flat calling with the nuts in a tourney.

[Honeybadger]

The rule that you are compelled to bet/raise last to speak with the nuts on the river is wrong and illogical imho. It is based on the seemingly reasonable assumption that the only reason you would ever fail to bet/raise the nuts on the river is if you are colluding with or softplaying someone, and therefore that this should be disallowed. However, this seemingly reasonable assumption is actually flawed. There are situations in tournament poker in which it would be a clear strategic error for you to bet/raise with the nuts on the river.

You are on the bubble. As the big stack you have been bullying the table relentlessly and increasing your stack steadily without ever seeing a flop. The entire table is playing far too tight as they are all trying to sneak into the money, and you have been relentlessly exploiting this. In this situation you want the bubble to continue for as long as possible, and it is actually detrimental to your EV if someone gets knocked out. The reason for this is, of course, that you are likely to be able to increase your chip stack even further if the bubble lasts longer, giving you an even greater chance to win the tournament when the bubble does eventually burst.

You have the nuts on the river. You are hu in the pot against a super short stack. He bets 2/3 of his stack. If you raise he will very likely call and will bust out of the tourney. At that point the bubble will burst, and some of your edge will go down since now your opponents will have made the money and will start to play more optimally. Therefore, raising would be a -EV play. It is in your interest to keep the bubble going longer and this is the only way to do it. In fact, if the short stack had pushed all-in on the river you should probably fold your hand. The EV you would gain from the bubble lasting longer is likely greater than the EV you gain from hoovering up the last of the short stack's chips.

Now granted, this exact situation is not likely to come up in a pure form in practice. However, variations based on its underlying principle  will definitely occur. Clearly a player who chooses not to bet the nuts on the river (or even to fold the nuts) in this sort of spot can be doing so purely for strategic reasons intended to increase his chances of winning the tournament. So the rule that this should not be allowed is wrong imho.

[outragous76]

why does numptydumpty have 1 post and is on probabtion?

fake acc?

[TightEnd]

why does numptydumpty have 1 post and is on probabtion?

fake acc?

no its a new account

just so happens to have the same name as an exisiting one I thnk


will investigate, meanwhile welcome to blonde sir

[valuehunter]

There are situations in tournament poker in which it would be a clear strategic error for you to bet/raise with the nuts on the river.

You are on the bubble. As the big stack you have been bullying the table relentlessly and increasing your stack steadily without ever seeing a flop. The entire table is playing far too tight as they are all trying to sneak into the money, and you have been relentlessly exploiting this. In this situation you want the bubble to continue for as long as possible, and it is actually detrimental to your EV if someone gets knocked out. The reason for this is, of course, that you are likely to be able to increase your chip stack even further if the bubble lasts longer, giving you an even greater chance to win the tournament when the bubble does eventually burst.

You have the nuts on the river. You are hu in the pot against a super short stack. He bets 2/3 of his stack. If you raise he will very likely call and will bust out of the tourney. At that point the bubble will burst, and some of your edge will go down since now your opponents will have made the money and will start to play more optimally. Therefore, raising would be a -EV play. It is in your interest to keep the bubble going longer and this is the only way to do it. In fact, if the short stack had pushed all-in on the river you should probably fold your hand. The EV you would gain from the bubble lasting longer is likely greater than the EV you gain from hoovering up the last of the short stack's chips.

Now granted, this exact situation is not likely to come up in a pure form in practice. However, variations based on its underlying principle  will definitely occur. Clearly a player who chooses not to bet the nuts on the river (or even to fold the nuts) in this sort of spot can be doing so purely for strategic reasons intended to increase his chances of winning the tournament. So the rule that this should not be allowed is wrong imho.

If people are genuinely smart enough to be folding the nuts for strategic advantage in tournaments then my plans to try to satellite into my first major live tournament are on hold! Scary

[Simon Galloway]

I've done it before.  Trying to think who the villain was too.  Think I called, as the chips went in I said "I know there's no point in raising as you can't possibly call the raise, I'd rather get to see what hand you stood the flop action with."

Think it might have been Tikay, not sure though.  He won't be able to remember anyway so I'll say it was.

Did I disadvantage the table?  Possibly.  Did the table have fun when he rolled over no pair no draw? Oh yes.

World of difference between a noob not realising the should be getting it in and a player that doesn't want to take chips off his wife/flat mate/%swap etc.

[valuehunter]

I've done it before.  Trying to think who the villain was too.  Think I called, as the chips went in I said "I know there's no point in raising as you can't possibly call the raise, I'd rather get to see what hand you stood the flop action with."

Think it might have been Tikay, not sure though.  He won't be able to remember anyway so I'll say it was.

Did I disadvantage the table?  Possibly.  Did the table have fun when he rolled over no pair no draw? Oh yes.

World of difference between a noob not realising the should be getting it in and a player that doesn't want to take chips off his wife/flat mate/%swap etc.

If someone calls you when you've got nothing, can you simply muck the cards, or are you obliged to show?

[Laxie]

My understanding, but could be wrong...

If you've led out the bet and been called, they're entitled to see your hand.  In some casinos they make you show but in most you can chance yer arm at folding and hope your opponent doesn't ask to see.

[Simon Galloway]

Usually if I call and someone says "you got me, I'm bluffing" I would happily just show my hand and take the pot.  It annoys me when pinheads insist on seeing the hand, particularly with a live one, just let him muck and save face.  Win with a little grace imo.  The argument "but I can see his mucked hand online" seems to miss the rather obvious point that you aren't online here - and lots of other things you can do online can't (and shouldn't) be attempted live.

However, if you are calling, and part of the price of that call is to see your opponents hand, just don't open up.  You called them, they are expected to open up first imo.  If he turbo-mucked, I wouldn't be delighted about it, but I wouldn't make a fuss.  

In this particular spot, it was obv dressed up as a comedy moment, and the victim was more than capable of taking it on the chin - I might have even been doing them a favour.  So the whole point was to make him do the walk of shame.  As a rule, I would never do that with someone I hadn't played a lot with.

[zzBlizzardzz]

I don't get it. That's exactly what I would do. It's not like he was last to act and checked the river is it? I would definetly check the nuts on the flop and maybe the turn if I didn't think they hit. Then blast them on the river. No issue with checking the nuts on the flop at all.

[marcin123]

I don't get it. That's exactly what I would do. It's not like he was last to act and checked the river is it? I would definetly check the nuts on the flop and maybe the turn if I didn't think they hit. Then blast them on the river. No issue with checking the nuts on the flop at all.

the original post says that a guy just calls the raise with the nuts on the river... basically he should always reraise here... nothing on the original post about the flop and turn...

[Girgy85]

If your first to act on the river then you are allowed to check here! You cant check behind tho if you have the nuts!

[HOLDorFOLD]

saw a guy flat with a royal flush, last to act at DTD once. It was against HoldorFold and I think she was kinda grateful.

Ah yes, popeye with his royal flush hit on the river against my lower flush .... yes I was kinda grateful in that spot. I asked him afterwards quietly why on earth he didn't re-pop because he would have had the rest of my chips (he had just been flat calling along the streets) and he said "to be honest i was falling asleep, I'm old and get tired, I didnt even realise I had a flush let alone a royal flush"

[Claw75]

saw a guy flat with a royal flush, last to act at DTD once. It was against HoldorFold and I think she was kinda grateful.

Ah yes, popeye with his royal flush hit on the river against my lower flush .... yes I was kinda grateful in that spot. I asked him afterwards quietly why on earth he didn't re-pop because he would have had the rest of my chips (he had just been flat calling along the streets) and he said "to be honest i was falling asleep, I'm old and get tired, I didnt even realise I had a flush let alone a royal flush"

[ ] wp tikay

[lazaroonie]

It gets me when someone has AA and checks when an A comes down on the flop. 

[Dingdell]

I had the nut straight at Luton on the turn, kept reraising, still had the nuts on the river, reraised the better. he reraised I put him all in (Dick Lynch) we had the same hand. I then got 20 mins of him moaning about why did I do that when it was obvious what he had and that we were splitting the pot.