK, KJdd, JTdd, AJdd.
It can be difficult when first starting out to determine what villain will do with each hand.
This just comes will practice and experience.
Vs this range AQ has 33% equity from equilab.
Therefore, if we are getting 2:1 pot odds villain makes a pot sized bet we can call, and if he bets larger we should fold.
If our opponent bets smaller we should still obviously call.
For more on pot odds see.
Improving hand reading One quick method of improving best poker hands images reading skills is to play without looking at your hole cards.
Playing live this is easy, but online this might mean putting a sticker on your screen over your cards.
Any loss can be seen as the price of your education.
This course is focused on one single objective: improving your hand reading ability.
The concept of putting your opponent on a range starts as almost a guessing game during the early poker career; but as your skills improve so does the accuracy of your hand range estimations.
Strive to best poker hands images your hand range construction skills as this is in essence how you will exploit your opponent.
Ultimately, with the best hand reading skills, you will come out the biggest winner at the tables.
Further Reading: My favourite poker book, Applications Of No Limit Holdem By Mathew Janda covers hand ranges in a huge amount of detial.
I would recommend checking it out on our best.
Good luck at the tables.

A7684562
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Search from 30 top Poker Hand pictures and royalty-free images from iStock. Find high-quality stock photos that you won't find anywhere else.


Enjoy!
Poker Hand Ranges [The Comprehensive Beginner Guide]
Valid for casinos
Top 10 Best Hands for No-Limit Texas Hold'em | How to Play Aces, Kings, Queens, Jacks | Top Poker Hands | Odds Shark
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
List of poker hands received a by Wikipedia editors, which is now.
It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This is the for discussing improvements continue reading the article.
This is for general discussion of the article's subject.
Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed.
Once the objections have been addressed you may the article for featured list status.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as on April 4, 2014.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the and see a list of open tasks.
This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's.
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's.
Remove template when the article is no longer a stub.
Try and expand any stubs to start class.
This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's.
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's.
Because of lots of little bits like this, the page is "semiprotected".
This means that you can't edit it from an anonymous IP address, and you can't edit it from an account less than four click old.
Note that posting from a named account actually gives you more privacy than posting from an IP address.
That's when you're one card short of a flush.
I wouldn't say that "forgotten" is the right word exactly.
It's pretty standard notation if anyone goes from here and reads anything else in a magazine or book, it will be "T", not "10"and it makes it so that all ranks use one character.
It might be helpful to clarify the rules about straights involving Aces.
You can have Ace high straights AKQJT and some games allow Ace low straights 5432A but you are never allowed to "turn the corner" 32AKQ.
Actually some use "turn-the-corner" straights in home games, but this is pretty uncommon.
QKA23 is considered three high straight in this case.
I think the latter is clearer when editing.
PS -sorry for multiple edits, I'm new!
Ie: does a spades royal flush beat a hearts royal flush?
I guess i'm asking about suit seniority.
Suit only matters for flushes.
Personally I'd like to see a link to some type of source to where the person got "Imperial Flush" from--for one, I've never heard of anything like this, and, not a screen down the article and it says that suits do not matter whatsoever.
For example, calling a bet for all one's chips, with 7-2 against opponents A-A and having the turn and river come up 7 and 2 best poker hands images two pair and "cracking" beating the opponent's A-A 22:14, 2 March 2007 UTC I have never heard any respectable player claim that this should be an exception to 3-of-Kind beating Two Pair.
The only reference that I have found is this.
Like those who responded to the original poster, I could give various reasons why this best poker hands images is ridiculous.
Aside from how ridiculous the exception would be, I have yet to find any evidence that "most visit web page poker scholars" believe this.
Please name some "educated poker scholars" and reference where they have stated best poker hands images belief in this idea before reposting this section.
For example, when comparing identical full houses, there are no "kickers".
I'm not sure if there is valid logic behind this sentence.
I always thought no two players can have identical Full Houses in one hand, as a full house consists of a 3-of-a-kind and a pair, and no two players can have 3-of-a-kind of the same card value in one hand.
So no two compared full houses houses will ever be found to be identical.
Example of identical full houses: 888-JJ vs 888-JJ.
Clearly this could never occur as it would require six cards of value 8 in the deck.
My suggestion is to change this to: For best poker hands images, when comparing identical straights, there are no "kickers".
Not very common but it is possible.
I do like your suggested example better as it is more likely to happen, tho.
In Texas Hold'em identical full houses can occur too, when the board pairs up I forgot about that when starting this conversationbut the point remains that the example used in the text can be substituted for one that is more common.
The example as it is now can never occur in 5 card draw games, learn more here my suggested example can and still brings the point across.
If the flop is dealt as follows Ah 2h 4d 4s 4h player 1 gets dealt Ad and 5c player 2 gets dealt Ac and 7d Then they both have a full house of 2 Aces and 3 4s.
Both are possible, though probably not too common.
The rest of the game is identical to Texas Hold'em.
In this variant, three pair beats two pair, but not a full house.
This is an exception to the stated "always five cards in a hand" rule.
There are probably other variants with similar rules.
That would just make sense to me.
I've been trying for a couple days to stress that a three pair hand is a legitimate poker hand, but my brother and parents keep saying it isn't.
This just in: Meh is a real word now, too!
What exactly does a 'three pair' go between; two pair and three-of-a-kind, three-of-a-kind and straight, straight and flush, or flush and full house?
Your comment above was really ambiguous.
It does bring up the point, though, that there is not sufficient coverage of deal irregularities in general here, so I'll make a note of that on the project page.
However, misdeals should be dealt with appropriately.
If a single card is dealt face up accidentally, the person to whom it was dealt should be given the option as to whether they wish to be dealt a new card or they wish to keep the card.
If the card is replaced, the exposed card should remain face-up on the table giving so all players can see it, but it remains out of play.
Any further inadvertent face-up deals result in a re-deal of the hand.
Often in a home game, the deal also passes.
If the bottom card of the deck is inadvertently shown to a player, the player may choose to keep this information to himself or disclose it to the table and have the deck cut.
However, the cut cannot be asked for after any cards are dealt.
The risk of bottom-card exposure can be easily mitigated with the use of an opaque plastic 'cut card' that remains as a cover on the bottom card.
The first and most important rule about exposed cards in all poker online casino jersey best new in all casinos is of course that the player can never be given the choice of whether to keep or replace the card--this gives an unfair advantage to that player.
The card must always be kept or always be replaced, according to rules which vary with the type of game being played.
The determination of whether or not a card has been "exposed" must be made by a neutral dealer or floorperson; if a card "catches some air" or is touched by another player, and the player is concered that others may have seen it, he may request that the dealer treat it as exposed, and the dealer may do so only if the dealer is certain that the player himself could not possibly have seen it.
In draw games, an exposed card on the initial deal must be kept, while an exposed card on the draw cannot be kept.
In lowball draw, a card exposed on the initial deal must be kept if if is one that can possibly be part of a perfect hand that is, a wheel card in ace-to-five or a 7,5,4,3,2 in deuce-to-sevenbut other cards must be replaced.
When a card is exposed and must be replaced, the deal continues with the next player in order getting the next card just as he would have ohterwise, until all cards are dealt; then the exposed card is replaced with the top card of the stub.
In stud games, if one of the initial downcards is accidentally dealt up, the exposed card is simply treated as that player's initial upcard and what normally would have been the upcard is dealt down.
If this correction cannot be made for example, if two cards are exposed the player's hand is declared dead and his ante refunded.
If one of the players' final downcards is dealt up, it must be kept, but special rules apply: if there are three or more active players, other players recieve their final downcards as normal, and the player with the exposed card has the option of being treated as "all-in".
He must choose before betting begins on that round; if he chooses to be treated as all in, all further betting goes into a side pot for which he is not eligible.
If he chooses not to, he is fully subject to all further bets and raises, and fully eligible to win or lose all such action.
If there are only two players, and the first player's final card is dealt face up, the remaining player's final card will be dealt up as well and betting proceed normally.
If the first player's card is dealt down and the second player's up, he must choose link continue playing or declare himself all-in as before.
In community card games, a card exposed on the initial deal best way play slots be kept.
The deal is continued as normal with the next player until all players recieve their initial cards.
The exposed card in then replaced with the next card in the stub which would have been the first burn cardand the exposed card is placed on top best poker hands images the stub face-up, and will be used as the first burn card so the community cards are not affected.
If two or more cards are exposed, or if the first card exposed is one of the first two card dealt, the deal is voided.
There are other rules for other irregularities, but those are the basics.
A flush beats a straight, not the other way around.
I don't have time to fix this page right now, but if someone else wants to, go right ahead.
Every other website on this subject says a full house beats a flush, and that's read article I've always played.
The highest card matters, not if you have straight of three in the flush.
Afterwards, I noticed that has nearly the same information.
Perhaps the two articles ought to be merged.
I will transfer all info to the other article Hand poker and redirect.
Surely both should be included, as both are valid rules even though bugs may be more common?
Also have you removed the section on poker variants, the section on probability, and the introduction to the Low-poker ranking section for a reason?
Iahve no idea what else you are refering to since I obviously did not remove that in simply reverting your change.
If you think more should be added from the old article, then do so.
As for wild cards, this article is about standard hands.
There is an article about non-standard hands.
Your added section included factaully incorrect information.
For example, KKKKJoker is four kings with an ace, not five kings.
Again, on-standard rules have their place, but this article should deal with standard rankings, meaning five aces is the highest hand when a https://ipodxs.com/best/best-roulette-wheel-app.html is used, and a royal flush is highest with a standard 52 card deck.
I think my https://ipodxs.com/best/best-casino-online-game.html arose because I didn't realise this article was strictly about standard play.
In that case I can see why you did not include the section on variations.
Also my edit was based on an article titled "Hand poker ", not "Rank of hand poker ", I thought "Hand poker " would encompass all information from both articles.
The section on wild cards which was not my work, to make things clear contained correct, but non-standard information as far as I can see.
My edit involved quite a few additions, but with reconsideration, I think how it is now is probably better given the title.
There was no need to add the table of probabilities that I added, I had removed that in the merge after realising that it, and the table for 7-card poker was already included on a separate page.
I have replaced the section on probabilities only, as that seems standard enough.
Therefore, I think that should be moved to the article.
Not many places as far as I know play with wild cards, and is definitely not played in most official games.
In fact, there's a whole bunch of stuff in this article about non-standard hands.
All of this stuff should be transferred go here the article.
This article should stick to the standard poker hands only to avoid duplication wit the non-standard poker hand article.
For a long time, the standard game in California was five-card draw with a joker.
Games like Pai Gow Poker also include the hand.
It should be included in any standard ranking of poker hands.
Five of a kind is standard in casino draw poker games, even if those seldom exist.
It is also standard in home poker draw games.
It's description could be disclaimered somewhat like "In game where a is used, five of a kind.
However, some rules of wild-card games stipulate that 5OAK is not a viable hand, because the hand could not otherwise exist.
Put it another way, a 5OAK requires best poker tables in reno phantom suit in order to be created, so some rules do not recognize it.
Those that do allow it must make a special declaration in the rules.
Because there is not a standard rule over its inclusion, and it's not possible in a standard game of poker, I believe it must be relegated to a nonstandard hand.
We shouldn't get into non-standard rules, or ignore standard practices decades old.
Five a kind is the best hand, in most cases it is not possible because a bug isn't used, but when it is used it is the best hand.
This is certainly followed in casinos as a standard rule.
Anyone who has heard of wildcards in poker has heard of 5-of-a-kind.
Although I don't agree that it is a 'standard' hand, I don't see why it can't be included in the list so long as it is clearly stated that a wildcard is needed in the deck for it to be possible.
It is not just some weird hand that has been made up by a couple of drunken blokes playing poker in their kitchen as it would seem is the case with most of the non-standard hands listed.
I vote that it should be included in the list.
I altered the title to "Use of wild cards and 'five of a kind'" as a substantial part of the section is about five of a kinds.
Also it will stop people from adding it again to the top of the main list.
Instead there should be a mention in the intro that Wild Cards can change the hand rankings listed, and the mention of FoaK in the Straight Flush sections should be removed.
I'm going to do that, but if anyone objects, then simply change it back.
The fact that it isn't possible in games without a joker doesn't make it less "standard" although as the article does, it should note the circumstances in games with a bug when five of a kind is a standard possibility.
Surely 'Royal Flush' is a name for the highest ranking straight-flush?
It is included in theso why should it be regarded as a a completely new hand, and hands like 'Steel Wheel' straight-flush A-5 and 'Four Pips' four aces not be?
Of course it is the highest possible hand in games without wildcards, but I still don't think that is reason enough to regard it as any different than a straight-flush.
In Finland where I liveby the way, the straight read article is nearly always referred to as the best hand and the royal flush as the highest straight flush.
The only reason why I could see doing this is to ensure that it's known that the Ace is high.
But why stop there?
Why not indicate a "Royal Straight" hand or a "Royal Pair" https://ipodxs.com/best/best-online-mobile-poker-sites.html />The Ace is already indicated as being the high card in the rule books; there's no need to show a Royal Flush.
The issue was that the Royal Flush was down on this page as a hand and I thought it shouldn't be, not that it isn't included as a unique hand.
The issue was resolved some time ago, and hence Royal Flush is no longer included as a unique hand.
I also added in the odds of being dealt each hand and expanded the sections on flushes and straights.
But this page says that Five-of-a-kind beats a Royal Flush, which would mean that there's no difference between a Royal Flush and a Straight Flush.
Eh, I like my rules better.
In Deuces Wild, a Royal Flush beats a Five-of-a-Kind.
You can see proof of this in the article.
I did the math, and there are 624 ways to get a Five-of-a-kind in Deuces Wild, article source only 484 ways to get a Royal Flush 4 Natural Royals, and 480 Wild Royals.
It's not a hand in its own right.
In real poker, five-of-a-kind wins--a royal is just an ace-high straight flush.
For instance, all the hands egas well as lowball systems, have redirects to the appropriate headings here, so any heading changes should be corrected in the redirects.
The term "wheel" is used in normal poker as well, but you wouldn't really know it from a quick glance of this article.
Even though the text of that section correctly said where it lay in the ranking, its improper location was misleading and generated a table of contents with the hands listed in ranked order correctly except for the full house.
I also added "and below full house" to the flush section.
I'm sure there are many players of those games who wouldn't know otherwise.
I can find a few references to it in the game of "Three card brag".
Does anyone have an opinion on whether it should be included on this poker page?
I'd say take it out, but I don't mind it staying either.
Since the ace is low, I assume not, but this would be good to clarify in the article.
Could someone do that?
But no more than five cards play--so if you're playing Texas hold'em, the board is 88AK5, two players with J8 and 83 in their hands tie, because they are both playing the five-card hand 888AK.
I don't think the suits need to be specifically mentioned, as the name of the suits isn't integral to understanding any aspect of poker hand ranking.
I https://ipodxs.com/best/best-slot-machines-to-play-at-foxwoods.html think it is almost a given that people reading this article will be familiar with a standard pack of cards and even if they aren't, there is a link to the article in the general rules section.
Although, if anyone thinks the suit names need to be mentioned, I doubt it will have a negative effect if they do.
HAVE TO be mentionned at the very begining of the article, period 13:11, 20 June 2007 UTC That might be true for a paper encyclopedia, but we've got hypertext here, and links are better, because they don't clutter the article with stuff that doesn't really need to be there while they still give the reader a way to find background material he might not be familiar with.
I found the picture quite handy and consistent with the text.
What is the reason the picture is now gone?
I would like to see it back, just my 2c.
It has been restored.
Your edit message was "why make it more complicated?
You could have just fixed it you know.
I don't really see why changing it is necessary - 52!
} is likely to just confuse the issue further.
But if you think it's a good idea, feel free to change it.
It's clearly not just a list article, it's a full explanation and description of a single subject.
It should clearly just be "Poker hands".
Indeed it's not " just a list", but that's not the definition of a " List of.
Regardless, it is sufficiently "list-like" to have been made a featured list, so its status as a list doesn't seem to be in question.
Something needs to be fixed.
I'd add a "contradict" tag, but the article is semi-protected, so I can't.
My inclination is to patch the straight flush definition, but I want to check out a reference or two first and wait for other comments.
Thanks for pointing it out.
But that layout of words and symbols could equally well mean "hand 1 defeats hands 2 and 3, and ties with hand 4".
More separation is needed between hands 2 and 3, or separate captions for each pair of hands, to make clear what is meant.
Suits do have value, they are just all equal.
Otherwise a flush or straight flush would be worthless or just a straight in the later.
The point is that, in poker, a royal flush in spades does not defeat a royal flush in clubs; if two hands are identical apart from their suits, then they are considered equal.
I'm glad to hear, however, that you found the article helpful - that is ultimately why it's there!
Once trump is decided, the other suits are all weaker.
A bit off best poker hands images, I know, but I wanted to correct it.
On the matter of suit values, though, I have heard the suits are ranked as diamonds, clubs, hearts and spades, in that order.
This would only apply for otherwise identical hands.
Is that true, or just a house rule?
When it comes to the forced bet in stud games the suits lowest to highest are: clubs, diamonds, hearts, spades.
The latter sounds more encyclopedic to me, and easier to understand.
If you think it reads better the other way, go ahead and change it.
Would someone with proper permissions be so kind?
How can two players have the same quad in community-card games i.
There is only one deck of cards.
This example should be removed.
Makes lots of sense - forgot you can indeed share the same quad if its all on the table versus the example with the wildcards 12:14, 26 February 2011 UTC Board is AAAxx, hands are Ax and Ax.
So there are five Aces then.
For instance, almost everywhere, including this article, people agree that the odds are 1 in 4,165 of getting four of a kind.
Those odds are written as if there is only one person that is getting cards from the deck.
In a poker game of 6 people, wouldn't the odds be exponentially smaller as there are other people that could be getting the cards that you're hoping for?
The 4th guy at the oregon best in payout casino would be dealt from the 37 remaining cards in the deck, and of those 15 that are gone, a large amount of the cards could already be gone, or they could all still be in the deck, therefore hugely increasing or decreasing his odds.
I'm not quite sure how to go about the math that would describe this, but I hope someone understands what I mean.
You get five cards out of 52.
It doesn't matter whether the remaining 47 cards are in the stub of the deck, in other players' hands, or burning up in the fireplace.
As long as the deal is fair, and you haven't seen any of the other cards, the odds don't change.
This doesn't depend on which cards may go where, so long as you haven't seen them.
As far as you're concerned, there's no difference between a card in the stub of the deck, among the burn cards, or in your opponent's read article you can't see it, you can't get any information from it, so your probability doesn't change.
It is meaningless to ask about the "real probability" of an event--that's always 100%--what happens happens; the cards are laid out the way they are.
One can only ask what the probability is from any particular bettor's point of view at a given time, and that's not about how the cards are laid out, it's about what he knows about how the cards are laid out.
It's mentioned udser "Straight Flush".
When I learned poker, I was told that a Royal Flush in Hearts is known as a Royal Straight Flush which beats the other Royal Flushes, which would be the only time a suit actually counts for more.
Has no one else heard this?
The terminology doesn't make sense though since all of them are Straight.
I have heard it from other people too; but with different suits: diamond and spades.
That's why I read this article, to find out which suit it is supposed to be.
And isn't that by the way the 'Dead Mans Hand'?
In standard poker hand evaluation, no suit outranks any other.
A Royal Flush in hearts ties one in spades, and if four unlucky players hold the four Royals, each gets a quarter of the pot.
That doesn't seem right to me.
Queen is higher than ten, so ace-queen defeats ace-ten.
Can someone fix it?
That seems correct to me.
Now I see that there is a horizontal rule separating the two pairs of hand.
It is nine for each suit, including the Royal Flush itself, making it 36 total.
Or am I mistaking something here?
Sorry to bother you, heh.
Things like lowball and Badugi are discussed elsewhere, so please leave "aces high" ranking alone.
No need to complicate this text with details that aren't relevant to the subject at hand.
Aces can play low, but only as part of low straits.
This is what the article says.
Most poker players would not refer to a hand such as 2-3-4-5-6 of hearts as either a straight or a flush but instead would refer to it as its highest ranking hand, the straight-flush.
However, most poker sites use the shorter definition for straights and flushes which do not exclude straight-flushes.
This means that the poker hands overlap in this area.
This problem also occurs in the straight section.
So if we go with the current definitions of straight and flushes where a straight-flush is included in both then these sentences must be changed so that the probability in the end is getting a flush straight that is not also a straight flush.
I will best poker hands images those changes.
The article says: Under typical rules there are 7463 distinct ranks.
I did the calculation and received the total of 7462 ranks.
I guess, the author of "7463" just counted the royal flush twice.
I must have had a duplicate in my spread sheet.
Either someone's been playing with it, or we've been wrong for a long time.
The old image is restored and the improving editor has been notified.
Thanks for spotting it, Spireguy.
Likewise, it is possible to find both tunica casinos best payouts full of B" and "A over B" describing a full house.
Maybe somebody somewhere says "Kings up nines", but it isn't widespread usage.
I know this means "over" is technically ambiguous, but in practice either the players have a local meaning, or the context is clear, eg player one says "I have two pair" and player two says "I have queens over fives.
People say "kings up" all the time, but close to no one at all says "kings up nines".
The phrase doesn't even make sense.
Google any example like compared to.
Try "queens up sixes".
People don't say it that way.
The search shows that people do use "up" that way, and listing both may stop the IP editor.
It shows no one says "kings up nines".
So on google searches, "over" shows up as often as "up" for two pair.
I found "up" used "in the wild" for two pair and now that this has come up, I think both "up" and "over" should be listed for two pair.
It's a separate issue.
The IP is asserting "kings up nines" is a way to refer to two pair.
The links above show that clear as day.
I can't imagine why you think we should include nonsense in the article, but the Wikipedia is a place for things made up one day.
If you think there are some issues with "over", then go ahead and start a discussion about that or remove it from best online casinos free play article.
That is off the point.
When Ngo's AJ vs Akenhead's AK, you can clearly hear the commentator said "Ngo with Aces up Jacks".
The commentator said "Ngo with Aces up, checks".
As far as full houses go, it's usually "Kings full", or the like, and the pair is mentioned only when it's needed to resolve the hand.
Which happens annoying often in Omaha.
Let's see some ways to refer to a full house: A's full of B's A's over B's A's full of B's of course In "Two Pair" article: A's over B's A's and B's A's up "up" what?
Since A's over B's is already used to refer to a full house, there's an ambiguity if A's over B's is used to refer to a two-pair too.
So, I offer two "solutions" if A's up B's is "not valid" in your opinion.
Remove A's over B's from Two-Pair article 2.
Add some explanation that A's over B's is usually refer to a full house, not a two-pair Thank you.
His rv reason was "there are too many subtleties in the derivation of 7-card statistics to include them in a featured list without citations".
So actually the information about the 7-card probabilities is likely best poker hands images important and more useful than the 5-card probabilities.
There's a huge difference between the two: One pair is less frenquent than No pair in 5-card poker but more frenquent in 7-card poker.
Ok, since asked for citations, I'm restoring my edit, and explicitly adding the to our article.
So far this article only have 5 inline citations, and 3 of them is added by me.
But it seems is still keeping asking me for citations.
Lots of things in this article are without citations but he doesn't ask.
Yes, we need citations, but, citation is neededif the content is not disputed, it's OK not to have a citation for it, and, if the citation is really needed, would you please use something like {{}} instead of reverting the whole change?
You're right that this is all about.
The majority of the article does not need citations because, as you say, it is not challengeable; the structure of various hands and their relative order is absolutely common knowledge.
The 5-card probabilities are derived from first principles within the article, self-verifying themselves.
Citations are needed for things which are neither common knowledge nor quickly-derivable facts and hence are challengeable; things like the nicknames of more unusual hands such as you refer to in your previous edit.
The fact that the derivation of the 7-card probabilities warrants its own entire article demonstrates that these are not common knowledge nor immediately derivable, and since a reference there is not sufficient.
A reference to an external reliable source such as you provide is sufficient, and that's all it needs.
I absolutely agree with you that it is valuable and useful to include these figures in the article where they can be verified.
Wikipedia's featured content is held to the highest standard of verifiability.
Material which would warrant a {{}} tag is simply not appropriate to have in the article at all.
The basis for using that tag rather than gutting every article that is lacking in references, andis the same basis for being proactive in keeping such tags, and the content that would warrant them, out of featured content: there is no deadline for making 'normal' articles 'perfect' in terms of verifiability, and there is no deadline in making featured articles 'perfect' in terms of content completeness.
But a featured article containing unverifiable content is simply not of featured quality.
I hope this explains why I've made the reversions that I have; I'm absolutely not opposing your changes, indeed they've added valuable content on each occasion, and I've been careful to only undo the specific additions that are problematic rather than blanket-reverting with consequent collateral damage.
It's good work; keep it up!
Which articles are you being directed from?
Is this, "nine million cards", meant to mean something slang, jargon?.
Since I'm not an English native speaker, I'd like to know why the change was reverted.
It's best to think of the term, "Two Pair" as the name of the rank itself, which is defined as two pairs.
Much like "Full House" is defined as one pair and one three-of-a-kind.
I can see why some people would be happier referring to it as plural, but it is simply a rank of a hand.
While I'm in England, four of the first five websites returned Excluding Wikipedia or images when Googling "Poker hand ranks" refer to it as "Two Pair.
I understand it's to be taken as "a two-pair hand", thus the lack of S.
Glad I could help : 15:17, 1 August 2013 UTC Sorry, but what does "tabby" mean in all those hands?
I can not find the word "tabby" anywhere in the article.
In most or all other sections they are denoted by k over n.
Both are acceptable, but, really, one ought to be chosen and used consistently.
In English, I believe, that usually would be n over k as is suggested by check this out Wikipedia article "Combination" which uses n over k throughout.
As to the use of k over nthis article says: ".
This article contains sound information and good graphics, but there seem to be a few referencing and text quality issues.
This is by far the biggest issue in the article.
And again, there's no citation.
For example "In five-card poker, there are 624 possible hands including four of a kind, the probability of being dealt one is.
The probability of being dealt one is.
Despite these points, I found it interesting to read.
Of course they don't, but the use of 4 rather than some other rank as the example invites that particular misunderstanding.
How about showing four 6s and an ace above the caption that says "four of a kind"?
Admittedly the viewer is taken to the Three of a Kind subheading which has a note redirecting to the disambiguation page, but surely the primary page viewed should be the disambiguation page.
I note that Four of a Kind does just that, so there is an inconsistency here.
If no response in a few days, I'll change it.
I noticed that the images for all the hands use all of the aces and face cards with no duplicates.
On top of that, no other card is duplicated, either!
Statistically speaking, this is unlikely to have been a random thing, and was much more likely to have been deliberate.
I have been rather heavy-handed with my edits, as I feel the article was in disarray, but I have tried to keep the content that I believe is relevant to the topic list of poker hands.
If I have removed anything which you believe should have been kept, feel free to leave a comment or fix it yourself make sure it is cited, as the rest of the article currently is.
While certain details are relevant to a discussion about poker hands, specific details about how the game is played are not relevant.
Lists may have sub-sections like standard and non-standard handsbut never seem to have totally unrelated sections.
For example, the details about "inside straights" in or.
I removed anything which cannot be generally applied to the vast majority of poker games.
Perhaps my boldest removal was the probabilities.
The relative ranking of hand categories depends on the number of hands in that category i.
However, the probabilities themselves aren't generally useful when playing the game, so they were adding nothing to the article.
The probabilities are still discussed in the article onso it's not like content has been removed from Wikipedia.
I think examples are very useful, but the images were just taking up too much space.
If you think I failed, please fix!
I am no grammar guru.

CODE5637
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
60 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

... hand stock photos. Affordable and search from millions of royalty free images, photos and vectors.. Poker hand ranking combinations. #45492033 - Poker ...


Enjoy!
World's Best Images Of Poker Hands Stock Pictures, Photos, and Images - Getty Images
Valid for casinos
POKER HAND RANKINGS - Know your hand rankings learn texas holdem hands
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
best poker hands images

G66YY644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
30 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

The top 10 best hands in No-Limit Hold'em. A look at the best starting poker hands including pocket aces to ace-jack suited. Our poker show how to play the best ...


Enjoy!
Web Filter Violation
Valid for casinos
World's Best Poker Stock Pictures, Photos, and Images - Getty Images
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
Top 5 Poker Moments

A7684562
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
50 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Poker Hand Rankings. (888) poker. Royal Flush. Straight Flush. Four of a Kind. Full House. A A73. A*J*: *5*7. Flush. Straight. Three of a kind. Two Pair. One Pair.


Enjoy!
POKER HAND RANKINGS - Know your hand rankings learn texas holdem hands
Valid for casinos
World's Best Poker Stock Pictures, Photos, and Images - Getty Images
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
best poker hands images

B6655644
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
50 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

We present to you a selection of 36 interesting and top Poker Hand Images collection. On our site with the button "search" you will find other great free clip arts.


Enjoy!
Top 10 Best Hands for No-Limit Texas Hold'em | How to Play Aces, Kings, Queens, Jacks | Top Poker Hands | Odds Shark
Valid for casinos
Poker Hand Ranges [The Comprehensive Beginner Guide]
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
Top 5 Poker Moments in History

CODE5637
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
60 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Find high-quality Poker Hand stock illustrations from Getty Images. Download premium images you can't get anywhere else.


Enjoy!
World's Best Images Of Poker Hands Stock Pictures, Photos, and Images - Getty Images
Valid for casinos
POKER HAND RANKINGS - Know your hand rankings learn texas holdem hands
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
best poker hands images

A67444455
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
50 xB
Max cash out:
$ 500

Download the perfect poker pictures. Find over 60 of the best free poker images.. person holding black ace and king spades playing cards on poker table.


Enjoy!
World's Best Poker Stock Pictures, Photos, and Images - Getty Images
Valid for casinos
Building a Poker Bot: Card Recognition | Mikhail Shilkov
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
Top 4 Daniel Negreanu Luckiest Poker Hands!

T7766547
Bonus:
Free Spins
Players:
All
WR:
50 xB
Max cash out:
$ 200

Analyze poker hands like this and start crushing.. the relevant info in each Flopzilla image for those of you unfamiliar with the program.. Unlike the 5-minute method–which helps you find the best play in a vacuum–the.


Enjoy!
Building a Poker Bot: Card Recognition | Mikhail Shilkov
Valid for casinos
Trend Micro InterScan Web Security Event
Visits
Dislikes
Comments
List of poker hands received a by Wikipedia editors, which is now.
It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
This is the for discussing improvements to the article.
This is for general discussion of the article's subject.
Please view the link under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed.
Once the objections have been addressed you may the article for featured list status.
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as on April 4, 2014.
If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the and see a list of open tasks.
This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's.
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's.
Remove template when the article is no longer a please click for source />Try and expand any stubs to start class.
This article has been rated as List-Class on the project's.
This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's.
Because of lots of little bits like this, the page is "semiprotected".
This means that you can't edit it from an anonymous IP address, and you can't edit it from an account less than four days old.
Note that posting from a named account actually gives you more privacy than posting from an IP address.
That's when you're one card short of a flush.
I wouldn't say that "forgotten" is the right word exactly.
It's pretty standard notation if anyone goes from here and reads anything else in a magazine or book, it will be "T", not "10"and it makes it so that all ranks use one character.
It might be helpful to clarify the rules about straights involving Aces.
You can have Ace high straights AKQJT and some games allow Ace low straights 5432A but you are never allowed to "turn the corner" 32AKQ.
live online best some use "turn-the-corner" straights in home games, but this is pretty uncommon.
QKA23 is considered three high straight in this case.
I think the latter is clearer when editing.
PS -sorry for multiple edits, I'm new!
Ie: does a spades royal flush beat a hearts royal flush?
I guess i'm asking about suit seniority.
Suit only matters for flushes.
Personally I'd like to see a link to some type of source to where the person got "Imperial Flush" from--for one, I've never heard of anything like this, and, not a screen down the article and it says that suits do not matter whatsoever.
For example, calling a bet for all one's chips, with 7-2 against opponents A-A and having the turn and river come up 7 and 2 making two pair and "cracking" beating the opponent's A-A 22:14, 2 March 2007 UTC I have never heard any respectable player claim that this should be an exception to 3-of-Kind beating Two Pair.
The only reference that I have found is this.
Like those who responded to the original poster, I could give various reasons why this exception is ridiculous.
Aside from how ridiculous the exception would be, I have yet to find any evidence that "most educated poker scholars" believe this.
Please name some "educated poker scholars" and reference where they have stated their belief in this idea before reposting this section.
For example, when comparing identical full houses, there are no "kickers".
I'm not sure if there is valid logic behind this sentence.
I always thought no two players can have identical Full Houses in one hand, as a full house consists of a 3-of-a-kind and a pair, and no two players can have 3-of-a-kind of the same card value in one hand.
So no two compared full houses houses will ever be found to be identical.
Example of identical full houses: 888-JJ vs 888-JJ.
Clearly this could never occur as it would require six cards of value 8 in the deck.
My suggestion is to change this to: For example, when comparing identical straights, there are no "kickers".
Not very common but it is possible.
I do like your suggested example better as it is more likely to happen, tho.
In Texas Hold'em identical full houses can occur too, when the board pairs up I forgot about that when starting this conversationbut the point remains that the example used in the text can be substituted for one that is more common.
The example as it is now can never occur in 5 card draw games, but my suggested example can and still brings the point across.
If the flop is dealt as follows Ah 2h 4d 4s 4h player 1 gets dealt Ad and 5c player 2 gets dealt Ac and 7d Then they both have a full house of 2 Aces and 3 4s.
Both are possible, though probably not too common.
The rest of the game is identical to Texas Hold'em.
In this variant, three pair beats two pair, but not a full house.
This is an exception to the stated "always five cards in a hand" rule.
There are probably other variants with similar rules.
That would just make sense to me.
I've been trying for a couple days to stress that a three pair hand is a legitimate poker hand, but my brother and parents keep saying it isn't.
This just in: Meh is a real word now, too!
What exactly does a best poker hands images pair' go between; two pair and three-of-a-kind, three-of-a-kind and straight, straight and flush, or flush and full house?
Your comment above was really ambiguous.
It does bring up the point, though, that there is not sufficient coverage of deal irregularities in general here, so I'll make a note of that on the project page.
However, misdeals should be dealt with appropriately.
If a single card is dealt face up accidentally, the person to whom it was dealt should be given the option as to whether they wish to be dealt a new card or they wish to keep the card.
If the card is replaced, the exposed card should remain face-up on the table giving so all players can see it, but it remains out of play.
Any further inadvertent face-up deals result in a re-deal of the hand.
Often in a home game, the deal also passes.
If the bottom card of the deck is inadvertently shown to a player, the player may choose to keep this information to himself or disclose it to the table and have the deck cut.
However, the cut cannot be asked for after any cards are dealt.
The risk of bottom-card exposure can be easily mitigated with the use of an opaque plastic 'cut card' that remains as a cover on the bottom card.
The first and most important rule about exposed cards in all poker games in all casinos is of course that the player can never be given the choice of whether to keep or replace the card--this gives an unfair advantage to that player.
The card must always be kept or always be replaced, according to rules which vary with the type of game being played.
The determination of whether or not a card has been "exposed" must be made by a neutral dealer or floorperson; if a card "catches some air" or is touched by another player, and the player is concered that others may have seen it, he may request that the dealer treat it as exposed, and the dealer may do so only if the dealer is certain that the player himself could not possibly have seen it.
In draw games, an exposed card on the initial deal must be kept, while an exposed card on the draw cannot be kept.
In lowball draw, a card exposed on the initial deal must be kept if if is one that can possibly be part of a perfect hand that is, a wheel card in ace-to-five or a 7,5,4,3,2 in deuce-to-sevenbut other cards must be replaced.
When a card is exposed and must be replaced, the deal continues with the next player in order getting the next card just as he would have ohterwise, until all cards are dealt; then the exposed card is replaced with the top card of the stub.
In stud games, if one of the initial downcards is accidentally dealt up, the exposed card is simply treated as that player's initial upcard and what normally would have been the upcard is dealt down.
If this correction cannot be made for example, if two cards are exposed the player's hand is declared dead and his ante refunded.
If one of the players' final downcards is dealt up, it must be kept, but special rules apply: if there are three or more active players, other players recieve their final downcards as normal, and the player with the exposed card has the option of being treated as "all-in".
He must choose before betting begins on that round; if he chooses to be treated as all in, all further betting goes into a side pot for which he is not eligible.
If he chooses not to, he is fully subject to all further bets and raises, and fully eligible to win or lose all such action.
If there are only two players, and the first player's final card is dealt face up, the remaining player's final card will be dealt up as well and betting proceed normally.
If the first player's card is dealt down and the second player's up, he must choose to continue playing or declare himself all-in as before.
In community card games, a card exposed on the initial deal cannot be kept.
The deal is continued as normal with the next player until all players recieve their initial cards.
The exposed card in then replaced with the next card in the stub which would have been the first burn cardand the exposed card is placed on top of the stub face-up, and will be used as the first burn card so the community cards are not affected.
If two or more cards are exposed, or if the first card exposed is one of the first two card dealt, the deal is voided.
There are other rules for other irregularities, but those are the basics.
A flush beats a straight, not the other way around.
I don't have time to fix this page right now, but if someone else wants to, go right ahead.
Every other website on this subject says a full house beats a flush, and that's what I've always played.
The highest card matters, not if you have straight of three in the flush.
Afterwards, I noticed that has nearly the same information.
Perhaps the two articles ought to be merged.
I will transfer all info to the other article Hand poker and redirect.
Surely both should be included, as both are valid rules even though bugs may be more common?
Also have you removed the section on poker variants, the section on probability, and the introduction to the Low-poker ranking section for a reason?
Iahve no idea what else you are refering to since I obviously did not remove that in simply reverting your change.
If you think more should be added from the old article, then do so.
As for wild cards, this article is about standard hands.
There is an article about non-standard hands.
Your added section included factaully incorrect information.
For example, KKKKJoker is four kings with an ace, not five kings.
Again, on-standard rules have their place, but this article should deal with standard rankings, meaning five aces is the highest hand when a bug is used, and a royal flush is highest with a standard 52 card deck.
I think my confusion arose because I didn't realise this article was strictly about standard play.
In that case I can see why you did not include the section on variations.
Also my edit was based on an article titled "Hand poker ", not "Rank of hand poker ", I thought "Hand poker " would encompass all information from both articles.
The section on wild cards which was not my work, to make things clear contained correct, but non-standard information as far as I can see.
My edit involved quite a few additions, but with reconsideration, I think how calculator app poker best is now is probably better given the title.
There was no need to add the table of probabilities that I added, I had removed that in the merge after realising that it, and the table for 7-card poker was already included on a separate page.
I have replaced the section on probabilities only, as that seems standard enough.
Therefore, I think that should be moved to the article.
Not many places as far as I know play with wild cards, and is definitely not played in most official games.
In fact, there's a whole bunch of stuff in this article about non-standard hands.
All of this stuff should be transferred to the article.
This article should stick to the standard poker hands only to avoid duplication wit the non-standard poker hand article.
For a long time, the standard game in California was five-card draw with a joker.
Games like Pai Gow Poker also include the hand.
It should be included in any standard ranking of poker hands.
Five of best poker hands images kind is standard in casino draw poker games, even if those seldom exist.
It is also standard in home poker draw games.
It's description could be disclaimered somewhat like "In game where a is used, five of a kind.
However, some rules of wild-card games stipulate that 5OAK is not a viable hand, because the hand could not otherwise exist.
Put it another way, a 5OAK requires some phantom suit in order to be created, so some rules do not recognize it.
Those that do allow it must make a special declaration in the rules.
Because there is not a standard rule over its inclusion, and it's not possible in a standard game of poker, I believe it must be relegated to a nonstandard hand.
consider, best casino in new england message shouldn't get into non-standard rules, or ignore standard practices decades old.
Five a kind is the best hand, in most cases it is not possible because a bug isn't used, but when it is used it is the best hand.
This is certainly followed in casinos as a standard rule.
Anyone who has heard of wildcards in poker has heard of 5-of-a-kind.
Although I don't agree that it is a 'standard' hand, I don't see why it can't be included in the list so long as it is clearly stated that a wildcard is needed in the deck for it to be possible.
It is not just some weird hand that has been made up by a couple of drunken blokes playing poker in their kitchen as it would seem is the case with best slots at of the non-standard hands listed.
I vote that it should be included in the list.
I altered the title to "Use of wild cards and 'five of a kind'" as a substantial part of the continue reading is about five of a kinds.
Also it will stop people from adding it again to the top of the main list.
Instead there should be a mention in the intro that Wild Cards can change the hand rankings listed, and the mention of FoaK in the Straight Flush sections should be removed.
I'm going to do that, but if anyone objects, then simply change it back.
The fact that it isn't possible in games without a joker doesn't make it less "standard" although as the article does, it should note the circumstances in games with a bug when five of a kind is a standard possibility.
Surely 'Royal Flush' is a name for the highest ranking straight-flush?
It is included in theso why should it be regarded as a a completely new hand, and hands like 'Steel Wheel' straight-flush A-5 and 'Four Pips' four aces not be?
Of course it is the highest possible hand in games without wildcards, but I still don't think that is reason enough to regard it as any different than a straight-flush.
In Finland where I liveby the way, the straight flush is nearly always referred to as the best hand and the royal flush as the highest straight flush.
The only reason why I could see doing this is to ensure that it's known that the Ace is high.
But why stop there?
Why not indicate a "Royal Straight" hand or a "Royal Pair" hand?
The Ace is already indicated as being the high card in the rule books; there's no need to show a Royal Flush.
The issue was that the Royal Flush was down on this page as a hand and I thought it shouldn't be, not that it isn't included as a unique hand.
The issue was resolved some time ago, and hence Royal Flush is no longer included as a unique hand.
I also added in the odds of being dealt each hand and expanded the sections on flushes and straights.
But this page says that Five-of-a-kind beats a Royal Flush, which would mean that there's no difference between a Royal Flush and a Straight Flush.
Eh, I like my rules better.
In Deuces Wild, a Royal Flush beats a Five-of-a-Kind.
You can see proof of this in the article.
I did the math, and there are 624 ways to get a Five-of-a-kind in Deuces Wild, and only 484 ways to get a Royal Flush 4 Natural Royals, and 480 Wild Royals.
It's not a hand in its own right.
In real poker, five-of-a-kind wins--a royal is just an ace-high straight flush.
For instance, all the hands egas well as lowball systems, have redirects to the appropriate headings here, so any heading changes should be corrected in the redirects.
The term "wheel" is used in normal poker as well, but you wouldn't really know it from a quick glance of this article.
Even though the text of that section correctly said where it lay in the ranking, its improper location was misleading and generated a table of contents with the hands listed in ranked order correctly except for the full house.
I also added "and below full house" to the flush section.
I'm sure there are many players of those games who wouldn't know otherwise.
I can find a few references to it in the game of "Three card brag".
Does anyone have an opinion on whether it should be included on this poker page?
I'd say take it out, but I don't mind it staying either.
Since the ace is low, I assume not, best poker hands images this would be good to clarify in the article.
Could someone do that?
But no more than five cards play--so if you're playing Texas hold'em, the board is 88AK5, two players with J8 and 83 in their hands tie, because they are both playing the five-card hand 888AK.
I don't think the suits need to be specifically mentioned, as the name of the suits isn't integral to understanding any aspect of poker hand ranking.
I also think it is almost a given that people reading this article will be familiar with a standard pack of cards and even if they aren't, there is a link to the article in the general rules section.
Although, if anyone thinks click to see more suit names need to be mentioned, I doubt it will have a negative effect if they do.
HAVE TO be mentionned at the very begining of the article, period 13:11, 20 June 2007 UTC That might be true for a paper this web page, but we've got hypertext here, and links are better, because they don't clutter the article with stuff that doesn't really need to be there while they still give the reader a way to find background material he might not be familiar with.
I found the picture quite handy and consistent with the text.
What is the reason the picture is now gone?
I would like to see it back, just my 2c.
It has been restored.
Your edit message was "why make it more complicated?
You could have just fixed it you know.
I don't really see why changing it is necessary - 52!
} is likely to just confuse the issue further.
But if you think it's a good idea, feel free to change it.
It's clearly not just a list article, it's a full explanation and description of a single subject.
It should clearly just be "Poker hands".
Indeed it's not " just a list", but that's not the definition of a " List of.
Regardless, it is sufficiently "list-like" to have been made a featured list, so its status as a list doesn't seem to be in question.
Something needs to be fixed.
I'd add a "contradict" tag, but the article is semi-protected, so I can't.
My inclination is to patch the straight flush definition, but I want to check out a reference or two first and wait for other comments.
Thanks for pointing it out.
But that layout of words and symbols could equally well mean "hand 1 defeats hands 2 and 3, and ties with hand 4".
More separation is needed between hands 2 and 3, or separate captions for each pair of hands, to make clear what is meant.
Suits do have value, they are just all equal.
Otherwise a flush or straight flush would be worthless or just a straight in the later.
The point is that, in poker, a royal flush in spades does not defeat a royal flush in clubs; if two hands are identical apart from their suits, then they are considered equal.
I'm glad to hear, however, that you found the article helpful - that is ultimately why it's there!
Once trump is decided, the other suits are all weaker.
A bit off topic, I know, but I wanted to correct it.
On the matter of suit values, though, I have heard the suits are ranked as diamonds, clubs, hearts and spades, in that order.
This would only apply for otherwise identical hands.
Is that true, or just a house rule?
When it comes to the forced bet in stud games the suits lowest to highest are: clubs, diamonds, hearts, spades.
The latter sounds more encyclopedic to me, and easier to understand.
If you think it reads better the other way, go ahead and change it.
Would someone with proper permissions be so kind?
How can two players have the same quad in community-card games i.
There is only one deck of cards.
This example should be removed.
Makes lots of sense - forgot you can indeed share the same quad if its all on the table versus the example with the wildcards 12:14, 26 February 2011 UTC Board is AAAxx, hands are Ax and Ax.
So there are five Aces then.
For instance, almost everywhere, including this article, people agree that the odds are 1 in 4,165 of getting four of a kind.
Those odds are written as if there is only one person that is getting cards from the deck.
In a poker game of 6 people, wouldn't the odds be exponentially smaller as there are other people that could be getting the cards that you're hoping for?
The 4th guy at the table would be dealt from the 37 remaining cards in the deck, and of those 15 that are gone, a large amount of the cards could already be gone, or they could all still be in the deck, therefore hugely increasing or decreasing his odds.
I'm not quite sure how to go about the math that would describe this, but I hope someone understands what I mean.
You get five cards out of 52.
It doesn't matter whether the remaining 47 cards are in the stub of the deck, in other players' hands, or burning up in the fireplace.
As long as the deal is fair, and you haven't seen any of the other cards, the odds don't change.
This doesn't depend on which cards may go where, so long as you haven't seen them.
As far as you're concerned, there's no difference between a card in the stub of the deck, among the burn cards, or in your opponent's hand--if you can't see it, you can't get any information from it, so your probability doesn't change.
It is meaningless to ask about the "real probability" of an event--that's always 100%--what happens happens; the cards are laid out the way they are.
One can only ask what the probability is from any particular bettor's point of view at a given time, and that's not about how the cards are laid out, it's about what he knows about how the cards are laid out.
It's mentioned udser "Straight Flush".
When I learned poker, I was told that a Royal Flush in Hearts is known as a Royal Straight Flush which beats the other Royal Flushes, which would be the only time a suit actually counts for more.
Has no one else heard this?
The terminology doesn't make sense though since all of them are Straight.
I have heard it from other people too; but with different suits: diamond and spades.
That's why I read this article, to find out which suit it is supposed to be.
And isn't that by the way the 'Dead Mans Hand'?
In standard poker hand evaluation, no suit outranks any other.
A Royal Flush in hearts ties one in spades, and if four unlucky players hold the four Royals, each gets a quarter of the pot.
That doesn't seem right to me.
Queen is higher than ten, so ace-queen defeats ace-ten.
Can someone fix it?
That seems correct to me.
Now I see that there is a horizontal rule separating the two pairs of hand.
It is nine for each suit, including the Royal Flush itself, making it 36 total.
Or am I mistaking something here?
Sorry to bother you, heh.
Things like lowball and Badugi are discussed elsewhere, so please leave "aces high" ranking alone.
No need to complicate this text with details that aren't relevant to the subject at hand.
Aces can play low, but only as part of low straits.
This is what the article says.
Most poker players would not refer to a hand such as 2-3-4-5-6 of hearts as either a straight or a flush but instead would refer to it as its highest ranking hand, the straight-flush.
However, most poker sites use the shorter definition for straights and flushes which do not exclude straight-flushes.
This means that the poker hands overlap in this area.
This problem also occurs in the straight section.
So if we go with the current definitions of straight and flushes where a straight-flush is included in both then these sentences must be changed so that the probability in the end is getting a flush straight that is not also a straight flush.
I will make those changes.
The article says: Under typical rules there are 7463 distinct ranks.
I did the calculation and received the total of 7462 ranks.
I guess, the author of "7463" just counted the royal flush twice.
I must have had a duplicate in my spread sheet.
Either someone's been playing with it, or we've been wrong for a long time.
The old image is restored and the improving editor has been notified.
Thanks for spotting it, Spireguy.
Likewise, it is possible to find both "A full of B" and "A over B" describing a full house.
Maybe somebody somewhere says "Kings up nines", but it isn't widespread usage.
I know this means "over" is technically ambiguous, but in practice either the players have a local meaning, or the context is clear, eg player one says "I have two pair" and player two says "I have queens over fives.
People say "kings up" all the time, but close to no one at all says "kings up nines".
The phrase doesn't even make sense.
Google any example like compared to.
Try "queens up sixes".
People don't say it that way.
The search shows that people do use "up" that way, and listing both may stop the IP editor.
It shows no one says "kings up nines".
So on google searches, "over" shows up as often as "up" for two pair.
I found "up" used "in the wild" for two pair and now that this has come up, I think both "up" and "over" should be listed for two pair.
It's a separate issue.
The IP click here asserting "kings up nines" is a way to refer to two pair.
The links above show that clear as day.
I can't imagine why you think we should include nonsense in the article, but the Wikipedia is a place for things made up one day.
If you think there are some issues with "over", then go ahead and start a discussion about that or remove it from the article.
That is off the point.
When Ngo's AJ vs Akenhead's AK, you can clearly hear the commentator said "Ngo with Aces up Jacks".
The commentator said "Ngo with Aces up, checks".
As far as full houses go, it's usually "Kings full", or the like, and the pair is mentioned only when it's needed to resolve the hand.
Which happens annoying often in Omaha.
Let's see some ways to refer to a full house: A's full of B's A's over B's A's full of B's of course In "Two Pair" article: A's over B's A's and B's A's up "up" what?
Since A's over B's is already used to refer to a full house, there's an ambiguity if A's over B's is used to refer to a two-pair too.
So, I offer two "solutions" if A's up B's is "not valid" in your opinion.
Remove A's over B's from Two-Pair article 2.
Add some explanation that A's over B's is usually refer to a full house, not a two-pair Thank you.
His rv reason was "there are too many subtleties in the derivation of 7-card statistics to include them in a featured list without citations".
So actually the information about the 7-card probabilities is likely more important and more useful than the 5-card probabilities.
There's a huge difference between the two: One pair is less frenquent than No pair in 5-card poker but more frenquent in 7-card poker.
Ok, since asked for citations, I'm restoring my edit, and explicitly adding best poker hands images to our article.
So far this article only have 5 inline citations, and 3 of them is added by me.
But it seems is still keeping asking me for citations.
Lots of things in this article are without citations but he doesn't ask.
Yes, we need citations, but, citation is neededif the content is not disputed, it's OK not to have a citation for it, and, if the citation is really needed, would you please use something like {{}} instead check this out reverting the whole change?
You're right that this is all about.
The majority of the article does not need citations because, as you say, it is not challengeable; the structure of various hands and their relative order is absolutely common knowledge.
The 5-card probabilities are derived from first principles within the article, self-verifying themselves.
Citations are needed for things which are neither common knowledge nor quickly-derivable facts and hence are challengeable; things like the nicknames of more unusual hands such as you refer to in your previous edit.
The fact that the derivation of the 7-card probabilities warrants its own entire article demonstrates that these are not common knowledge nor immediately derivable, and since a reference there is not sufficient.
A reference to an external reliable source such as you provide is sufficient, and that's all it needs.
I absolutely agree with you that it is valuable and useful to include these figures in the article where they can be verified.
Wikipedia's featured content is held to the highest standard of verifiability.
Material which would warrant a {{}} tag is simply not appropriate to have in the article at all.
The basis for using that tag rather than gutting every article that is lacking in references, andis the same basis for being proactive in keeping such tags, and the content that would warrant them, out of featured content: there is no deadline for https://ipodxs.com/best/best-offline-poker-games-pc.html 'normal' articles 'perfect' in terms of verifiability, and there is no deadline in making featured articles 'perfect' in terms of content completeness.
But a featured article containing unverifiable content is simply not of featured quality.
I hope this explains why I've made the reversions that I have; I'm absolutely not opposing your changes, indeed they've added valuable content on each occasion, and I've been careful to only undo the specific additions that are problematic rather than blanket-reverting with consequent collateral damage.
It's good work; keep it up!
Which articles are you being directed from?
Is this, "nine million cards", meant to mean something slang, jargon?.
Since I'm not an English native speaker, I'd like to know why the change was reverted.
It's best to think of the term, "Two Pair" as the name of the rank itself, which is defined as two pairs.
Much like "Full House" is defined as one pair and one three-of-a-kind.
I can see why some people would be happier referring to it as plural, but it is simply a rank of a hand.
While I'm in England, four of the first five websites returned Excluding Wikipedia or images when Googling "Poker hand ranks" refer to it as "Two Pair.
I understand it's to be taken as "a two-pair hand", thus the lack of S.
Glad I could help : 15:17, 1 August 2013 UTC Sorry, but what does "tabby" mean in all those hands?
I can not find the word "tabby" anywhere in the article.
In most or all other sections they are denoted by k over n.
Both are acceptable, but, really, one ought to be chosen and used consistently.
In English, I believe, that usually would be n over k as is suggested by the Wikipedia article "Combination" which click n over k throughout.
As to the use of k over nthis article says: ".
This article contains sound information and good graphics, but there seem to be a few referencing and text quality issues.
This is by far the biggest issue in the article.
And again, there's no citation.
For example "In five-card poker, there are 624 possible hands including four of a kind, the probability of being dealt one is.
The probability of being dealt one is.
Despite these points, I found it interesting to read.
Of course they don't, but the use of 4 rather than some other rank as the example invites that particular misunderstanding.
How about showing four 6s and an ace above the caption that says "four of a kind"?
Admittedly the viewer is taken to the Three of a Kind subheading which has a note redirecting to the disambiguation page, but surely the primary best poker hands images viewed should be the disambiguation page.
I note that Four of a Kind does just that, so there is an inconsistency here.
If no response in a few days, I'll change it.
I noticed that the images for all the hands use all of the aces and face cards with no duplicates.
On top of that, no other card is duplicated, either!
Statistically speaking, this is unlikely to have been a random thing, and was much more likely to have been deliberate.
I have been rather heavy-handed with my edits, as I feel the article was in disarray, but I have tried to keep the content that I believe is relevant to the topic list of poker hands.
If I have removed anything which you believe should have been kept, feel free to leave a comment or fix it yourself make sure it is cited, as the rest of the article currently is.
While certain details are relevant to a discussion about poker hands, specific details about how the game is played are best free online nj relevant.
Lists may have sub-sections like standard and non-standard handsbut never seem to have totally unrelated sections.
For example, the details about "inside straights" in or.
I removed anything which cannot be generally applied to the vast majority of poker games.
Perhaps my boldest removal was the probabilities.
The relative ranking of hand categories depends on the number of hands in that category i.
However, the probabilities themselves aren't generally useful when playing the game, so they were adding nothing to the article.
The probabilities are still discussed in the article onso it's not like content has been removed from Wikipedia.
I think examples are very useful, but the images were just taking up too much space.
If you think I failed, please fix!
I am no grammar guru.