Talk:Badugi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Badugi has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. |
 |
The following users are actively contributing to this topic and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources: Kzollman (talk • contribs • email) |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Poker, an attempt at building a useful poker resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page. |
This article is just... SO wrong. i mean, fundamentally wrong, in the rules and examples and everything. please see http://www.badugi.in/ or just google "badugi rules" for any number of pages with the correct rules... and please, please dont actually try to play this for money using what youve read here, it will be very costly...
i would rewrite this myself but i suck as a writer so someone else will have to step up to the plate. 64.81.113.151 20:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
- The article has been rewritten since this comment and what factual errors I found have been removed. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 07:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] GA nomination failed passed
Since I didn't know how to play the game and still don't, this article helped me a bit but a section on What cards to keep or My hand is a 2-card hand or 3-card hand or 4-card hand should be addressed since when tallying up the scores you need to know that. Second thing, the reference section is really short. I would also add an historical section to let people know where the game comes from. Also, if possible, say why is this game getting popular in america. Lincher 14:30, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you for your time looking at this article. I'm afraid that I simply don't understand what you mean when you ask for a section on "My hand is a...". Could you say more? Re: strategy, history, and popularity. Unfortunately, no one seems to know. There has not been a book published on the subject and every webpage I've found says the same thing: "its becoming more popular in the U.S. and it came from asia". This is one of the things about this article, until someone else writes a book on the subject any additions to the article will constitute WP:OR. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 17:29, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- What I do not understand about the game is why such player would decide to have a 2-card hand or a 3-card hand or a 4-card hand. What reasons would somebody have to keep only 2 cards an thus try to beat somebody that has a 4-card hand. Maybe go into more details with a typical game section or something like that. It's ok if there are no other sections on strategy, history, and popularity since they can't be found. Lincher 16:41, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Great work on the re-wording. GA as of now. Lincher 03:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Gender
In the sentence, "Each player may observe those four cards she is dealt" why is the gender listed specifically as "she"? While there are many professional and amatuer female poker players, it is currently a male dominated sport.
If the subject was something more generic, let's say "jogging," then one could argue that the person jogging could just as easily be male or female. In an game that it played mostly by males it does not make sense to use the pronoun "she." -- 72.129.69.227 10:46, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's a generic pronoun, meaning it could either refer to a male or female. Using the generic she is an accepted form of the English language despite the historic use of "he" as generic. (As an illustration, see the bottom of this Q&A page at the chicago manual of style.) Since you seem to care about this so much, I'll leave it. However, I find it odd that you think it's so important that the article say "he" instead of "she" that you would be willing to change it three times. Why is that? --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 18:27, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- I changed it because (A) it's misleading and (B) I'm stubborn. I referred several of my friends to this page in hopes that they would learn how to play Badugi. I received a few responses, asking if this was a game geared towards females. My guess is that other people reading this article could make the same assumption. This is your page, so I will not make anymore edits without your approval. -- 72.129.69.227 19:04, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Although I appreciate the gesture, it's not my page. And you should feel free to make any changes that you think make the article better. I'm not sure what is misleading about it. Women are capable and do play the game. How is it any less misleading to use "he"? Your friends' responses are exactly why I use the generic "she", just because a woman can play a game doesn't make it a woman's only game. I hope that one day, people won't be surprised when women are written about. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 19:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] GA Re-Review and In-line citations
Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. Agne 21:48, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Poor example
- 5♦7♣K♣K♥ beats 2♠3♦K♠K♦ the former is a three card hand (made by discarding the K♣) the later is a two card hand (made by discarding the two Kings).
This is inconsistent with the sources cited, which indicate that only one of the two cards forming a pair should be discounted when evaluating a hand. In fact, the example itself is inconsistent as it states that in one hand, only one King must be discarded, whereas in the second hand, both must be discarded. If this is because of the suits involved, that should be clarified.
I am not certain of the rules myself (in fact, this entry is the first time I've seen the rules), so it is entirely possible that I'm just misunderstanding something. If that's the case, then I still make a good example of how the above example is confusing and should be explained better.
- It's not just pairs, but suits. In the second example both kings are of the same suit as the other two cards, so it is only a two card hand. 2005 20:35, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
That's correct: 2♠3♦K♠K♦ is a 2-card Badugi hand with the value 3-2, because both kings match the suits of lower cards in the hand; indeed, it is exactly the same hand as 2♠3♦4♠5♦--the fact that the kings are also paired doesn't affect the hand. It would also be the same as 2♠3♦2♣3♥. Your Badugi hand is the largest subset of your four cards none of which match either suit or rank of another. --LDC 21:29, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please clarify
I couldn't find anything about this in the article, which of the following hand would win and why?
- A♦2♣3♠4♥ versus A♠2♥3♣4♦
--Mandor.se 16:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
- Those are both perfect hands, and would tie (split the pot). --LDC 02:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
