A secret poker game you can play on the subway

Game rules & mechanics

• Several commenters were confused about when/how to “choose” a row and what the player actually does.
• Others clarified: at the agreed starting point you pick a row of seats as your hand, then just watch passenger turnover until the end station; you’re effectively betting on how that row will evolve.
• Some found this explanation clearer than the article itself and noted that without actions, betting, or control over the hand, it feels more like bingo or a passive RNG contest than a game of poker.

Strategy, fairness, and “poker-ness”

• People proposed ways to add agency:
  • Keep chosen rows secret and use normal betting/bluffing.
  • Treat each stop as a betting round.
  • Secretly choose “hole seats” plus shared “community seats” (Texas Hold’em style).
• Others joked about “cheating” by subtly herding passengers, offering seats to desired “cards,” or discouraging unwanted ones.
• Some argued this isn’t really poker because it lacks imperfect information and wagering; others countered that many games using poker hand rankings are called poker anyway.
• One commenter suggested hashing unambiguous visible traits (coat color, hats) into virtual cards to normalize probabilities, at the cost of strategic depth.

Classification, gender, and ethics

• Multiple people questioned how to decide who is a child, teen, or elderly, noting that age is ambiguous and would prompt disputes.
• There was discomfort with a game that requires assuming strangers’ gender or age; some would avoid it for that reason, others thought it harmless since targets are never addressed.
• Suggestions included redesigning the game to avoid gendered categories altogether, e.g., using clothing or phone use.

Writing style and originality

• A substantial subthread revolved around the article’s “AI smell”: clichés (“let’s dive into”), generic structure, and flattened voice.
• Some criticized this trend and worried about false AI accusations; others compared the post with earlier blog entries and felt a clear stylistic shift.
• The author eventually confirmed using an LLM to polish English, and seemed unsure whether that was a good choice.
• Several noted that the idea and point assignments closely match a 2005 short film, “Tube Poker.”

Variants and practical constraints

• Commenters discussed how differing subway layouts (French-style group seating vs long corridors, checkerboard seating habits) affect feasibility.
• Alternatives mentioned: using suits based on clothing/items (while avoiding racist mappings), counting phone users instead, and other ad‑hoc public‑space games.