Similar to this question, it would be useful for the site to support markup for hand histories. If nothing else, markup for suits could be helpful when I say I have AsKc (a little spade and club next to the letters or something). I believe this has been implemented elsewhere with :spade:, :club:, etc. There exist full-blown hand-history converters that support copying results directly from online log-files (I think some even use 52 distinct images for the cards), but that is less important now than something more basic.

♠ ♣ ♢ ♡

  • 3
    +1 for this, a poker site without AT LEAST able to make cards pictures easily, wont live long !
    – kissgyorgy
    Commented Jan 10, 2012 at 20:29
  • 1
    I'm not sure that the black-and-white unicode symbols are sufficient. I think color could help a lot. Red for hearts, black for spades, and either red or blue for diamonds and either black or green for clubs. Commented Jan 10, 2012 at 22:01
  • I just added a hand history and the process to format it was RIDICULOUSLY long. Seriously need this feature to get some attention! Hand history converters for markdown anywhere?
    – Toby Booth
    Commented Jan 15, 2012 at 17:58
  • @nick if you could assist ben per the below? Commented Jan 22, 2012 at 8:48

4 Answers 4


This is a must-have feature for the site.


Okay, I have enabled a first version of a card renderer (example).

You can either use the colon notation (A:spades:), HTML entities (7♥), or plain unicode (T♦). I have decided against the allowing Qh Kd style because of this ambiguity:

As would be the nut flush, so you should fold.


As that would be the nut flush, you should fold.

It's red/black currently; if you want a four-color deck, voice your support for this request.


Agreed, the site needs this. The question is just in the details – what markup do we use?

When we created the Go renderer (example) for the Game of Go StackExchange (later merged into boardgames), there was already a convention on what markup to use, as Sensei's Library-style markup is the default way of showing Go game situations all over the internet. Thus many people were already posting games in SL markup before the renderer existed.

Is there something similar for the "discussing poker online" world? A "default" way of describing cards?

A♣   AC   A+   A:clubs:

If so, we shouldn't reinvent the wheel, since familiarity with the markup would be a big plus for users coming in from another community.

If there's not, well, then we need to come up with something nice and intuitive, including the question "what does this markup describe?" I.e. is it just a way to describe the suits? Or does it describe whole hands, including a "these cards from the board, these cards from the player" display feature (You know, like when the dealer pushes the best board cards upwards. I'm pretty sure that action has a name.) Or does it display whole tables? Despite trying to be intuitive, how can it also be flexible (e.g. not create issues with different game types)?

Comments appreciated.

  • 2
    Yes, definetly it is !! Every poker software use this: A,K,Q,J - obvious T - for tens 9,...,2 - obvious too. For colors: c for clubs s for spades d for diamonds h for hearts So you describe cards by writing the card value first, then the color: Ac Ks Kh 2d etc You dont even need space between cards, because it's exact: 2c2s
    – kissgyorgy
    Commented Jan 16, 2012 at 14:24

To follow up on @balpha's post, the 2 + 2 forums use the :clubs: style markup, and support it with buttons you can click on in the editor interface to insert card symbols. Since the 2 + 2 forums (it's starting to look like I work for them...) are the largest poker forums/question site in the US, a majority of the audience here would likely understand that format.

That being said, I honestly think it doesn't matter which is chosen so long as the choice does not create ambiguity with other features of our site. Just like the other forums, buttons can be added to insert them for new users who don't already know the format. My vote goes for the :diamonds: format for the reason that this wouldn't interfere with existing markup and the bonus that it still allows people to use other common textual representations if they want to. The follow up question there of course is whether or not we should just transform as many representations as we can to create a more uniform feel, or just use one representation and let the editors adjust as they see fit?

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .