Cake uses two kickers?

I was in a hand where I had a weak ace and it paired...

Not sure how to get accurate hand history from Cake anyway, but that's not what has me confused...

For all this time, I thought that if a kicker that's higher than both players' kickers lands on the board in a hand then the pot's split...

Only Cake used the other player's kicker from their hand plus the kicker on the board. Is that right?

It should be the highest possible hand of five cards. Where the kicker is does not matter. If he had a king and you had a Q, his hand would win. If this is a game like Omaha then just remember that two cards must and only two cards can be used from each players down cards.

Like Confuz said, it's your best five cards in Hold'em. You can 0, 1, or both of your hole cards.

You have A/7
Villain has A/4
Board is A/8/8/9/2
You split the pot, both using A/A/8/8/9 as your best hand. Each only using your Ace.

You have A/7
Villain has A/4
Board is A/K/5/2/Q
You win with A/A/K/Q/7, he loses with A/A/K/Q/5. You use both cards, he only uses his Ace.

What game is this? NLH? Omaha? In Omaha, you must use *exactly* two of your hold cards and *exactly* three of the cards on the board. This can be confusing to people who are unfamiliar to the game and want to us an improper number of hold cards.

EDIT: Your "uses two kickers?' comment makes me think that you you weren't looking at all five cards as the complete hand. If I have "top pair," that means that I paired the highest card on the board and the other three cards in my best hand didn't pair or make a flush/straight. So if you have one pair, you have three kickers.

No what I'm saying is we each had a pair of aces. The winning hand was aces with a Q/J kicker. The queen was on the board, my hole cards were A/rag and his were A/J we were playing aces vs aces and the queen should have been our mutual kicker, unless I've been getting ripped off at site after site for all these years.

Was Hold Em. Just regular old NL Texas Hold Em. I limped with A/rag and if it weren't for what should have been a mutual kicker I wouldn't be miffed. I can take a bad beat or outright loss, it's this two kickers nonsense that has me baffled. I never heard of two kickers before. I've split pots when a king showed up and trumped my relatively high kicker before.

The queen is a mutual kicker..which means that they must go to the NEXT best card. The best 5 card hand....so, you had a/6 he had a/j, board had AQXXX. The queen played in both of your hands...whatever was on the board that was above your 6 played for you...his jack played..he won.

You both had AAQ, that's the best 3 cards. You need the best 5.

Thanks guys, this'll make more sense when I feel better. I hope.

Say you had A/4.
He had A/J.
Say the board was A/Q/7/6/2.

Your hand is A/A/Q/7/6.
His is A/A/Q/J/7.

Essentially, the kickers to your pair are Q and 7 and 6. (You are not playing the pocket 4)
The kickers to his pair are Q and J and 3.

Your pair ties his pair.
Your first kicker ties his kicker (Q)
Your second kicker (7) loses to his second kicker (J).
You lose.

And yes, it can come down to your 5th card as well.
A/7 vs A/6
K/Q/J/5/2 board.
Result: Ace high with K/Q/J/7 kickers beats Ace high with K/Q/J/6 kickers.

It's not two kickers. The kicker would be the first card that you didn't tie the other player with. In the scenario you describe he has a Jack kicker and you have a rag kicker.

Also, I type slow.

Thanks, brain still fuzzy...

Sorry, been messed up with my tooth, when a tooth starts hurting your brain reacts funnily.

Anyway, on the one hand I get what happened now, I think I'm just not used to seeing the kickers listed that way in hand history because I usually just skim. The real point is, if my brain hadn't taken a hiatus I would have folded that ragged ace pre-flop. The kicker thing was just playing a mind game with me.

I'm almost back in form.