Dealer contributes to confusion... Floor please!

[Lottery Larry]

-1 for wimping out with the edit

[psandman]

yesterday playing playing Omaha I had a player announce he had second nuts when the board had three diamonds on it (no pairs and no Straight Flush possibility, highest diamond on the board was a king.

So I assumed he had the King High Flush. My mistake, you see he had a straight. In his mind a flush was the nuts and a straight was the second nuts. I guess my set was the third nuts, damn bad beat.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
I had a player announce he had second nuts when the board had three diamonds on it (no pairs and no Straight Flush possibility, highest diamond on the board was a king.

So I assumed he had the King High Flush. My mistake

[/ QUOTE ]

4th nuts- you forgot about the Ad nut flush?


How did you get sucked into paying off with 4th nuts, btw? I'm losing respect for you.... :P

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I had a player announce he had second nuts when the board had three diamonds on it (no pairs and no Straight Flush possibility, highest diamond on the board was a king.

So I assumed he had the King High Flush. My mistake

[/ QUOTE ]

4th nuts- you forgot about the Ad nut flush?


How did you get sucked into paying off with 4th nuts, btw? I'm losing respect for you.... :P

[/ QUOTE ]

Typo... the board had the Qd not K diamonds.

I didn't get sucked into paying off, I made a big bet which put him all-in, and he was talking out loud while trying to decide what to do. He was very close to folding. I still like my bet, and can't believe that he called, this was on the turn so even if I was beat i still had the chance to fill up.

[pfapfap]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And by the way, now that's two dealers of mine you've kicked in the nuts who were female.


[/ QUOTE ]
What, it doesn't hurt for them??

[/ QUOTE ]

I interpret Nuts (kick in) to mean Gonads. Women have 'em, too. Just a little harder to kick directly.

Now, if you find yourself getting kicked in your third nut, you should see a doctor.

[EWillers]

I would agree that usage frequently dictates the meaning of words.

Here, there is an issue of precision. The board is 9 9 8 8 2. A player at showdown announces I have the nuts.

Now, with the rigid use of the term, every reasonably bright person at the table knows what the declarer has (assuming the declarer is accurate).

With the willy nilly voodoo use of the term, everybody is left guessing. "Oh, you have 9 9? Crap, it's a fouled deck then because I have 9 8."

It gets back to being able to identify the nuts given a board. One should be able to identify the nuts and unbeatable hands given a finished board.

All "nuts" are unbeatable hands; all unbeatable hands are not "nuts".

It is easier to call any unbeatable hand the "nuts". And it just feels good at the table at a showdown to say "I have the nuts". I think that's what drives the current usage.

There is a compelling argument (precision) however to try and curb this usage.

[StevieG]

EWillers,

Wow that is rigid.

I'm guessing you don't often get invited to play charades, scrabble, etc.

[Lottery Larry]

Well, this isn't what I intended for my 6Kth post, but some would think it's appropriate:

[ QUOTE ]
I would agree that usage frequently dictates the meaning of words.

Here, there is an issue of precision. The board is 9 9 8 8 2. A player at showdown announces I have the nuts.

Now, with the rigid use of the term, every reasonably bright person at the table knows what the declarer has (assuming the declarer is accurate).

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly- he has a hand that won't be beaten by anyone else- thus, "the nuts"

To argue that he is causing a precision faux pas by not stating one of the two nut-type hands that he could hold here... is lame beyond words.

[ QUOTE ]
With the willy nilly voodoo use of the term, everybody is left guessing. "Oh, you have 9 9? Crap, it's a fouled deck then because I have 9 8."

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, that's what I'd be assuming about the villan's hand, if I held 98 here.

[ QUOTE ]
It gets back to being able to identify the nuts given a board. One should be able to identify the nuts and unbeatable hands given a finished board.

[/ QUOTE ]

You seem to be one of the few who would have a lot of consternation and confusion, facing this statement and situation. Respectfully, maybe you are the problem?


[ QUOTE ]
All "nuts" are unbeatable hands; all unbeatable hands are not "nuts".

[/ QUOTE ]

........ eh, never mind.


[ QUOTE ]
There is a compelling argument (precision) however to try and curb this usage.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, not really compelling at all... for most of us.

[Hair_of_the_Dog]

I always ask, "Is the action on me?"

[Guruman]

al capone,

I'm typically a big fan of your rants.

This one sucked, however. It was a little bigoted but above all it was a rant on English fluency that was filled with grammatical errors. In fact, the one paragraph that was actually ranting on the fluency thing was probably the most grammatically bad part of any post in this thread.