Can you imagine if NL Poker was played without the ability of " checking " ?

WorldNumberOne · Jun 1, 2006

Was playing earlier and the thought popped into my head .

What a different game it would be .

Doug · Jun 2, 2006

Wouldn't a very tiny bet be about the same thing ?

Illini · Jun 2, 2006

W#1- I take it you've been smoking some fatties? That stuff does make you think outside the box.

Fishhead · Jun 2, 2006

Illini said:
W#1- I take it you've been smoking some fatties? That stuff does make you think outside the box.

:smoker2:

PatrickMcIrish · Jun 2, 2006

I've played that before, LOL. Wasn't NL though, it was $20-40-60-80 limit and you could never check. Only checking in this game was them checking for weapons before you entered. You either folded, bet, called or raised when it was your turn. The bet started one to the left of the player who started it the previous round. The game played bigger than it sounded. I was the only nonGreek who played, what a great game it was, excellent cooking and excellent action.

:103631605

WorldNumberOne · Jun 2, 2006

Patrick McIrish said:
I've played that before, LOL. Wasn't NL though, it was $20-40-60-80 limit and you could never check. Only checking in this game was them checking for weapons before you entered. You either folded, bet, called or raised when it was your turn. The bet started one to the left of the player who started it the previous round. The game played bigger than it sounded. I was the only nonGreek who played,what a great game it was, excellent cooking and excellent action.

see !!! all you pot heads take a look ..

i think it would be a very different / interesting way to play..

5teamparlay · Dec 15, 2018

Could never happen for a second.

first to act must bet or fold—-

HarryCaray · Dec 15, 2018

Checking is such an important part of the game, this would detract from the strategic subtleties and complexities.
If you want bigger pots play higher limits, don't butcher the game.