Opinions on Two Poker Rulings Please

[PhatBoyPoker]

Hey all I am new here... names Steve go under the name of PhatBoyPoker... (long story)

Right I played at a venue the other day, and had two rulings, one where I was involved and one where it was last hand before a break and my table had broke... and was watching another table...

1. I was in a hand with pocket 3's, I had limped pre and was raised by the BB... I flat call... board comes 2 4 Q... I was pretty sure the other guy hadnt hit, he gestured a checking motion (like when you fist tap the table) but he did it in mid air, looking at me as he did it... I took it as a check, and checked behind him... even the dealer went to put the turn card down... but as soon as I said check... the BB announced "900" and proceeded to put a bet in... to me this was a move, he totally denied having checked, and said his motion was relating to someone else on the table he was having a conversation with...

I asked for a ruling... 2 other guys at the table (other locals as the BB was) were getting involved belittling the idea he would make a move for such a small pot (around 600 odd) My argument was he gestured that he was checking, and only when I checked behind him did he then bet... Anyways the card room manager ruled in his favour, saying he hadn't tapped the table, or said check... however there are loads of other gestures people do to check... Anyone know what the rules would be on this ?

2. The hand I wasn't involved in but watched... a guy raised pretty big pre flop in the cut off position... he got a caller who had limped in early position... the board comes A 5 9, first guy checks, original raiser C bets... A on turn, first guy checks, original raiser bets out 2 thirds of the pot... A on river, first guy bets out but fairly small... the original raiser shoves all in putting the other guy all in... Now I would guess that the guy put to the sword probably has 25-30% of his stack already in, but it's a deepstack and probably has a good 40 BB's left...

He dwells up for ages, and then shows the guy who went all in a 9 (nine) the dealer says, "So you've folded" and the player who has shown the 9 says no... he looks across at the guy whos gone all in and says to him "see I have a 9" waits a few seconds then calls... the guy who had gone all in was indeed on a bluff... and the guy with the 9 wins...

The guy calls for a ruling about the guy exposing his card... and I have to say I agree with him. Surely you cant show your card, as this would surely allow you to get a read potentially off the guy who's all in. The card room manager ruled that it was ok, that the guy showing the 9 couldnt make any more action... but to me that's a joke, the action as happened and he only has the option to fold or call... he cant create additional action (as in raise) surely that's an unfair situation to get a read on a player... I am not suggesting the player who showed the 9 is good enough to get a read, but surely that's the potential benefit ?

Anyways would love to hear some opinions on this

Thanks

Steve

[tikay]

Hi Steve, welcome aboard.

Which Venue was this at, if I may ask, please?

[PhatBoyPoker]

Hi Steve, welcome aboard.

Which Venue was this at, if I may ask, please?

Hey Tikay...

It was at The Luton G Casino... I understand some Casinos have "local rules" I know not all casinos work off the same rules, which is a big problem as it causes inconsistances... but surely there is some guidlines to how the game should be played... etiquette and all that... My one I put down to a move by a player with little etiquette... a cheap stunt to win a pot, I nearly moved all in to be honest just to put him to the test... lol.

But the hand I watched seem wrong all round... in both etiquette and surely the rules of the game... the result cost the guy who went all in a massive pot, he lost some 80% of his chips... I just cant believe you can be heads up in a hand, be all in, and have the last player to act gain an advantage by exposing his cards...

[zerofive]

1. When the floor is called over, the dealer should be authoritative enough to convince the TD that player A checked. If the dealer sees a check, then it's a check. If you check out of turn by mistake or you thought you saw a check but the dealer didn't, then obviously your argument is invalid. If the dealer has moved the action to you because he saw a check, the check should stand and the player involved should be encouraged to be more careful when making gestures that may be perceived as an action.

2. All casinos have different rules about this. If your hand isn't declared folded by exposing any part of it, then you should be given a warning or a penalty as this is a pretty clear angle. The only exception might be if it's a hand between friends who don't mind etc.

[KarmaDope]

1. What zerofive said.

2. AFAIK, ruling given is the correct one but the player who exposed the card gets a one round penalty.

[smashedagain]

Did you expect him to say Luton G Tony?

[PhatBoyPoker]

1. When the floor is called over, the dealer should be authoritative enough to convince the TD that player A checked. If the dealer sees a check, then it's a check. If you check out of turn by mistake or you thought you saw a check but the dealer didn't, then obviously your argument is invalid. If the dealer has moved the action to you because he saw a check, the check should stand and the player involved should be encouraged to be more careful when making gestures that may be perceived as an action.

2. All casinos have different rules about this. If your hand isn't declared folded by exposing any part of it, then you should be given a warning or a penalty as this is a pretty clear angle. The only exception might be if it's a hand between friends who don't mind etc.

In regards to 1... well I dont think the dealer was strong enough, the way the player acted (aggressively) and the two mates who joined in the same... didn't make it easy for the dealer to say anything... 3 grown men barking that I was out of order, that he never checked, that he would never make a move like that... blah blah...

The dealer said very little when asked... however he went to put the turn card down. hence he thought we'd both checked...

The player clearly gestured a checking motion... whether with an intention to check, or to simulate a check to get a reaction from me... how can you say I checked out of turn ? I thought he had checked, hence why I then checked behind him... Can you not doing other gestures to check, how many players just simply point to the next player, or do some sort of motion with their hand... this was a full checking motion from this guy just in mid air... my bad I guess for assuming that it was a check... and falling for such a move...

The dealer even appologised to me, and when we had a dealer change he said "at least now you got a dealer who knows more about the game"... enough said ?

[PhatBoyPoker]

1. What zerofive said.

2. AFAIK, ruling given is the correct one but the player who exposed the card gets a one round penalty.

In regards to number 2... the right one ? Wow, really ? How in gods earth can it be the right one... as the other guy said it's definetly a "angle" the guy made it to get a read, how is that fair ? I guess if he'd turned both over accidently I could see why the hand want dead, but to deliberatly turn it over to see the reaction of the player ?

Isn't there a rule that you can lie about what hand you have, but cant declare the actual hand ? Surely showing the actual hand is worse no ?

I guess seeing the Card Room Manager who made the decision laughing and hugging the player in the break made it just a tad worse... glad it wasnt me in the hand would of put me on life tilt...

[gatso]

2. All casinos have different rules about this. If your hand isn't declared folded by exposing any part of it, then you should be given a warning or a penalty as this is a pretty clear angle. The only exception might be if it's a hand between friends who don't mind etc.

It's a tournament, it's much worse if it's between friends

[KarmaDope]

1. What zerofive said.

2. AFAIK, ruling given is the correct one but the player who exposed the card gets a one round penalty.

In regards to number 2... the right one ? Wow, really ? How in gods earth can it be the right one... as the other guy said it's definetly a "angle" the guy made it to get a read, how is that fair ? I guess if he'd turned both over accidently I could see why the hand want dead, but to deliberatly turn it over to see the reaction of the player ?

Isn't there a rule that you can lie about what hand you have, but cant declare the actual hand ? Surely showing the actual hand is worse no ?

I guess seeing the Card Room Manager who made the decision laughing and hugging the player in the break made it just a tad worse... glad it wasnt me in the hand would of put me on life tilt...

It's the right ruling because you can't kill a hand for exposing a card. You can, however, stop them from taking aggressive action.

Personally I'm of the belief that people should be able to expose their cards when they want. After all, if you want to tell your oppo exactly what he has then feel free!

As for your life sentence, that particular card room manager is one of the best and would not have made a ruling to favour his friends. Assuming of course it was George, who posts on here as "relaedgc". If it wasn't, I would recommend you contact him as he is the manager of the Luton G Casino Poker Room.

[doubleup]

In regards to number 2... the right one ? Wow, really ? How in gods earth can it be the right one... as the other guy said it's definetly a "angle" the guy made it to get a read, how is that fair ? I guess if he'd turned both over accidently I could see why the hand want dead, but to deliberatly turn it over to see the reaction of the player ?

There has been a lot of debate about this over the years.  Any rule that kills an exposed hand opens the door for all sorts of horrific angle-shoots that commonly happened in rooms that had such a rule.  People who are actually able to get reliable reads from exposing cards are few and far between and the greater concern is showing cards in a bubble situation to avoid a call - a penalty is therfore an adequate response to the situation.

[PhatBoyPoker]

1. What zerofive said.

2. AFAIK, ruling given is the correct one but the player who exposed the card gets a one round penalty.

In regards to number 2... the right one ? Wow, really ? How in gods earth can it be the right one... as the other guy said it's definetly a "angle" the guy made it to get a read, how is that fair ? I guess if he'd turned both over accidently I could see why the hand want dead, but to deliberatly turn it over to see the reaction of the player ?

Isn't there a rule that you can lie about what hand you have, but cant declare the actual hand ? Surely showing the actual hand is worse no ?

I guess seeing the Card Room Manager who made the decision laughing and hugging the player in the break made it just a tad worse... glad it wasnt me in the hand would of put me on life tilt...

It's the right ruling because you can't kill a hand for exposing a card. You can, however, stop them from taking aggressive action.

Personally I'm of the belief that people should be able to expose their cards when they want. After all, if you want to tell your oppo exactly what he has then feel free!

As for your life sentence, that particular card room manager is one of the best and would not have made a ruling to favour his friends. Assuming of course it was George, who posts on here as "relaedgc". If it wasn't, I would recommend you contact him as he is the manager of the Luton G Casino Poker Room.

LOL I have heard this argument and it's flawed... aggressive action in this case is making the call... there is no more action to be had, it's on the river, the guy has gone all in... the guy then showing his card is getting additional information by showing his card... how can that be right ? Saying all his allowed to do is call, is like saying someone with a gun is only allowed to shoot someone in the head ? Still ends up with the same result... the guy making the bluff with the all in lost 80% of his stack... due to a move/angle made by another player trying to get a unfair read... It just dont sit well with me I guess... any TD's in here want to comment ?

[PhatBoyPoker]

As for your life sentence, that particular card room manager is one of the best and would not have made a ruling to favour his friends. Assuming of course it was George, who posts on here as "relaedgc". If it wasn't, I would recommend you contact him as he is the manager of the Luton G Casino Poker Room.

It wasn't a HIM, it was a HER... I have also emailed G about the rulings... yes I felt that much about them lol... well more so wanted clarification... As I stated in my last post the fact that people are sayign he can only call after exposing his card is pretty flawed... So your telling me this is exceptable in cash and tournements alike ?

Can someone link me to any list of rules that confirms this ? No offense to any who have commented, but I seriously wuld love to see it in black and white... or if any TD's post on here, would love to hear their opinions...

[PhatBoyPoker]

In regards to number 2... the right one ? Wow, really ? How in gods earth can it be the right one... as the other guy said it's definetly a "angle" the guy made it to get a read, how is that fair ? I guess if he'd turned both over accidently I could see why the hand want dead, but to deliberatly turn it over to see the reaction of the player ?

There has been a lot of debate about this over the years.  Any rule that kills an exposed hand opens the door for all sorts of horrific angle-shoots that commonly happened in rooms that had such a rule.  People who are actually able to get reliable reads from exposing cards are few and far between and the greater concern is showing cards in a bubble situation to avoid a call - a penalty is therfore an adequate response to the situation.

Hmmmm... The bigger angle is showing the card to get a read... hence why people doing it should result in a dead hand... have to be honest I have now googled it and most say the hand is dead, I guess some dont opens the door for inconsistancy

[doubleup]

Can someone link me to any list of rules that confirms this ? No offense to any who have commented, but I seriously wuld love to see it in black and white... or if any TD's post on here, would love to hear their opinions...

52:   Exposing Cards

A player who exposes his cards with action pending may incur a penalty, but will not have a dead hand. The penalty will begin at the end of the hand.

http://www.pokertda.com/custom_posts/view-official-tda-rules/