When Did the Rules Change?

[sub-zero]

A littel poker history/trivia here. I had a deck of cards when I was growing up that was my dads, so it was several years old already when I got it, and now it would probably be close to 35-40 years old. I wish I still had it, but I don't.

I know that the rules in that deck said that a Full House beat a Straight and a Flush beat a Full House. It used to be that way. I started playing poker again just a few months ago and realized that this was not true anymore. When did this change?? It confused the heck outta me at first, but now it isn't an issue anymore. I am just curious.

[winningedge]

As far as I know, a Full House does still beat a straight or a flush, though that doesnt mean that there arent some oddities in the way hands rank in poker though..
I've always thought it wierd that a Flush beats a Straight.. I mean, statistically , you're more likely to make a flush than you are a straight, yet the flush still wins..

and lets not forget about 3 of a kind, which with any two cards, is a 2 or a 3 out hand.. far less likely to hit trips than to catch a flush or a straight.. Anyone else ever thought this was strange or know why it is like this?

[r8rpwr]

That confused me as well recently, though I think I've finally got it straight.

I would think they would revisit things so that the rank of hands matched up properly with the odds. It's just numbers, after all. I'm a math geek and I could probably figure it out myself.

But hey, that would be too obvious.

[sub-zero]

As far as I know, a Full House does still beat a straight or a flush, though that doesnt mean that there arent some oddities in the way hands rank in poker though..

Ok, I said it backwards, didn't I? Yes, today, a flush beats a FH. But the deck I had said that a FH beat both a Straight and a Flush. Here is the order:

Pair
3 of a Kind
Straight
FH
Flush
4 of a Kind
Straight Flush
Royal Flush

Flush and FH used to be switched in this list.

[winningedge]

nope.. you've still got that switched around.. your FH should be higher than the flush.. it is trumped only by 4 of kind, straight flush, or royal flush as shown below

Straight
Flush
FH
4kind
Straight Flush
Royal Flush

[Rowena105]

Well I'm glad to see that someone finally put it the right way. I have been playing poker for 40 years and as far as I know that is the way it has always been. I don't ever remember it being any other way.

[PokerPrincess]

Sounds to me like you got a deck of cards manufactured by someone who really didn't know poker. I have never heard of a flush beating a full house in my life.

[sub-zero]

Well, perhaps I am on crack then. I wish that I still had that deck of cards that my dad had when I was young so that I could verify, but I don't. Thanks for the replies, though.

[C8H10N4O2]

I've never heard of it being the other way. As far as I've known, a flush has always lost to a full house. In fact, here is a page full of the odds of each hand etc... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_poker_hands

[frob23]

As far as I know, a Full House does still beat a straight or a flush, though that doesnt mean that there arent some oddities in the way hands rank in poker though..
I've always thought it wierd that a Flush beats a Straight.. I mean, statistically , you're more likely to make a flush than you are a straight, yet the flush still wins..

and lets not forget about 3 of a kind, which with any two cards, is a 2 or a 3 out hand.. far less likely to hit trips than to catch a flush or a straight.. Anyone else ever thought this was strange or know why it is like this?

There are fewer ways to make a flush than there are ways to make a straight. Once you already have a flush draw, you do have one more out than if you had an open-ended straight draw. But there are more combinations of hands that can have a straight draw than can have a flush draw.

I'm sick today or I would explain this in detail because it is a little bit weird. But the overall ranks of hands is determined by how rare they are... not how easy or hard they are to hit once you are part-way there.

With that said, I had a very old book on gambling... very old... from the 1940s... and that book has the same ranking of the poker hands as currently exists. It sounds like your deck was weird and not that the rules have changed.

[C8H10N4O2]

With that said, I had a very old book on gambling... very old... from the 1940s... and that book has the same ranking of the poker hands as currently exists.

I'm glad you added this, I was actually curious if the rankings had been the same from that long ago.

[frob23]

The oldest card book I have on hand is from 1968 (although it revised from many older editions). So that is 42 years ago. That book lists the ranks of hands as they still are today. So we know those were in place at least 42 years ago and made it into a book called the Official Rules of Card Games.

Tomorrow, I might actually post some snippets from that section on poker. It is very amusing especially since some of the descriptions for games you might know... won't resemble anything you've ever heard of. Oh screw it... I'll quote it now:

From page 101:

-- Each player receives two cards down. Five cards are dealt to the center, face down. There is a betting interval. Then the center cards are turned up one by one, with a betting interval after each. Each player makes his hand from his own two cards plus the five in the center.

Can anyone guess the name of the above described game?

[pokerbucket]

There are fewer ways to make a flush than there are ways to make a straight. Once you already have a flush draw, you do have one more out than if you had an open-ended straight draw. But there are more combinations of hands that can have a straight draw than can have a flush draw.

I'm sick today or I would explain this in detail because it is a little bit weird. But the overall ranks of hands is determined by how rare they are... not how easy or hard they are to hit once you are part-way there.

With that said, I had a very old book on gambling... very old... from the 1940s... and that book has the same ranking of the poker hands as currently exists. It sounds like your deck was weird and not that the rules have changed.

It just seems like people make a flush more than a straight because a lot of people will play any two suited cards and will chase down a flush draw to the end...not so much with gut shot and backdoor straight draws.

[frob23]

It just seems like people make a flush more than a straight because a lot of people will play any two suited cards and will chase down a flush draw to the end...not so much with gut shot and backdoor straight draws.

Once someone has a solid flush draw (4 to the flush) they will hit it more often than if they had an open-ended straight draw. The flush draw has 9 cards that help and the open-ended straight has 8. But, there are many more ways to flop a straight draw than to flop a flush draw. There was an old book I had (it might be the one from the 40s that I misplaced) where the author goes on at length about why a flush beats a straight... even though it is harder to draw to a straight and hit -- this was talking about draw poker. And it has to do with the number of combination of hands that will provide each type of draw.

Yes, in Hold'em, people do play a lot of suited crap. But it is still more likely that someone will get a straight than a flush... if they played every hand all the way to the river.

I do know what you're saying here and I am not arguing. It does appear that people hit a lot of flushes. And everyone always thinks they hit too often. But I am not arguing that. I'm just saying that AK on a flop is going to hit their flush more often than J-T on a 9-8-2 flop is going to hit their straight.

[envercaushaj]

It must have been a deck produced in China!!!!! hahahaha

[RiverstarsVictim]

That pack of cards wasn't giving the rules for Hold'em. 5 card draw where flush beats full house!

[travz21]

All the games of poker have the same hand strengths. At least that's what I thought until I read this old as fawk thread.

[RiverstarsVictim]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five-card_draw

Stripped deck variant

Five-card draw is sometimes played with a stripped deck. This variant is commonly known as "seven-to-ace" or "ace-to-seven" (abbreviated as A-7 or 7-A). It can be played by up to five players. When four or fewer players play, a normal 32-card deck without jokers, with ranks ranging from ace to seven, is used. With five players, the sixes are added to make a 36-card deck. The deck thus contains only eight or nine different card ranks, compared to 13 in a standard deck. This affects the probabilities of making specific hands, so a flush ranks above a full house and below four of a kind in the seven-to-ace five-card draw.

[frob23]

The oldest card book I have on hand is from 1968 (although it revised from many older editions). So that is 42 years ago. That book lists the ranks of hands as they still are today. So we know those were in place at least 42 years ago and made it into a book called the Official Rules of Card Games.

Tomorrow, I might actually post some snippets from that section on poker. It is very amusing especially since some of the descriptions for games you might know... won't resemble anything you've ever heard of. Oh screw it... I'll quote it now:

From page 101:

-- Each player receives two cards down. Five cards are dealt to the center, face down. There is a betting interval. Then the center cards are turned up one by one, with a betting interval after each. Each player makes his hand from his own two cards plus the five in the center.

Can anyone guess the name of the above described game?

Since no one wants to guess. I'll just tell you. The above described game is called "Omaha." Hold'em is described in the book... also a bit weird but this wasn't Hold'em... it was what the author's called Omaha. It bears a striking lack of resemblance to the current game.

[C8H10N4O2]

Since no one wants to guess. I'll just tell you. The above described game is called "Omaha." Hold'em is described in the book... also a bit weird but this wasn't Hold'em... it was what the author's called Omaha. It bears a striking lack of resemblance to the current game.

Wow... weird. I wonder how that evolved into a completely different game.