Talk:Faro (card game)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sentences like "It was, however, the most dangerous game for the destruction of families ever invented." seem to be decidedly NPOV, hence the tag. -- AlexR 02:36, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 Problems with this piece 2 Odds are always fair, except when a pair is dealt 3 Faro Dealers 4 This page needs fixing 5 Recent Faro 6 Doc Holliday Did Not Deal Faro

[edit] Problems with this piece

The rules of the game are incorrectly described. A faro layout has only one suit (13 cards, usually spades as it was typically the suit used on the layout) on which gamblers place bets. The suit of the card that is dealt is irrelevant; if a bet is placed on the four of spades on the layout the bet pays if the winning card dealt is a four in any suit. Further, the bets pay even money, not 2 to 1 as this page describes.

(Rick Rutt 19:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC) I revised the article to describe the table, and clarify "2 for 1" versus "1 to 1".)

Also, there is considerable debate regarding the origin of the name faro, though it appears unlikely that it is related to the term pharoah.

Here are a couple of links with good faro info:

http://www.lahacal.org/gentleman/faro.html

http://www.bcvc.net/faro/start.htm

(Rick Rutt 01:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC) I added a link to Mark Howard's article at www.bcvc.net )

See also, John Scarne, New Complete Guide to Gambling

How do folks feel about updating this page?

[edit] Odds are always fair, except when a pair is dealt

The original article contained this betting analysis:

"Suppose a person to put down 20s. upon a card when only eight are in hand; the last card was a cipher, so there were four places to lose, and only three to win, the odds against being as 4 to 3.

"If 10 cards only were in, then it was 5 to 4 against the player; in the former case it was the seventh part of the money, whatever it was, £1 or £100; in the latter case, a ninth. The odds from the beginning of the deal insensibly stole upon the player at every pull, till from the first supposed 4 per cent. it became about 15 per cent."

This analysis incorrectly implies a house edge that increases as the cards in the shoe are dealt out.

For each deal, two cards are dealt, as described in the article. If the denomination is dealt to one pile, it is a winner; if to the other pile, it is a loser. The number of remaining cards of that denomination is irrelevant -- only which pile the next one lands on counts. Think this through, and you see there is no house edge (provide different denominations are dealt to each of the two piles).

The house edge comes from the situation when a pair is dealt -- the same denomination to both piles. The dealer takes half of any bet on that denomination.

Refer to the links in the prior discussion note to confirm these rules.

Rick Rutt 19:41, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Faro Dealers

Faro Dealer's were not called "sharps, sharpers, and blackleg." A sharp, and sharpers, are names for confidence men. True, a faro dealer might cheat, and someone may accuse them of sharping, but "shaper" is not synonymous with "faro dealer."

[edit] This page needs fixing

Someone needs to fix this page. I don't know who wrote "the rules," or where they got their information, but the names and rules are different from what is currently there. It seems the writer mixed European rules and names, with U.S. rules and names. They also used slang names, like "coffin" and "mechanical shoe" for dealing box, not standard all over the country, which only confuses readers. The whole article needs re-writing, using standard names and rules. Soapy 11:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I began correcting some of the mistakes, but do not know the European rules, or at least, that is what I am guessing the writer was using. I collected artifacts and books on faro, and played the game for many years, and I have never come across the game and payoff rules in this article. Then again, I studied and played 19th century U.S. faro. Soapy 11:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Recent Faro

I personally played this game at Tropicana in Las vegas in early 80's. It continued in Reno for a couple more years. There have been recent musings about bringing it back. See [1] John celona 14:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Doc Holliday Did Not Deal Faro

Wyatt Earp did. Doc never twisted the tiger's tail. Holliday preferred poker where skill and nerve are predominant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.6.239.53 (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps you should not limit your knowledge of Old West history to the movie Tombstone. 204.115.253.51 20:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

"Its name is believed by some to be a corruption of pharaoh and refers to the Egyptian motif that commonly adorned French-made playing cards of the period, though no records of any Egyptian Motif on any playing cards of that era have been found." This is a little confusing- how do we know an Egyptian motif was common if there are no records of it? I'm hoping I've misunderstood this. Does it mean that there is no record of the French cards being used to play this particular game, or in areas where it was popular? -FZ 16:22, 24 October 2007 (UTC)