Post-mortems and rabbit hunting slow down a [1] poker game and should be discouraged. If a rabbit hunter proves himself to be too much of a nuisance in a serious poker group, the players are better off without him. One way to rid the group of such a player is to move (or Boat) the game and stop inviting him. Another way to improve the situation is to correct his lack of etiquette at the table. But some of these fellows can be so persistent that it seems, at times, as if the only way to rid your game of one is to do to him what Doc Holliday did to Ed Bailey.

Holliday, Bailey and others were playing poker at Ft. Griffin, Texas. Bailey was an especially obstinate rabbit hunter. He even looked at the players’’ discards and dead hands, often making cutting remarks on how the hand had been played. Now Holliday, like most serious [2] poker players, held that a man had no right to see his hand unless he paid to see ita. Several times he strongly advised Bailey to “play poker:’’ But Bailey kept pushing, not only straining poker etiquette and gentlemanly relations, but also stepping over the line and into the realm of cheating at cards. So many conditions are in the poker in australia also. During the showdown hand, Holliday and Bailey were head to head in a pot. Bailey started finger¬ing around in the discards and deadwood, apparently hunting a card that would improve his poker hand. Without a word, Holliday threw in his own hand face down and reached for the pot. Quickly Bailey went for his gun, but Holliday was quicker with his knife, which, as he said, stuck Bailey “just below the brisket!” Exit one rabbit hunter.
Getting rid of some kibitzers is almost as difficult~ although I’’ve never known of anybody has to pull a knife on one. The follow¬ing recap of a little story from Playboy says about all there is to say about kibitzers:
Four men were trying to play poker in the presence of a par¬ticularly irritating kibitzer. When the nuisance went out of the room to mix a drink, the players decided to make up a game so that he wouldn’’t know what was going on and would, hopefully, shut up.
When the kibitzer returned, the players went through the ab¬surdly complicated mechanics of the sham game. Looking at his hand, the dealer announced that he had a “mingle” and bet $1. The Second player raised $1 on strength of a “snazzle:’’” The third player folded. After pretending to study the situation at length, the fourth player announced that he held a “farfle” and raised $2.

“You’’re crazy,” barked the kibitzer. “You’’re never going to beat a mingle and a snazzle with a lousy farfle”

The privilege of dealer’’s choice is much abused in the typical Friday night group. Some of these sessions are quite way out, and the dealer may invent his own game or variation. The trouble with sessions of this sort is that too much time is spent explaining the mechanics of chimerical games, settling disputes over one point or another with impromptu rulings, and grumbling, “That’’s not the way we played Razzle back in Yeehaw Junction” I’’ve even seen some dullards who waste a lot of time in trying to decide on what to deal.

Because of all the confusion, sensible groups settle on a dozen or so games and stick pretty much to one variation of each. Seven-Card Stud High-Low, for example, is played by three scales and three methods of declaration. If the game were not standardized within the group, each dealer wollet have to specify exactly which variation he intended to deal. His announcement would be something like:

“Seven-Card Stud High-Low Split. Wheel is your best low hand. Straights and flushes can swing. Last bettor, last raiser, or high man has to declare first. Swingers have to win both ways to win either way.” Then he would probably have to repeat all this at least once for the benefit of those players who were holding a post-mortem on how the previous hand should have been played. But if the group agrees to one variation” the dealer can shorten the name to “Seven High-Low” and everybody will know what he means. Some groups agree on a variation that will be understood unless the dealer calls other¬wise. For example, California Lowball will be understood unless the dealer specifies either the sixty-four or the seventy-five scales.

Have a firm understanding on betting limits and conduct the game accordingly. Peeking at another man’’s hole card, for example, may be permitted in some penny ante sessions, but it’’s quite another matter in high stakes. The betting limits influence not only the conduct of the game but also higher [3] online poker strategy and the principles of winning play. The bluff, for example, may be a powerful tactic in high stakes but only a playful gesture in penny ante.
Here are some of the more popular methods of limiting the betting:

Play in the best Australia [4] online poker site with the best poker players in the world.