The Instigator
Loserboi
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
Brendan21
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

In the event of a poker match having 5 kings, it should lose to 4 aces

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
Loserboi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/6/2010 Category: Sports
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,647 times Debate No: 13085
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

Loserboi

Pro

Texas Holdem poker- "is a variation of the standard card game of poker. The game consists of two cards being dealt face down to each player and then five community cards being placed by the dealer—a series of three ("the flop") then two additional single cards ("the turn" and "the river"), with players having the option to check, bet or fold after each deal, i.e. betting may occur prior to the flop, "on the flop," "on the turn," and "on the river."

King- 4 cards in the standard playing card deck with suits of diamond, club, heart, and spade.

Ace- 4 cards in the standard playing card deck with suits of diamond, club, heart and spade

In the event that a extra king were to fall into the deck, and the person has 5 kings as their hand, with the opposing person having 4 aces, the man with the 5 kings should lose to 4 aces.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.comedycentral.com...
Brendan21

Con

Thank you Pro, for an interesting and humorous debate.

In the rules of Texas Hold 'Em Poker, a pair is better than a single, and three of a kind is greater than a pair, and four of a kind is higher than three of a kind. According to these rules, it does not matter if Aces are involved or not. Thus, if a player has the ledendary five-king-hand, than it would easily trounce the mere four aces of the other player, just like five twos would bet four threes if a two was accidently shuffled into the deck. The player cannot be punished for the hand dealt to him by the dealer, which is generally a professional, thus his hand should be considered "playable" for the current hand, then have the extra king removed before reshuffling.

I look forward to Pro's response.
Debate Round No. 1
Loserboi

Pro

I thank my opponent for so quickly responding in the first round. (seriously you are awesome for doing that)

My opponent's argument is that since 3 of a kind beats a pair, and a 4 of a kind beats a 3 of a kind, 5 kings must automatically beat a 4 of a kind. But, in poker that is not the case of a rare instance of a 5 of a kind. I would like my opponent to see the official rules of Texas Holdem, ranking the hands by strength. [1] You see there is no such thing as a 5 of a kind... since the rules and strength of a 5 of a kind has never existed, a person having 5 of a kind kings should by the standard rules seen as a 4 of a kind Kings with a King kicker. The 4 aces beats the 4 of a kind kings so in the real rules of Texas Holdem the person who has 5kings should lose to a person with 4 aces. Since the highest "of a kind" established is 4 and anything else other than the 4 of a kind with be dubbed at a "kicker" in a 5 card hand.

I look forward to your argument.

http://www.fulltiltpoker.com...
Brendan21

Con

And I thank you for your equally quick response.

Indeed, having five kings is not included in the rules of poker, but if the dealer dealt the card, then its part of the game if anything, the hand would be cancelled, and thus no one would win the hand. If they choose to play with the faulty hand, its a simple matter of counting, and five is greater than four. The only instance of the legendary five-king-hand to ever occur is during Futurama, and they ruled the five kings win, and the fifth king wasn't even a playing card.

Realistically, the hand would be called off as soon as the fifth king appeared, and no one would be the winner. Pro has yet to prove four aces would "win" against the five kings.

Thanks, and I'm looking forward to your response.
Debate Round No. 2
Loserboi

Pro

LOL, the futurama video is why I started this debate, the logic 5 kings beating 4 aces is flawed because the rules in Texas Holdem has never counted a "5 of a kind", or given it any kind of additional power over a 4 of a kind. We know a 4 of a kind beats a 3 of a kind because the rules simply state that it does. a 5 of a kind has no meaning and has no official leverage over a 4 of a kind because by all means a "5 of a kind" does not exist. My argument which I stated in the last round which my opponent does not seem to get, is this. 5 kings should not be looked at as a 5 of a kind because a 5 of a kind is an imaginary power hand. One player cannot possess a"5 of a kind" because the highest Texas Holdem accepts is 4 of a kind. So because we have rules, we have to look at a 5kings as a 4 of a kind with a king kicker. That is the highest possible hand you can make with 5 kings. Since 4 aces being the highest 4 of a kind possible, it beats 4 of a kind kings with a king kicker, 5 kings would automatically lose to a 4 of a kind aces, just based on the rules. This is my proof that 4 of a kind aces beats 5 kings because 5 kings only means 4 of a kind kings with a king kicker.

As for disqualification, it should be called off, but in situations that involve money it is hard to tell. If I was dealt 4 of a kind aces, one of the rarest phenomenons in the entire poker game, it would outrage me that my hand does not count. If the person with 5 kings still tried to bet with 5 kings then they should have known that their 5 kings would be counted as a 4 of a kind kings with a king kicker, seeing as the "5 of a kind" is a power hand in poker that does not have any power or additional leverage over a 4 of a kind. They should lose just based on the fact that they still attempted to bet on their 4 of a kind kings with a king kicker.

My opponent has made some good points, but you cannot argue with the official rule set forth, and in the event that the counted match between a person with 5 kings met a person with 4 aces, a person with the 4 of a kind kings and king kicker would lose to the person with a 4 of a kind aces and random kicker.
Brendan21

Con

Thank you got the quick debate.

You may have proved, if the hand continued, than the aces would, according to the rules, win. However, I don't think the hand would be allowed be to played. As soon as the player is aware that there is an extra king, it is reasonable to assume that the player would inform the dealer and other players something was not right, and the hand would be cancelled. It may be unfair to the player with four aces, but it would be unfair to continue the game with an illegal hand. A do-over would be the only fair thing to do in my opinion. In TV tournaments, the players cards are known to the officials in charge at all times, and they would most likely call off the hand if they noticed an extra card in the deck, and remove it or simply get a new deck.

I would also like to point out, in an unprofessional game, if I was dealt 5 kings, I would hold on to it, knowing the laughs it would cause, and I think that home-poker games would allow the player with 5 kings to win, adding insult to injury to the player with four aces.

Thank you for the fun debate.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Chrysippus 7 years ago
Chrysippus
Koopin has a point. Although Texas hold 'em is not played with the Jokers, there are versions of Poker that are; in those 5 of a kind is a valid hand, and is listed as the highest possible. Whether it's five kings or five aces that is highest depends on whether you are playing aces high or low.

Because the version of poker referenced for this debate was Texas Hold 'Em, though, all of what I just said is completely irrelevant. Fun bit of trivia, though... :)
Posted by Loserboi 7 years ago
Loserboi
LOL, it does look like that is whats saving me
Posted by Brendan21 7 years ago
Brendan21
Damn, looks like I need to use more sources to win these kind of debates, oh well :)
Posted by Loserboi 7 years ago
Loserboi
Looking at*
Posted by Loserboi 7 years ago
Loserboi
"Looking for one's cards is a clutch for players who rely on skill"- Bender LOL
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
2000miles, Yes, there were some games invented that used a fifth suit. I forget what the symbols were or what color. I suppose somebody could put a tarot card into the deck as well.
Posted by Brendan21 7 years ago
Brendan21
@ RoyLatham

Thank good sir.
Posted by 20000miles 7 years ago
20000miles
What would be an illegal suit? King of stars?
Posted by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
The situation is covered by the rules of poker, "If two cards of the same rank and suit are found, all action is void, and all chips in the pot are returned to the players who wagered them (subject to next rule). " http://www.thepokerforum.com... If there are five kings two of them must be of the same suit, so the hand is voided. Actually, there is a rule that covers a king that is not of one the allowed suits; that's also voided. If the hand is voided, neither player wins or loses, so the resolution fails.

However we do need more poker debates!
Posted by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
Have you guys never played with Wilds?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Sieben 7 years ago
Sieben
LoserboiBrendan21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Vote Placed by xxdarkxx 7 years ago
xxdarkxx
LoserboiBrendan21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by sllewuy 7 years ago
sllewuy
LoserboiBrendan21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 7 years ago
RoyLatham
LoserboiBrendan21Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03