What is the best way to get your score up
Poker score
Started by rangersfc [1600886] on in Questions & Answers.
About this thread
Posts archived: 13 / 13 posts (100%) · the total is Torn's reply count + the opening post at the last fetch
Counted by TornLife from the archived posts.
- Archived posts
- 13
- Discussion span
- →
- People posting
- 9
- Likes on archived posts
- 18
- Authority score
- 59 / 100
- Historical score
- 18 / 100
- Story score
- 35 / 100
- Engagement score
- 60 / 100
Most-liked replies
Play poker
This might help:
http://torncitytips.blogspot.com/2013/01/torn-city-poker-king-honor.html?m=1
And a response copied for bogie:
https://www.torn.com/forums.php#/p=threads&f=3&t=16166819&b=0&a=0&start=0
http://torncitytips.blogspot.com/2013/01/torn-city-poker-king-honor.html?m=1
And a response copied for bogie:
https://www.torn.com/forums.php#/p=threads&f=3&t=16166819&b=0&a=0&start=0
Mentions: Poker score
One of the things again that nobody knows exactly how it works or how it is calculated. But yeah, play poker. Big pots might increase it faster or might not. Participating in hands (instead of folding) might increase it faster. Who knows. Just play and it will rise.
i vaguely remember the poker points correlated with the type of hand you were dealt
Playing more hands per minute/hour is the fastest way. I would usually play with friend and we would just keep checking checking checking until one wins. When you get good hand you get score depending hand. Weak winning hands are couple thousand. Streets, straight, house 10k to 30k. Higher stuff even more. If you play fast you can play one hand every 20-30 seconds.
The best thing you could possibly do is play with a friend, and a lot of money, on Juan on Juan (50m/25m blind table). And fold every hand to each other.
Poker score is based on stakes (blinds), number of people dealt into the hand, and strength of winning hand. You do not have to show your hand to gain the same score. Size of overall pot does not matter.
Poker score is based on stakes (blinds), number of people dealt into the hand, and strength of winning hand. You do not have to show your hand to gain the same score. Size of overall pot does not matter.
Folding every other hand would definitely lead to faster hands but strength of hand plays a big role from what I’ve seen. Ex. Winning with 1 pair was roughly 5k score, winning with flush was 30k points with all other factors equal. (3 players, $1M Big blind)
Presumably you would play more hands folding every other one but the winning hand strength would be stronger with both people checking through the whole hand.
It would be interesting to see where the trade off is in there.
Presumably you would play more hands folding every other one but the winning hand strength would be stronger with both people checking through the whole hand.
It would be interesting to see where the trade off is in there.
"You do not have to show your hand to gain the same score. "
in poker 1.0 the cards rolled out and you got score based on whatever your hand was going to be, hard to imagine they changed anything for 2.0
in poker 1.0 the cards rolled out and you got score based on whatever your hand was going to be, hard to imagine they changed anything for 2.0
From what I’ve read and seen in my own testing, only the winner of a hand gets a poker score gain.
Assuming that is the case, if Player A would have a flush and Player B would have a pair if the entire hand was played out but pPlayer A folded because it was his turn to fold, only player B would get points based of his pair.
Had they checked through, player A would have won with points awarded based on the flush.
The table’s net points per hand would significantly be lower than it could be
Assuming that is the case, if Player A would have a flush and Player B would have a pair if the entire hand was played out but pPlayer A folded because it was his turn to fold, only player B would get points based of his pair.
Had they checked through, player A would have won with points awarded based on the flush.
The table’s net points per hand would significantly be lower than it could be
Yes only the winner. So either both players fold and take it in turns to each build up score (since they'd be helping each other out, is fair), or one player folds everything, whatever works for you.
Based on the communication and checking-down time I imagine it would be any more efficient to evaluate which hands are going to profit the net score-gain before deciding who folds.
Based on the communication and checking-down time I imagine it would be any more efficient to evaluate which hands are going to profit the net score-gain before deciding who folds.
That's so useful to know, so slow playing quads, straight flush, and royal flush isn't mandatory to ensure poker score :p
Correct