This is the official site of the Tuesday Night Poker club of NYC.  Here we will store news, commentary, photos, and the general history of our madcap escapades each and every Tuesday night. This site will be a virtual scrapbook and permanent online documentary of our adventures in gambling arguing and drunkeness.

Op/Ed

Here we will discuss "issues at large" and offer a forum for those who wish to air their opinions, grievances, and/or insane  babblings. 

The Money Does Indeed Stay.

The pot should be split between the two players going "Both Ways:"   3 votes

The "Both Ways" players cancel each other out, and the second best hands win:   0 votes

Nobody wins and the pot stays for the next hand:    6 votes--WINNER.

Koneotorial: Slimey Bastard! w/rebuttal by Hank

A very special editorial: What has happened to our game? by, M. Chowhound Hauser 7/27/2001

Hank's Rebuttal to the April 17, 2001 Lead Story.

Although TNP commentary was, as usual, entertaining, it was not completely accurate. I did not actually get angry at Lymie about the pizza. It was the yelling at me for talking to the neighbor, for sitting on his chair, for getting me too drunk, etc. the pizza was just the cheese on the cake. As I remember it, Koneo and Chowhound actually were more offended (this would make sense given the importance of food for Chowhound and Koneo). In fact, the pizza place that he ordered from is pretty good and has good salads. they just screwed up that night by being so late and forgetting two salads. perhaps, if we didn't have so much booze in us, on empty stomachs, the food would have been ok.

March 1, 2001 Which is it?  Y-E-R-P -or- Y-U-R-P?

• (from Edict) In my opinion, the official spelling should be YURP. YERP is the way people from the Midwest pronounce and spell a certain continent across the pond. I don't feel a need to even comment on the spelling Eurp.
  • (from Hank) The correct spelling is YERP to reflect the fact that it does sound like a certain continent across the pond. YURP could be mispronounced by the uninitiated with a long u.

• (from Chowhound)  The correct spelling is YERP. Don't make me break my foot off in your ass.
  • (from Dano) Like the term Burp, YURP has the same sound. To me it's a no brainer.  YURP has a U always did and always will.
  • (from Koneo) I don't know, but if Chowhound says it's YERP then YURP has got to be the right spelling.
  • (from Redcard) D: None of the above. The correct spelling is: E-U-R-P!

• (from Feltman) Perhaps we should adopt a system like that of many of the romance languages: different spellings and pronunciations of certain words depending on an arbitrary status. ie masculine/feminine.  In our case, those of us with education, intelligence and a modicum of respectability, can spell it Y-U-R-P.  Those of  us with who have last names that rhyme with the word "schnauzer" can spell it Y-E-R-P.  How you spell it depends on who you are and/or who you are addressing.

• (from Hank) YURP is like slurp. completely disgusting and not appropriate
  • (from Edict)  Since when is the goal of Tuesday Night Poker to be GENTEEL and APPROPRIATE???  You have made my point exactly, Hank! YURP perfectly captures the slurpy inappropriateness that is TNP's essence.

Respond/rebut here!

January 23, 2001:  Should the Chip-Off-Table fine be equal to the value that falls to the floor or just a quarter?  

• (from Chowhound) This is a stupid rule, period!

  • (from Hank) This makes the game more interesting.
    • (from Feltman) I agree.  But why does the penalty have to increase with the chip?  The offense is the same.  The penalty should be a quarter---period. 
    • (from Redcard) Causing a chip to leave the playing surface (even unintentionally) is rude in so much as it delays the game and inconveniences the other players. In the interests of fairness, however, the value of the chip(s) has no bearing on the level of the rude behavior. Therefore, I propose that the penalty for this offense be based on the number of expatriated chips, and not on their relational values

January 15, 2001:  Should aces be permitted as wild-cards in "low-in-hole" games?

• (from Koneo): In ANY game of poker you ALWAYS PLAY YOUR BEST FIVE CARDS. If you allow this mythical rule about having to have a 3rd Ace in the hole to stand then it's not a poker game. And I thought I was playing poker.
  
  One or some of you, somewhere along the way, decided, on your own accord, to ignore this most basic premise on which the game of poker is played and surreptitiously incorporate this illegitimate rule into Iron Cross. I would like the person(s) who invented this rule and or any of the players from last night who were defending it (Chris ,Redcard, Feltman) to come forward and explain to me why I lost that hand.
  
  P.S."Because we've always played it that way" is not an answer I'd be happy with. I've never nor would I ever agree to play a rule so skewed from the basic rules of poker. If others have been willing to part with chips based on this bastardized ghost rule which came from nowhere and which nobody will step forward to defend then that's their problem.

  • (from Redcard): It is an arbitrary rule, I will agree with that, but the rule has been in effect for some time. As long as it is applied consistently,  arbitrary or ³House Rules² do not impugn the integrity of the game itself. You like employ an arbitrary rule regarding the building of a low hand without the use of a wild card, correct?  If you want to change the rule then spell it out, and let the majority decide.
    

     

    • (from Koneo): When and by what "majority" was this "arbitrary rule" ever imposed in the first place? We have no system for deciding what "House Rules" stand and which ones don't. If a player belches out some absurd amendment to the basic rules of poker  and one or two other knuckleheads agree to go along, is everyone else then bound to play his new bastardized version of the game.
      
      Anyway, my main  point, which you haven't yet addressed, is that ALL poker is played with your best five cards. Your discards are ALWAYS irrelevant that's why they call them discards, you throw them out , garbage, gone..They can and should never, if you want to call the game Poker, have to be considered in your hand. So I have to disagree with you, this rule does impugn the integrity of the game.
      
      A dealer IS allowed to imposed limited variations within a particular game, like the one I use of  not being able to use a wild card to build a low, as long as they are confined within the broad and basic principles of poker. Forcing a player to include a discard in playing his hand does not meet that criteria.
      

       

      • (from Redcard): low hole card wild:  (n phrase) A form of seven-card stud, found only in home games, in which the lowest card each player has in the hole (that is, face down) and all others of the same rank in that player's hand are wild. (Wiesenberg's  Official Dictionary of Poker)  Redcard also wished to include the following picture titled "official poker rules committee."

        

         

        • (from Feltman)  This is from "www.pokermike.com's" official home poker rules:    

          Wild Cards

        1. Wild cards, not dictated by the game being played, must be declared by the dealer prior to dealing.
        2. If "lowest" cards are wild:
           • Players must use the lowest card eligible at the time of the showdown as their wild card, and cannot disregard their lowest cards in favor of others.
           • If a player's lowest card happens to be wild for some other reason, then it still counts as that player's lowest card.
           • Aces cannot be wild, even in games where A-5 straights are possible, unless all of the cards that are eligible are Aces.
           If that wasn't clear, try this example: the game is 7-Stud, 3s and lowest hole cards are wild; one player's hand is (4,4,3),K,4,7,9 and another player's hand is (A,A,A),2,3,6,J -- note that the cards in () are the players' hole cards. The first player must use the 3 as the lowest wild card, even though it's already wild, and has four 4s. The second player has all Aces down, so they are wild, and has five Jacks -- the 3 up is also wild.

           PS: Challenges to any rule, understood or implied, fair or stupid, should be made before or after a hand is dealt...not after you miscalled your fucking hand.

            

           • (from Koneo):  I never said it wasn't within the realm of possibility that you could find another retard outside the game who subscribes to that ridiculous rule. F-Poker Mike he's probably one of your relatives Feltman.

             My point, again, is that IT NEVER WAS A RULE as far as I'm concerned. Why,because it doesn't make ANY SENSE and neither do your half-baked analogies.

             Everyone, except you and Poker Mike, agrees that it doesn't make any sense. Even Redcard ,who fleeced me on that hand, agrees that the rule is "arbitrary". Unofficial, arbitrary, ghost rules don't count, that's my argument in a nut-shell.

             A rule or a law has to be based on sound reasoning. There is none behind that one. You say one can't question a rule in the middle of a hand. I ask again; who invented the rule? and when did we officially adopt it? I say F** the 3rd Ace down rule, F** Poker Mike and F**U Feltman!!!