Talk:Badugi

Comments

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)

I find the article very difficult to read because it goes into detail of the format of the game before stateing the object of the game. Hence I would like to see something like, "The object of the game is to get the lowest possible hand of separate suits and ranks" near the start before diving into the format of the rounds. This would make it so much easier to follow as it is it goes into the round structure without dscribing what the rounds are actually for, which is very annoying!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esboella (talk • contribs) 01:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Used to play four card off suit lowball in Winnipeg in the 80's. This is not a new game. It is certainly older than the 1990's never mind the year 2000. Theshowmecanuck (talk) 06:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

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, thank you. I'll work on those sections in a little while. I'll drop you a line when I have a new version. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 21:15, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I have made some changes to the "Hand evaluation" section to better explain what is meant by "2-card hand" etc. I have also added an example game, which hopefully demonstrates the play of the game better. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 19:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Great work on the re-wording. GA as of now. Lincher 03:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

Inline citations are now included. --best, kevin [kzollman][talk] 03:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

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)

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)

Poker?

Should Badugi be really counted as Poker? Considering hand-ranking is not based on any type of Poker Hand rankings (game is instead based on uniqueness of suits and uniqueness of rank). Also consider the fact that in almost all valid Poker variants you must showdown a 5 card hand either high or low but based on the hand rankings. Strongsauce 16:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Badugi uses Lowball hand ranks. It is also spread in poker cardrooms as a poker game. "Almost" all poker variants use five cards, but not all do, guts being and chinese poker others. 2005 22:00, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Poker is about betting structure, not hands. If you and I were to bet on, say, who has the largest potato hidden in a sack, and we did it by anteing $1 each, then betting in turn, and determined the winner by either bluffing (making a large bet that the opponent won't match) or by matching bets and comparing potatos, then we're playing poker. A video poker slot machine, on the other hand, is not poker, nor is a game of Pai Gow poker, which use poker hands but not the betting structure. --LDC (talk) 21:25, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Worst Possible Hand

If I'm not mistaken, the worst possible Badugi hand is not K♦K♥K♠K♣. That would be a 4-card Badugi and would beat all 3, 2, and 1-card hands (that is, hands where 2, 3, and all 4 cards are suited). The worst possible hand would be K♠Q♠J♠10♠ as only the 10 would play, and any 1-card hand with better than the 10, or any 2, 3, or 4-card hand regardless of cards would beat it. 76.104.235.214 (talk) 22:19, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

NO, KKKK is the worst hand. It's only a one card Badugi, a king, because pairs count against you. Any other four card hand beats it. 2005 (talk) 23:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Of course. I wasn't thinking of that. 76.104.235.214 (talk) 19:08, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Protect?

I have reverted over and over the same edits from the same valdal(s) changing all of the euro's and pounds to $'s. Can we semi-protect this page? DegenFarang (talk) 00:28, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

GA reassessment

I'm going to delist this article as a GA for the following reasons:

• There are many unreferenced areas.
• The citations are just bare links. They need to have the page title, publisher, etc. and use the Citation templates.
• There's virtually nothing on the game's history in the article.

If this is expanded and fixed, it can be re-nominated at GAN. Wizardman 20:02, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

lulz invented in USA

This is Bryan Micon, pro poker player. I have been playing mixed games in Las Vegas for the past few years. Badugi was invented (or at least played in) South Korean in the 80's. This has been told to me by multiple middle-aged Koreans. Something about the translation in Korean to "multi-colored dog" also should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.180.172.79 (talk) 21:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

I used to play this game in Winnipeg in the 80s for God's sake. We called it off suit lowball. I had a couple of Chinese buddies of mine who loved the game but that doesn't mean the Chinese invented it either. Theshowmecanuck (talk) 06:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Both of these pieces of information have found their way into the article, though they are unsourced, and so unverifiable. This is an example of what must cease to occur at this article, if it is to become encyclopedic. Le Prof 71.201.62.200 (talk) 19:47, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Article must cease being dumping ground for editor opinions and OR

WP authority comes from sourced material. This article needs to cease being a wasteland of sentences that are just the ideas and opinions of editors—however knowledgeable and experienced they might be at the title game—because WP requires verifiable, sourced information.

I have added an initial list of further reading, which has other's published opinions and ideas about the game (and this based on about 30 mins research). Please stop adding your ideas and information; please start perusing sources, and adding information from published sources.

And whatever you might know about the origin of Badugi or its name, it simply does not matter. I know where I was born. If it cannot be reliably and verifiably source this information, my OR regarding my birth place (and yours regarding the game's origins) are useless to WP articles on these subjects. This is the definition of WP:OR, and it is prohibited here. Le Prof 71.201.62.200 (talk) 19:46, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Badugi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081016040105/http://www.badugipoker.com:80/ to http://www.badugipoker.com/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Badugi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150401110235/http://www.planetpoker.com:80/games/badugi.asp to http://www.planetpoker.com/games/badugi.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120326001819/http://www.howtolearnpoker.net/2011/05/badugi-poker-is-your-best-chance-of-becoming-a-world-class-poker-player/ to http://www.howtolearnpoker.net/2011/05/badugi-poker-is-your-best-chance-of-becoming-a-world-class-poker-player/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)