blonde poker forum

Ok first to set the scene...

£25 F/O at Grosevnor Southampton, Wed night just gone.

Sat at the table playing away and throughout the banter, one gentleman (lets call him Bob) is quite obviously trying to build up an imag of himself as a tight, aggressive, experienced player. He is regularly doling out advice to people on how they should have played their hand and constantly telling everyone that he only plays the nuts. I don't have a problem with that, as he is obviously playing the game and even trying to be helpful. It does get a bit tiresome though, but I keep my thoughts to myself. He is also letting it be known that he knows a few people; is trying to build up his buddies image too.

Quite early in night I look down and see  Qh Qd. I raise to 300 (3 bb) from an early position. Everyone folds to Lady (lets call her Doris) on the cut off re-raisesto 800. Fold-fold-to BB (lets call him Beavis) who puts in a massive raise to about 2800.

I am going to the fold, but want to build up my own image. So I hum and ha and then state to the table....'I have a hand...but I dunno if I can play to this. Doris is a rock and that re-raise is rather scary'. I happen to know she is very tight. Beavis is also relatively inexperienced and gave away a massive tell.

So I folded. Doris folds, Beavis takes pot.

People ask what I laid down. I state 'Queens'. At which point Bob and a few of his mateys p*ss themselves laughing. Bob says 'I push every time in that position' and proceeds to give me a lecture. I stay cool and even have a chuckle, but after he doesn't let up I tell him that I don't think QQ is that good a hand in the situation and that its too early in the tournament to risk my life.

Beavis then inflames it all when asked what he has and says he had deuces! They all p*ss themselves laughing. I stay cool and say 'nice bluff...good luck to u playing like that'. (I've already milked all my chips from him and am v happy having him on my right). The pi*staking continues and I say something along the lines of 'well thats why I'll go deeper in this tourney than u lot'. Bob then says 'I win tournaments sunshine!'.

Jibes continue and whenever I raise the jokes come out about me having KK or AA. Very nice for me. I'm raising with all sorts of junk by now!

Beavis later confides to me that he did indeed have AA, which is a positive for me obviously.

Now to the main part of the plot....

A little later on I look down to see  Qh Qd in second position. Same suits as last time! This time I raise 2.5 bb to 500. All folds round to Bob in the SB. He calls. Got a read, I know he's on an Ace or King ...probably with high kicker. Bobs obviously not as good as he makes out :-) He calls. Beavis in BB folds.

Pot is 1200.

Flop comes...

 Qc 8d Tc

BEAUTIFUL!

I quickly check and Bob fires in 500 chips. I call. Pot is 2200.

Turn...

 6h

I check, Bob puts me all in for my last 5000 or so.

Naturally I call.

Cards on their backs, Bob droans 'I've been caught out'....

He has  Ac Jh

Now for the juicy bit...

River comes...

 Kc

I sit stock still trying to register what I thought I had seen.

I hear 'unlucky mate' and then see Bob saying 'yeah I got caught out'. He picks up his Ace and mucks it!!!!!

Well! All my christmases have come at once! I've escaped a bad beat, made lots of chips and have a chance for some sweet revenge on this fella!

Another players says 'No Bob...u won that with a straight!'

He says...'Oh yeah', retrieves his cards and starts to pull in the pot!

I say 'Er no. Leave those chips alone they're mine. You mucked your hand'

To which chaos lets loose! He says he only mucked one card. I tell him his hand is mucked. At which point he spews some drivel about having a similar situation recently in a card school. He stated that the cards were on their backs and everyone knew what they were. He stated that as such, he could then muck the card and take the pot. I told him that was not the case and sorry, but u muck one card your hand is mucked. I advise him to get a ruling.

He argues the toss with the card room manager who backs me up. Eventually he has to back down. He handled it ok, but was fuming (red and shaking quite a good indication??? :-) )

To compound matters, he asked me which my car was in the car park so that he could key it!!!! I then had the pleasure of him pushing all in on my blind and taking his last 5000 chips.

He disappeared under a cloud. Not very happy.

I'm pleased to say that I was able then to take most of the cacklers chips of them to take to the final table.

Justice?

Anyway....whats your thoughts on this. Would you have done the same? I believe I would not have been so stubborn over the ruling had the game been played out in a good nature prior to the incident. I might even have let it go.

Was I right to insist? Or am I a horrible nasty man??????

If the cards were face up at the showdown the dealer should give him the pot as the cards speak. 

Well, in my humble opinion...

Firstly, the cards are obviously face up after all the chips go in - he hits his straight and the dealer should pass him the chips

Secondly, you should just pass over your chips with good grace

so all in all I'd go for option (b) you're a horrible nasty man  ;)

He doesn't need to, the cards speak.  If the dealer genuinely felt that he wasn't able to determine the best hand then it is your pot, but it is the dealer's* decision. 

*I would be very surprised if a UK dealer would know what to do here and the floor manager would just hear the word "muck" and award you the pot.

NB I'm only talking about tournaments here as there are all sorts of situations that affect other players, so the pot should always be awarded to the best hand.  If this was a cash game the pot is mine and not sure what I would do, it would depend on a multitude of factors, but if I was never going to return to the cardroom I would probably keep the pot (so add me to the nasty horrible man list)

I am of the opinion that if a card hits the muck its dead.

Indeed, if the cards hit the muck then he's mucked his hand. Your well witth your rights to do it Lee and i'm glad you did cos he sounds like a ****, how did the FT go?

Personally I wouldnt do it just cos I dont really like confrontation unless its in the pokerstars chat box ;)

If he turned his cards on there backs at any point in the hand either pre river being dealt or after but before they went in the muck, and you stated they went on their backs and you also knew cards and suits so you must of seen them at some point, then the rule that cards speak in a tournament showdown situation is applicable. Therefore the wrong ruling was given and you should not have won the pot and in my opinion should of given it up like a gentleman without a fight, you did have the worst hand afterall. I have had this happen to me and every time have conceded the pot in fact often been the one to point it out to my own detriment. In a cash game i would do the same and have seen it many times, anyone at the table can point it out if the dealer misses it. No point playing if you play the game any other way just cheating IMO. If they hit the muck before they go on their backs then that really should be a dead hand.

Cards on their back so they speak. It is not just the responsibility of the dealer but every player on the table (including you) to say hang on he had a str8. You cant "muck" your hand as after it has been tabled it stands. You are cheating and the cardroom manager is incompetant for ruling in your favour. It is not a local rule either it is one of the first rules of poker worldwide and is in every rulebook (TDA etc), it is also meant to be a gentlemans sport so common sense and decency should have made you do the correct thing.

In Lee's defence I have to say that not everyone (including some TDs by the sound of it) knows the 'rule book' inside out.

If he believed his opponents hand was dead AND the floor ruled it that way then I think branding him a cheat is a bit over the top.

I would have let him take the pot. Whether I dislike the guy or not, it's not how I want to win a competition.

as already said, cards speak.

it's a terrible ruling and I'm afraid you seem to have behaved badly too. everyone knows he's sucked out on the river and he may be an idiot but it's still his pot

i think you were entitled to give up the pot and not ask for a ruling. however if you were ignorant of the of the rules and having asked the td for his decision he found in your favour i think its a bit harsh to say you were cheating.

Exactly

disagree with any of you defending on the "he didn't know the rules" argument.
he had the best hand and no matter what sort of person he is he wins the pot. Win with dignity not win at all costs. How anyone can justify taking the pot is beyond me. I have seen several instances on cash games (including me in the pots and declaring the other guys hand for him) where players table there cards not realising they have made a backdoor 3 flush or something silly- Any player who doesn't declare a hand once he's seen it and then claims a pot is a cheat in my books. He openly admits he knew the guy had hit his str8 and yet still claims the pot- sorry you're a cheat.

When the cards go on their backs you have reached "showdown"

If a hand has been showndown then it is no longer possible to muck. If the chips are still in the middle of the table he has every right to "claim" the live pot with the winning hand that he showed.

However, if the dealer has pushed the pot over the bet line and "awarded" it to you there is no longer a live pot to claim and it is yours to keep if you wish.

The bulk of your post centres around the atmosphere at the table and the banter that you are subjected to. Depriving your opponent of a pot he has quite rightfully won is not the best way to score points here. Personally, I would say something like...."I believe Broadway beats a set Doyle" and give him a wry smile. Yes, you don't win the pot, but hey you haven't won the pot anyway...but you do show yourself to be a fair, honest player. This gives you the moral high ground. The jibes should then stop. If they don't...just cough..."broadway" every time he opens his mouth.

Always let your play do the talking because the way you play represents the person that you are.

In short, F*ck him!

If he's too stupid not to have worked out that he was looking for a King then that's his problem.

He should go back to playing for play money if he can't read a flop.

If he was just a beginer then fair enough I'd do the decent thing and tell him he'd won with a straight but since he is the fount of all poker knowledge then he gets no leeway when he makes an arse of things   ;D

Glad to see the spirit of poker is alive and well  :dontask:

incorrect- dealers make mistakes all the time and if the mistake is pointed out before the next hand is dealt it should have been corrected. The fact the TD ruled in favour of you is just beyond belief. If there was the old oh I dont know how much is in the pot argument then the bets should be put back and it is easy to work the pot out.
the thread is titled "am i a horrible person for doing this"- DEFINATELY  " would you do the same"- never in a million years.

thems the rules. you and the TD got it wrong. simple as that really.

On a side note how the hell do you manage to get a TD that doesnt know the most basic of rules? Where do they find them from?

If I had a 1£ for every TD in the UK that didn't know the rules I could play Ivey and golf and give him 20 shots (even though I am crap at it) play 18 holes for 3 days and still walk away with enough money to buy myself into the main event.

I think you are being a bit harsh.  IMO there should have been no dispute in this situation had the dealer/manager been competent.  I don't think that players should have to do anything more than abide by floor decisions, otherwise you get all sorts of potential problems.  In my earlier days of playing I lost a huge pot with AhJh vs 22 on a double paired board in exactly the same circumstances with the manager giving exactly the same incorrect ruling.

As far a cash is concerned, a player requires all his cards to collect the pot.  I would only concede the pot in a cash game if I thought it was in my long term interests i.e. a beginner or a regular donator. 

A major problem with poker is the lack of definitive and universal rules. The rules of the house take precedence. This situation has occurred at my table in two different Grosvenor casinos and on both occasions the card-room manager has been called. Both times the table has been informed that at Grosvenor casinos an awarded pot cannot be retrieved.

I think the sooner universally accepted rules are implemented as standard the better.

Often though we are talking about a moral issue rather than a technical ruling. I would never take a pot I didn't feel I was entitled to. I think you do the game and yourself a real dis-service if you don't play like a gentleman. Winning fairly and with integrity is what you want.

I was at the Broadway in Birmingham on Friday night where there was a violent fist-fight over a "burn-card" ruling. I watched 2 guys lumping seven bells of shit out of each other over whether the deuce of hearts should be allowed to stand.

When all is said and done this is a game. Talk of "keying" cars etc...is quite pathetic in my mind. Nothing is as important as how you conduct yourself on the way to victory....even victory itself.

I think you know you did wrong here in the heat of the momnet, by starting this thread you probabaly  are admitting it to yourself.

However, don't beat yourself up to much, as I know quite a few players that would have done the same as you, maybe not the people posting here, but certainly you are not alone in "trying it on" in the poker world. it happens all the time, and from people who would swear bllind they wear halos.

Cheers Rob

can this be the same ariston complaining of someone cheating as the ariston who posed the hypophetical question that if you could see players hole cards online you should take full advantedge and take em for all you could?!

Are you horrible for doing this? - no
Would I have done the same? - probably not

"cards speak" - they just lie there mute, they need a spokesperson. This should be the dealer, of course, and the players involved, but in the real world outdraws can easily be overlooked. In this case, you overlooked it deliberately for a split second: I've known worse things happen.

'I'll key your car' is funny.

Any chance of coming back to the Broadway, Richard? Your presence is missed... 

hypothetical question being the key part and it was in response to another thread. Don't ever question my integrity iceman.

you left your integrity open to question. dont ever tell me what i may or may not do.

you know in your heart you were out of order which is why the post described what a nasty person this was so trying to justify your actions. I don't care if it was Osama Bin Laden in this hand with you by taking the pot when you know you had lost you were cheating- you knew he had hit his str8 and still thought you would keep your mouth shut and take it when the dealer had made a cock up. It's the players responsibility to protect some form of integrity in the game as well as the officials. A bit like a snooker player calling a foul on himself or a golfer moving his ball accidentally when moving twigs and stuff in the rough (if they don't they are in effect cheating)

the question was a hypothetical one aimed at starting debate/discussion (which it did). My integrity is fine but if you would like to take this off forum by pm or maybe question my integrity at a live game don't expect me to be so polite. I don't know you from adam so please be very careful with what you post about me on an open forum.

at no stage in his initial post does he say he was aware of the ruling. you ,make the assumption he knows and label him a cheat.

he doesnt need a ruling- he knows his hand had been beaten so why is there a need for a ruling? He had seen the hand and knew he was beat. You defending his actions tells me all I need to know about you.

i shall precede with how i see fit. if you think you can intimidate me your much mistaken. as for being up close n personal,frankly youd be punching above your wieght

you absolute tool. I wasn't threatening anything. Why do all ex firemen think they are rocky balboa ffs. Go shit stir somewhere else you numpty (as for punching above my weight I am a real fat bstrd as most on here will confirm so I doubt thats true lol)

have you sacked me then? damn, i thought i had a night shift to go to

I'm sure plenty on the forum will vouch for my integrity and I can't believe I've got involved with a slanging match with some random tool who reckons its fine to have a random pop at someone who is answering a genuine thread. From now on if you want a row (as most fireman do- I know quite a few) just pm me and we don't need to bother anyone else on here.

I think that the "cheating" tag is a bit mis-guided here

If jjandellis was in the same hand with "Doris" instead of "Bob" I am quite sure he would immediately point out the error. The reason he behaves the way he does is to teach his arrogant, know-it-all opponent a lesson.

However, and this is a very important poker related point....To change the way you would normally behave because of how your opponent acts means that you are letting an opponent pull your strings. In other words, your opponent is controlling how you act. You can never reach your potential in the game if this happens.

This is why I say you should have pointed out the error "in spite" of the person involved. This way your outlook, actions etc...remain constant and opponents can't get into your head. Scoring points with banter is an enjoyable part of the game, but if you take other people's actions too much to heart it leads to Broadway fist-fights, keying-car threats and blonde members having pops at each other.

The wider point then....is control your opponents....don't let them control you. A thick skin is a good attribute in this game.

i dont care who would vouch for you. look at the thread you started re seeing hole cards and then defend your moral ambiguity. again you see fit to childish name calling and and an implied threat. for use of the word tool i suggest you locate ariston in your dictionary.

my defence if thats how you wish you wish to see it of the posters initial thread is mostly based on 2 things, 1 - i have no knowledge of his understanding of the rules and 2  - that people such as yourself have no right to catagorise him as a cheat without the facts. your only to willing to BULLY or attempt to.

It does my head in when people say that. You can win a pot in a cash game with ONE card if you like. If you've accidentaly mucked one somehow throughout the course of the hand, as long as you started with two.

Of course, you have to show all remaining cards to take a pot.

Of course he's cheating. He's scraping in a pot he knows he lost. There's no two ways about it. I've never met a poker player yet who doesn't know the most basic rules of a showdown. You cannot "muck" your hand after they've been on their backs.

Even if the geezer didn't know that rule, he's still aware that he lost the pot, even if the lumpy of a dealer didn't realise it, and should have the honestt to award it to another player.

As for having "no live pot" when the chips cross the line, that's just completely made-up! Re-construct the hand, few minutes, job done.

Similair thing happened on an Omaha cash game in Manchester recently. Superivisor didn't have a clue what he was doing and made the wrong ruling when he was called by the dealer, the players decided it was a load of bollocks and chopped the pot up accordingly.

This is totally wrong and can obviously lead to all sorts of collusion and bullying.  The cardroom employees should make decisions and if they are getting them wrong, their incompetence should be brought to the attention of their managers.   

in a cash game if the players involved agree to do something its got nothing to do with the staff. Its a cash game and its our cash thats on the table so why should we put up with a half arsed decisision?

Don't be naive

What happens in a "cash game" and what happens in a "tournament" is different

In a tournament there is a tournament director or card-room manager who's specific job it is to manage the event. He/she will make consistent decisions across the board. I am quite sure there is more day to day variation at the cash tables.

This is a very interesting thread!

Its like a movie plot.   ;popcorn; ;popcorn; ;popcorn;

you started this thread by asking the question are you a horrible person and would I do this. I have answered (as a more experienced but certainly not wealthier) that I wouldnt do this because it is cheating. I am not staining your character and you now know for future reference that it is unacceptable behaviour. I have explained that corect ettiquette and rules state that once a hand has been tabled it speaks, if the dealer makes an error and passes the losing player the pot it should be corrected by anybody at the table and the pot should go to the winning hand. If you want to plead ignorance then fine but now you know would you do it again? If the answer is yes you would do it again then yes I think you are a cheat, if the answer is no then you're not.

I think this is debateable.  The reason that you have to show both cards is because of the possibility of the deck being fouled.  Lets say there are 4 spades on board and player a shows the King of spades - player b realising that he also has the King along with the Ace, tosses the King in the muck and shows the ace.

Bob Ciaffone's rules state that a hand is dead if it doesn't contain the required number of cards for the game. 

Interesting thread.
Allegations of being a cheat seem a load of tosh to be honest as he appears from the original post to have acted in line with his understanding of the rules and he has been backed up by the TD.
As for the ruling hopefully Mel will read this thread as it would be good to get her views on this one.

Indie cheated in the quiz...;whistle;

 ;yellowcard;

greats words of wisdom here,lets not be decievieved that the poster has any affinity with the losing player in this hand (possiblly theyre both mugs) but who knows-surely the truth would be a point of conjecture!!!!????? lets -in all honesty be the novice at the table n then pose the question tomorrow,good luck folks,youre morallity has been predetermined-ypo are a cheat.

very good at taking quotes out of context- you have showed over and over what an imbecile you are and I will have no further slanging matches with someone who obviously already knows everything. The quote above was when somebody said players weren't allowed to sort the pot out themselves in a cash game when an incorrect ruling had been made and I said in cash games its different. Keep attacking away in any other threads as you are obviously that type of person but I will leave you to play with yourself now (should be used to it)

maybe your not a cheat after all but like me youre a wanker,imbecile,child,tosser,aggressive idiot who disagrees with the self appointed god on all things poker related unless of course it diverts from the truth according to - ive played and lost consistently for 20years it hurts to much to face the truth so ill call every1 else into question ariston,coz thats all i know how to do !!

You're out of order!

check the thread- i dont think so. give a reason at least

Have read thread from start to finish. If you don't think your posts are out of order then any reason I give will be falling on deaf ears methinks.

so you dont give a reason but decide to be critical,how apt

Reason enough I think.

My thoughts on the OP are as follows: I think the snooker analogy was a good one. I ALWAYS call a foul on myself in cuesports whether I have fouled or not...If I think I may have fouled that's enough...It's about honour and poker is the same. In the example in question I'd have pushed the chips over TO THE PLAYER THAT SHOWED DOWN the winning hand. For my money, asking for a ruling here with the intention is pretty low. May be in a hypothetical situation a player might ask for a ruling to make the villain sweat which would be punishment of sorts for his behaviour but the said player would NEVER have any intentions of claiming chips they clearly hadn't won.

Please don't ask me for anymore reasons.

Oh dear

LOL

wow cant believe no mod stepped in on this "debate"!

jj- i agree with what mantis has contributed to this thread as it is the only sensible string of posts on here. You would have gained so much more from announcing his hand than just the money for 3rd place. He would never have been able to comment on a hand while at your table again as you could destroy him  missing the only card that could hit to save him plus gain the respect from fellow players as they seemed to miss it aswell (frikking morons- wish this casino was close to me!)

I think i understand you asking for a ruling as you genuinely believed the mucking rule stood even in showdowns and you can in no way be called a cheat as you asked for a ruling from the TD. How many cheats do you know ask a TD to check out a hand ruling unless the TD is in on it aswell!

The only bit i am figuratively shaking my head in shame at is that you let him control your emotions!

Dont go beating yourself up about it,as long as you learn from the mistake and park your car away from the casino from now on!

Sound advice.
 rotflmfao

brilliant. Early contender for post of the week lol

In normal circumstances i would give him the chips but i think justice was done he he he

I agree with King Poker - I think its a bit harsh to call him a cheat. In this situation i would have given the player the pot cause i dont like confrontation and i dont play at high enough stakes that i'm willing to get into an argument about a pot, BUT, in this situation i would have maybe have ruled the same as the TD. From the posts, its quite clear that i'm wrong in thinking that, but that doesnt make me a cheat - especially if i call over a TD to get a ruling.

And when people talk about live rules and etiquette, remember we have a generation of net players who dont neccessarily know them.

Kinboshi - See you in court :redcard:

Rather be judged by 12 than beaten by 13... ;)

Wow...this lit some blue touch paper eh!

I understand the situation you found yourself in here Lee.....but think you got it wrong this time, but your explanation is good enough for me. The best way to deal with this plonker would have been to remind him of all the help he needed in understanding hand values.

You a cheat......not in a million years IMO

Must say I've enjoyed the post.....ding ding.....round 10!

 You might not be nasty but you obviously don't understand the concept of the 'showdown'. 

In the heat of the moment a few times playing live I have not realised I had won a hand, it happens alot.  Just ask the BB4 winner who it happened to a few weeks ago at the local casino! he chopped a hand and walked away thinking he had lost :) You claim the people at the table are all cheats if they saw it?

You cant blame someone for not saying something esp if the geezer is a prick.

don't care what anyone says- anybody who would claim the pot when they know (and he did know) the other person won is a cheat. Would it be ok to "improve" your lie in the rough on the golf course if you were playing someone who was a prick? Would it be ok if you didn't get seen? I am surprised anyone can defend this as I would have thought most blondites were very fair and honest people. I am not saying he is a cheat who cheats all the time but in this circumstance he cheated and was backed up by an imbecile of a TD who didn't know the most basic of rules. He has yet to say wether he would do this again (if it ever happened again) just because the other bloke is a tool. If it was a nice old gentleman would he do it? no, so what he is saying is its ok to cheat somebody because they are an arse. Doesn't wash with me.

I wouldn't personally do it but you can understand why it was done. I would not however label them a cheat in the same way as moving your ball in golf.

But I guess everyone has their own different opinions.

Bad Karma... a powerful thing.

jjandellis first out last night and 8th out in tonights APAT satellite!!!   ;gobsmacked;

 ;scarymoment;

The golf analogy doesn't work. In the poker scenario outlined he asked the TD and the TD gave a ruling. If when playing golf you ask the "ref" if the rule is you can improve the lie and he says yes then how can you be cheating? The fact that both the player and the ref is wrong doesn't imply cheating.
One of these days there will be a simple rule book that you can refer to to preven these scenarios arising, but this has been a long time coming.

Poker is War and all is fair in love and War :-)  this is a very strange one because as every one says cards speak BUT if cards hit the muck there dead so it all depends on how quick this all went down it seems to me all the cards were on there back before the river SO the dealer at that stage CAN'T muck a winning hand BUT there is no rule that says a player CAN'T muck a winning hand so if the GUY mucked his cards before the dealer did any thing HE LOST if the dealer just sat there looking at the flop and did nothing I would not let him deal to me sorry to bust your bubble Ariston and any one else but there are the rules world wide and poker is not full of nice guys in fact there are a lot of pricks out there and they want your cash like vampires want your blood

Answer one question---- the cards are on their backs on the turn---- is a showdown - can you muck them?  I don't think so...

Obviously jjandalis has no idea what the showdown is- bless you child....

Jjandalis very smart of you setting up the scene so people will feel sympathetic to your actions, if it was an old lady - the support would be much lesser.

Once action has forced an "on their backs situation" i.e. no more betting due to a player/players being all in, with cards to come on the board, once the cards have been tabled they are live. The player should have nothing more to do with the hand, it is down to the dealer to "kill" hands. The player should not be allowed to "kill" their own hand. Furthermore it is down to any player, if they notice an irregularity has taken place to state it. So I am afraid in my book, Ariston's "bubble" is still in tact.

This is a real odd one.

Forget all the nonsense about the "grudge factor" - that is not relevant.

What we have here are two rules that clash - "cards speak" & "mucked cards = hand killed".

The concensus seems to be that the hand should go to Broadway Straight Man - fair enough, it's tough to argue conclusively either way, & in the grand scheme of things, that's OK by me.

But the OP - who I readily admit is a pal - was honest enough to come on here & ask the question.

And if I read the Post correctly, he asked the Dealer the score, & the Dealer summoned the TD. The TD made a Ruling - whether it was right or wrong is not relevant - he gave a Ruling, & unless we want anarchy in our Cardrooms, we need to respect TD's decisions.

Lots of mistakes were made here - arguably, & variously, by one or more players, by the Dealer, & by the TD.

As to the tone of the thread as a whole, it's a shame that some folks can't be a bit more creative with the way they word things. The OP may have been entirely wrong in what he did, maybe, maybe not. But he is not a cheat, he's an honourable geezer. He may well have made a mistake, but I don't see why folks have to be so provocative, & go looking for trouble. The Mods spend half their time damping down fires, while others seem to delght in pouring petrol on the fire.

It's possible for grown-ups to have a cracking debate without making emotive accusations. Call someone a cheat, & there is bound to be a ruck. Say "imo, you were wrong sunshine" & we get a good debate that stays on track, & we all learn from it.

Insta-call.








LOL can i back you into the WSOP please, with reads like that you can never lose.





You should let the SB act first really, acting out of turn is against the rules.




Cards on their back, you lost take it like a gent.

You are basically an angle shooter, which is as bad as a cheat you look to abuse rules and hope for cardroom staff errors to take advantage of people. Acting like this will get you a horrible reputation, if i was a regular in Southampton i would inform everyone of your personal character.

Why do I always look for flushys posts 1st when I log on at this time of morning ::)

Because you know it....

For me it is the technical ruling that is the wholly irrelevant aspect of this thread with the "grudge factor" being the most vital of elements.

Whether a specific rule on any given day is implemented correctly or not is as irrelevant as whether the ball crossed the line in the '66 world cup final. It "did"... England won...end of. Debate about something that can't be changed is insignificant in comparison to the emotional reaction to it.

One day a person invented poker and some other people wrote down some rules.

But the "fight or flight" instincts that we have as human beings are light years more powerful than what someone wrote down one day and described as a "rule". So when 10 people sit down to play poker what happens with the "balance of power" is compelling stuff. Often the cause of the argument is just an insignificant spark that leads to a battle over who gets the psychological upper hand.

In this thread jj was allowing "Bob" to rankle him. When this situation arose an opportunity presented itself for jj to gain the upper hand...he seized it. Even after the "ruling" he could have given the pot to it's ethical (maybe not technical) owner. But didn't. To keep the pot was to rankle "Bob" back and gain the upper hand. "Bob" tries to re-seize the initiative by threatening to "key" jj's car etc....(N.B. To give the pot to "Bob" wins the war period.)

If you read the numerous exchanges between ariston and iceman it is clear the "ruling" has long been forgotten and it is now just a question of who can impose himself on the other and who gets the last word in.

If you go out on Friday night wearing your favourite shirt you feel great. But if someone points at your shirt and laughs (you must get this tikay) how do you feel now? Do you feel the same about your shirt? If not why not? Does it cease to be your favourite shirt because of what someone else thinks? Or do you have the ability to just shrug your shoulders and continue to enjoy wearing it regardless?

Your potential as a poker player can NEVER be reached if you allow your EMOTIONS to enter the decision making process. This point carries even more serious consequences if you allow others at the table to actually CONTROL these emotions and your behaviour generally.

I very rarely if ever let anyone get under my skin...to care about someone's opinion at the table is to give that opinion importance...I don't care what my opponents think...it isn't important...so how can I get annoyed?

To become detached from emotion at the table is surely the pinnacle that we should all be striving for.

So it is impossible to say the "grudge factor" is irrelevant in this clearly emotional debate because it is the "grudge factor" that turns threads like this into the hot-bed of opinion enforcement and mud-slinging that is has actually become.

So Tikay.....if you would be kind enough to tell me what car you drive my key is at the ready!

What was not pointed out was that this was a self dealt game and the pot had been awarded to jj, at this point the other player mucked there cards into the discards. When the td was called there was no possible way of 100% knowing what the cards had been as it was a call after the river and the player mucked the cards instantly.

He states they were on their backs before the river? And the cards were tabled?

you raise some good points here and in a reflective mood ive questioned my intenions in regards of the discourse i had with ariston. as for me my attitude was very out of character and one that i wouldnt like to see myself repeat as im normally very level headed and not quick to anger especially with somebody who i dont even know.

im not going to drag up any of the pre discussed issues,theyve been covered over and over but id like to say that no matter what any1 says im gona carry on wearing my I LUV ARISTON T-SHIRT whatever anybody says.

his memory must be worse than mine, or trying to give it more of a good story.

In which case thats a whole new spin, and a completely different story

The main point is that it was a self - dealt game in which the player discarded his own cards into the pot, which had been awarded to jj. The cards speak rule can not be applied because only one person still has active cards that the td can 100% verify.

my I love iceman tshirt hasnt arrived yet.

 Caught me on a bad day  ;smackedbottom;

if you want to play that way fine- you are certainly a cheat (even though jj clearly isnt and has learnt his lesson). If you know you are beat and still claim the pot I hope I'm never on a table with you.

I can hold my hand up for having those too, along with most when part of such a large community. x

Regardless the person awarded the pot (JJ) acknowledges after the cards had been tabled, that his hand was beaten, and uses a rule as hard and fast, and against the spirit of the game, which should always be a Paramount Rule and superseeds all others.

i dont play, so the cheat comment is a little off. but a td can only make a ruling on what he/she see's, if it was a dealer dealt game the casino has someone there that can verify what has happened, in self- dealt we do not have that luxury. So we make decisions on what we are told by the players (which in this incident not all players on the table could tell us what cards where shown)

So at the time, did the player awarded the pot, tell you that he actually had the worse hand, or is this the first you have heard about it?

Bob stated what hand he had but with no cocnclusive proof on the table or a memeber of staff present to confirm the cards. The hand could not be reconstructed as the cards had been mixed up with the rest of the muck. The pot had already been scooped by jj before the td was called for by the players.

sorry jj still had his cards face up in front of him

jj has admitted that bob had AJ and that it was face up on the table. hand tabled it wins end of

Did JJ admit to you at the time, that he had the worse hand, as he admits here?

jj and a few others on the table where unsure of the exact hand bob had (suits included) the td was actually having his dinner when this all happened and when he was called back the only player with cards was jj.  jj was mistaken in his details that the river had already been dealt or the td was told a different account by jj and Bob.

From JJ's own post, he seems very clear what hands and suits everyone had, and the order it happened. It looks like some facts may have been omitted to the TD in which case, it was a blatent angle shoot.

i would like to point out this was a rookie comp so other players on the table and possibly jj and bob are not hot on all the rules but the casino's and td's can only give rulings on what they know and are told by the dealers / players, it may not always be the most favoured ruling but i believe that they must do it on facts alone. With all due respect to the spirit of the game sometimes the correct ruling will go against it.

as a regular players at southampton grovesnor, i can tell u there wouldnt have been a dealer cos all tournys are self dealt (seat 2 shuffles, seat 9 cuts, seat 1 deals, and it goes in a continuous clockwise fashion)
so there would have been no mistake by the dealer as there wouldnt have been one there apart from the final table

i dont know if this changes anything about how the hand was played out.

im also quite interested as to who the characters in question are as ive rarely seen any out of order players at southampton

If you read the original post again there are a number of clear indisputable facts...

JJ states that his opponent held A-J

Therefore "Bob" has the best hand with the broadway straight and wins the pot. This is a fact and cannot be challenged.

When the TD is called he/she makes a judgement call based on second hand information concerning the "mucking" of cards. The decision is to award the pot to JJ. Whether this decision is technically correct is hardly relevant...a decision is made. As players, if we don't accept decisions there would be chaos. Therefore it is now JJ's pot to keep. This is a fact and cannot be challenged.

So "Bob" WINS the pot but JJ is AWARDED the pot. These are the two facts that can't be argued.

But....

This is something I don't agree with. No TD or single person has authority over the spirit of the game. This is a much greater entity and cannot be "ruled" against.

This post is not about the rule-book and the technicalities of the game. If it was, the cold-hard facts about the hand would be presented in isolation. But if you read the post there is much talk about jibes, insults, revenge, threats etc etc...and this is where the heart of the thread lies. So no, I don't think that the spirit of the game is subject to a TD's ruling.....this is a moral issue and principles are something that individual players must uphold if they choose to do so.

The thread is not entitled "Technically Is This My Pot?" it is headed "Am I Horrible For Doing This?"

The reason JJ does this is because his opponent is a shit....but now JJ wants to know if this makes him a shit too. The actual "ruling" is inconsequential in my eyes.

phatomch is a top TD, when i read this thread i assumed he can't have been working that day as he would never give such a bogus ruling, now it has become apparent he was told (rightly or wrongly) that the AJ was never tabled so he is spot on with his ruling.

What does surprise me is that he was having dinner, i didn't think someone so thin could possibly eat anything!

so if the hand was tabled before the river was dealt then "mucked" after the river the hand would still have won. The fact that the TD wasn't told the hand had been tabled looks to me like someone was cheating/angle shooting/being a horrible person (here we go again lol)

It is entirely possible that I've missed something here, but for me it is impossible to cheat accidentally.

The concept of "cheating" in this case implies that one knows the rule, and lies about it deliberately to try to exploit the ignorance of others. If one is ignorant of the correct rule, one cannot cheat it.

This was a rookie comp, it's been said, JJ thought he was acting within the rules to ask for the TD to make a decision when the card hit the muck. Now he knows different.

Whichever way you spin it, it cannot be called cheating, or angle shooting - both of those concepts surely require a player to know the rule and pretend not to in the hope of getting a favourable (albeit incorrect) decision from the TD.

At last, someone understands!

Ref: My earlier posts



I also refute the cheat/angle shooting accusations. But what I have said is that "Bob" controlled how JJ weighed-up "the spirit of the game" and now he is reflecting upon what sort of person this makes him. My ideal is to have a consistent game ethic that is immune to peer pressure and other outside factors.

If JJ says that this is his stance regardless of game conditions I wouldn't knock that. But what he's saying is that his stance here would vary according to other people and how they have behaved towards him. This is what interests me.

Yes, the first post was a little ambiguous, it could be interpreted that he knew the rule and lied about it to get revenge. But he debunked that idea on page two:


When he says that he wouldn't have been so stubborn about it in a good-natured game, it sounds more to me like he felt he had the right to appeal, but would have waived that right under better circumstances; to a player who doesn't know the exact rule, wouldn't that sound entirely reasonable? It sounds reasonable to me!

It seems he let the guy get to him in the heat of the moment, I think it's forgiveable. He badly wanted the rule he thought he understood to be true, but it wasn't and now he knows it.

Also, at a rookie game it would be understandable if not all the facts were presented (by either party) in an exact enough fashion for a TD to accurately assess what had happened. It doesn't necessarily mean that anyone lied to get an advantage.

I pointed this out 5 pages ago!

I agree with everything you say Zimbra.

I don't think jj is in need of anyone's forgiveness. He got a ruling and was awarded the pot...end of. I don't think his morals should be questioned at all.

The part that interests me is the attitude of people to rules and why that might change in a given circumstance. Personally I think rules should be a framework and there needs to be a degree of flexibility within. Or we end up losing our integrity.

You get awarded a pot on a technicality and win a big tournament. You leave the casino at 4:00 a.m. and get pulled over by the police. They bust your balls for doing 32 mph in a 30 zone, give you 3 points and the standard £60 fine. What's your attitude? If you are a stickler for the rules and take this in your stride....fine. If you insisted on abiding by the "rules" in the casino but think that this scenario outside of it is unreasonable then we have ambiguity of character.

In jjs case he says that he takes advantage of the ruling (a perfectly reasonable stance) because of the person inolved. However, even when the ruling is forthcoming he still has the power as an individual to over-rule that judgement if he so wishes. Wouldn't giving the pot back to "Bob" after the rule had been declared made jj untouchable as a player/person? And wouldn't that have been the sweetest revenge of all?

Personally, I give-up the pot to "Bob"....mainly through fear of provoking the "poker gods" into some callous bad-beat campaign against me...but consistently enough I also tell the copper to go swivel!!!

I alluded to this on page 1!!  :dontask:

You are not the only one of this opinion...

Copied from Robert's Rules of Poker -

2 - HOUSE POLICIES

DECISION-MAKING

1. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling.

Wouldn't deliberately disobeying the ruling (by giving the pot to Bob) make him a cheat though?

PMSL , but could you be clearer on the facts then, was it "on their backs"  and what made "Bob" throw his hand away, before you tabled. I did not realise you were a novice and can now comprehend the reason for posting. If this is an experienced player, then can you see how this sounds like a stroke/opportunistic/angle shoot etc. The Spirit of Poker relies on etiquette and honesty, and I know there are many "poker players" who have neither, as a TD it is our Job to uphold the Spirit and in our judgement, make the right call with the fairest outcome. So what actually happened then  ;frustrated;

So adult, so mature yet so sensitive;)

jj you seem a decent sort and have obviously made a mistake. You didnt mean to cheat but in effect you did, there is no way you can take it back. There is no such thing as a mistake at a poker table if you learn from it. You have already said you wouldn't do it again and in reflection this post was probably because you felt guilty which means you already have the correct emotions to be a decent poker player/human being. I appologise if I seemed a little off in some of my posts with others but it did kick off a little. Don't appologise for the the thread its been fascinating (if a little fraught)- would rather have a thread like this than a oh no my aces got cracked by a numpty type thread. Good luck at the tables and just try to do unto others etc.

can we stop going round in circles now guys?

This never happens on the internet

Being a cardroom manager myself and having my fair share of problems with staff competence, from dealers to TD's, i accept all players moans and groans but i will always defend my staff as much as is possible. If they have made a mistake with a decision, if possible it will be rectified, or made clear that the same decision will not be made in the future.

A lot of people on this thread have given the TD involved here a lot of abuse and called him incomepetent which has now become apparent due to all the facts being given finally on the thread that he isn't. I think i know who the TD is as we work for the same company and i wouldn't have him down as incompetent, far from it. I am sure that now you know all the facts you will apologies to the TD for calling him incompetent.

The spirit of the game is of great importance and should be upheld by everyone involved in it. There will always be angle players and cheats within the game and it is upto dealers, TD's and players alike to point them out and get them out of the game. (I am not reffering to anyone in this thread) If everyone played with gentlemens intentions what a wonderful game it would be, however we know this is not true, and the same can be said for any game or sport in the world. If there is a human factor to anything there will be mistakes but what we need to do is learn from them and move forward.

Someone said " this never happens on the internet". Of course not there isn't a human element giving rulings or decisions. The rules are written into the programs. Facts aren't able to be excluded.

This was a fantastic thread and hit a few nerves by the looks of things. Lets hope we can all learn from it and i think we all now know what the correct ruling is.... ;D

Whoooooooooooosh

Only when you accept he wasn't cheating?
 ;scarymoment;

My comment about "this never happens on the internet "wasn't a dig by the way. In case that was what the whoooooosh was for. ;D

Ignore him Lord, it's only Chopper being cheeky, we all do. ;)

I am the the Lord these days...

Noted tikay...... ;nemesis;