What is the origin of the term "to call" in card games like poker?
I can understand that one can "raise" the bet, but why does one want to say "call" to match a bet or match a raise?
How would that meaning of the action "call" be used elsewhere?
|
What is the origin of the term "to call" in card games like poker? I can understand that one can "raise" the bet, but why does one want to say "call" to match a bet or match a raise? How would that meaning of the action "call" be used elsewhere? |
||||
|
|
|
There seem to be many different uses of 'call' in different card games. The Laws and Practice of Whist (Caelebs, 1859) says:
So calling here is a particular signal to your partner (not a verbal call, but a signal encoded by the choice of cards played). But it also seems to be used in the sense of 'calling the game', when you reach a point where you have sufficient strength to win regardless of your opponents' actions. The Compleat Gamester (Richard Seymour and Charles Johnson, 1754) under 'Whist' has
I believe this is current usage in other trick-taking games like bridge - if at the end you have the right number of trumps (say) then you can declare victory without actually playing out the rest of the game. The 'call' of poker might be similar to this older usage. OED has
quoting Longman's Magazine from September 1883. The sense is that it is now time to see who has won (and by matching the amount bet, the person who says 'call' is still in the game). |
|||
|
|
|
I believe it stems from Poker's origins as "Brag". It's a 3-card, "straight" game similar in overall feel, but there's only one "betting round" after the cards are dealt. So, in Brag, to bet into the pot or raise the stakes is to "brag" that your cards are better than everyone else's (obviously without seeing anyone else's hand). To "call" is literally "to call them out" or "to call an end to the brag"; you match the outstanding bet and thus end the betting, forcing them to back up their "brag" by showing their hand. |
||||
|
I don't know if this counts as an answer -- it's more like an assumption I've had so long I didn't realize it wasn't the obvious truth. I thought that you were "calling on" your opponent to act, typically show his cards. |
|||
|
|
|
I always thought it was from the financial world's "call option", where the buyer is given the chance to either buy or pass -- the fact that "pass" is also used in poker reinforced that belief, but I've never bothered to research it. |
|||
|