WE NEED OPINIONS (murder at our casino)

[mikkyT]

Not saying I like it myself, and this one does come close to declaring your hand. If the rules of the casino disallow it then the rules should be obeyed.

But theres nothing wrong with it generally speaking. I'm not innocent to the occasional "ooh well someones got to bet it" when flopping the nut flush on a checked board when the 4 flush lands on the river......

[Jon MW]

I would still stick with:

1. Deception by lying - crossing the line
2. Deception by implying - fine

Took me ages to come up with that   

[4KingNutz]

I allso agree with tighty on this one on my first visit to notts gala there was a guy on my table that just kept annoying everyone on our table by name calling and stuff a bit to harsh to say and when i checked on the bb with j 2 and the flop cam e 2 2 j and he bet his a j and i raised he pushed i called with a smile on my face he went into one like y the hell didnt you fold that you could have bloody folded i just said unlucky and he left with a face like thunder

[rivered]

why is declaring your hand against the rules?

and re the 'announcement', whilst it's pretty clear he was implying he had QQ, he could also have AK - that's also a bit of a dog to KK / AA, but a coin flop against the other big pairs.... just illustrating that you can't define rules around the implication of hands as there aren't many clear cut situations

I'd like to hear from the big opposers as to why they don't like it.  imo it'll bring a nice element in to the game, and if anything it'll give the better players another edge and more of a chance to read their opponents - he says he has AA... does he really?  is he bluffing?  As i said, I think it's all part of the game.  You try to mislead opponents by acting strong when weak, or strong when strong etc etc, why not take it a step further.  what exactly is the harm?  What you clearly can't do is expose the cards, but anything else.... no probs.

[bolt pp]

i really don't see what all the fuss is about - poker is a game of deception (amongst other things) and it's all part of the game imo.  I personally think you should be able to say whatever you want to win the hand (with exception of abuse), tell him your hand whether real or not, just chat away... makes it more fun!  I love that side of the game.  Otherwise, where exactly do you draw the line - you end up with situations like this where there can be no clear ruling...

 

I never heard Tony G call anyone "scum"!!!!   

[Royal Flush]

[But he didn't actually declare his hand, another player should realise the difference and act accordingly, which in this case he did. The Aces were hit but the player implying he had QQ didn't stop the call in the first place.

If you ask hundred exprienced players what they took to be the meaning behind the statement "if you have AA or KK, good luck to you" they would unanimously say - the player is saying he has QQ.  There is no point in debating that.

I am thinking AK here more than QQ. QQ is less worried when its HU!

[MrMoves]

i really don't see what all the fuss is about - poker is a game of deception (amongst other things) and it's all part of the game imo.  I personally think you should be able to say whatever you want to win the hand (with exception of abuse), tell him your hand whether real or not, just chat away... makes it more fun!  I love that side of the game.  Otherwise, where exactly do you draw the line - you end up with situations like this where there can be no clear ruling...

 

I never heard Tony G call anyone "scum"!!!!   

That could drag up some really old stuff 

Even so:

 

[londonpokergirl]

Its just not very friendly, regardless if they know each other, or if they are heads up
its just wrong

Banter is good for the game, but when it gets trashy I think its time for penalties to be
awarded

[GlasgowBandit]

james,

you I both know that a bit of verbal deception happens all the time - and the players involved both know this.... Your use of the "oh is there a flush out- I didnt notice" when betting a checked river is a case in point!!! (that I fell for it still hurts lol).

Mr moves is right- sb didnt declare his hand if he had it would have been void and would have been ruled as such.

If the BB felt that the sb definately had qq then it was a poor call, something told him that there may be some deception going on- ie prior knowledge/ common practice etc- so why be suprised?
Poker is a game of deception, speech play as such is not against the rules and in IMHO adds to the game as long as it is not abusive.

calling someone scum, and then "a few bad words" when told good call is not acceptable. In extreme cames it can lead to unpleasantness or worse(as when we had a guy banned for fighting an opponent after he had been publically humiliated and abused on a Final table the previous week). BB was out of order.

I for one would like to see a sin bin for this ( and other blatent rule infringements) implimented ( and enforced equally at each tournament in Cardiff and in other grovesnor casinos). I feel consistant interpretation and implementation would go a long way in ridding tables of unpleasentness).

I agree with all of that.

[sofa----king]

i would like to thankyou all for your opinions,you all sound very honest in your views.and RUDDERS is there a flush out there hehe

[Karabiner]

Its just not very friendly, regardless if they know each other, or if they are heads up
its just wrong

Banter is good for the game, but when it gets trashy I think its time for penalties to be
awarded

I think that the two issues are getting confused here.

Surely there can be no penalty for the speech play during the hand, it's allowed.
Any penalty could only be incurred for "ungentlemanly conduct" afterwards.

[Copag]

I always thought the rule in Europe was different to the US on speechplay but obviously not after Tony G's French WPT.
If someone states what hand they have their hand should automatically be dead,"I have a pair, I have a flush etc", whether they have or not, anything implying a hand is ok

[sofa----king]

just one thing i didnt mention was after the hand there was a bit of rowdiness but to be fair to the small blind i didnt think he said anything untoward but as he was trying to defend his play by saying he did nothing wrong was sent to the sin bin for 10 min this to be honest in my opinion was a bit harsh,im sure someone will post something else as to what happend later at the final table ,but this had nothing to do with what happened here,totally seprate issue,this thread could go on a bit here .

[albert]

tighty, i did ask the sb to sit out for 10 after, to cool the siuation down.

[bolt pp]

tighty, i did ask the sb to sit out for 10 after, to cool the siuation down.

The SB?