Awwww, that’s so sweet! Thanks!
1 Like
It might be worthwhile to post a thread about the fascinating (and occasionally infuriating) subject of cognitive dissonance and it’s many peculiar manifestations, particularly those that are relevant to issues common in online poker. Unbased attributions of nefarious intent subsequent to outcomes contrary to expectations being a particularly popular example, lol.
Anyway, has there been a consensus reached as to what the term ‘bingo’ means in the context of poker yet?
There’s no point in attempting a discussion about it (or any subject, frankly) until it’s been properly defined, which seems self-evident as otherwise what exactly are we discussing if all parties involved can’t agree on exactly what we’re discussing?
1 Like
Not that I have seen. I would love to have a universally accepted definition of the term. I’ll suggest a starting point…
Bingo: Any playing style that depends entirely on luck, employing neither skill nor strategy.
3 Likes
By the way, if this last definition seems to be at odds with some of the stuff I have posted before, it’s because it is. I have looked into it more, and now have a different understanding of the term. Previously, I only thought of “bingo” as players who went allin often, usually with any 2 cards. I rarely saw this behavior.
If the definition is expanded to include any player who depends on luck alone, then I have seen lots of bingo players.
3 Likes
That’s the way I think of it as well.
In Bingo (the actual game of that name), they hand you a card and you listen to hear if your numbers hit. The game wouldn’t change even if there weren’t any actual ‘players’ present, so it’s the cards that win or lose, not the players.
In the poker variant it seems reasonable that it would refer to those who are dealt some cards (doesn’t matter which) and wait to see if they end up winning the pot (calling as needed if they aren’t already all-in).
1 Like
Note to Maya
I now understand the distinction you were making when you kept saying that allin as a strategic move wasn’t bingo. Sorry it took me so long to grasp your point, but you were right all along.
2 Likes
Bingo is a game where players receive a card with a specifically ordered but random configuration and a caller pulls random balls out of a hat until someone achieves a pattern on their card. That’s not what happens here exactly although at the end of an actual bingo game someone does have to shout BINGO due to their purely random selection and ability to pay attention. On replay, people also shout BINGO, but usually when they lose.
What happens in the rings and lower MTTs is more akin to high card low card where you first get to see your card. Someone who knows the game can guess that a high pair has a good chance, even ahead of the flop. Someone who does not know the game might like the thrill of going all in, even without seeing their cards. Think of these people as millionaires visiting Vegas for the first time. They down 3 shots, plunk down their money, and they are ready to go.
None of this really embraces the spirit of poker IMO, but it is a game. However, I have been at good ring tables so I cannot dis Replay. I also see that it does not take long for what I call high/low players to fall out of the MTTs. Hopefully they visit the discussion room and learn a few new strategies. If they are nice about it I will take their money and wish them well.
Wrong…wrong wrong wrong…
Bingo is any play that beats someone who is versed in odds and Game Theory. And, unlike you, I submit proof of the validity of my definition: All the threads that have been started about Bingo by people versed in odds and Game Theory
Strongly agree with this definition. It encompasses the rampant limp bingo that occurs here, even at the highest stakes. As has been said many times by many smart people here: limping in with any two cards is just the passive form of going all-in with any two cards.
2 Likes