beanie42

What does it take to get me back on the forum? Situation in a cash game tonight that got me seriously tilted, and looking for opinions on the rule/etiquette involved, to see if my expectations are too high or if I'm justified in being upset.

The game is a well-run home game at moose's, which is generally well-run and follows all the normal/standard rules, so no string-raises, angle-shooting, or other shenanigans. Friendly and fun atmosphere, but the players are generally "regulars" who know poker etiquette and the rules (not many casual players).

The hand in question was with 800Over, and after much betting we end up at the river heads-up and it goes check-check. I turn over my cards and declare "2 pair". Nik says "just a 6" and is about to muck, shows his cards to the player beside him, and then as he's about to muck, that player points out "you have a flush". At this point Nik apologizes since he didn't see it, and scoops the pot.

My issue is that this other player was not in the hand and was not the dealer, and my opponent did not show either my or the dealer his hand, or simply table it face up. If he had done any of these things, his cards would speak, and I would have pointed out the flush myself. However, showing your cards to another player and then mucking is something many people do, but it deprives your actual opponent of the privilige/information of seeing your hand, and in my opinion is not the same as tabling your hand. My opinion is that the other player should have remained silent, and if Nik had either noticed on his own or tabled his cards, he would win. However, the other player interfering deprived him of the opportunity to do any of these on his own and "legitimately" win, and deprived me of winning the pot if he decided to muck without opening.

If it matters, the third player is a frequent player in home, underground, and casino games, and appears to know the rules. Also, for any who don't know 800Over, he wouldn't intentionally angle-shoot or slow-roll, and this was just a brain-fart on his part, and I don't think he did anything inappropriate in this situation.

So, my question is whether the third person should point out Nik's hand, or if he should remain silent and wait for the hand to be tabled?

__________________
"So many losses with such a small bankroll against such weak opponents - it's like being beaten by a mob of toddlers" - Me (while learning ring games)

GTA Poker

Is this a rhetorical question?

C'mon man.

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.

moose

Sorry I didn't see nik's action but other players believed he was tabling and I don't think nik would have taken the pot if he believed otherwise.

__________________
To Bet or not to Be(t). That is the question. - Billy (Big Slick) Shakespeare
RC III, XI - Champions!

beanie42

No, not rhetorical. Just wondering if it's reasonable to not table your cards thus depriving your opponent of the information of seeing your hand, which is to your benefit, while also gaining the benefit of having your cards speak? If you get both, why would you ever table your cards? Playing devil's advocate, I know you can invoke "show one, show all", but it's pretty customary that player's will occassionally just show the guy next to them and muck, and asking to see the hand if neither notices the better hand is actually to your disadvantage. So from my viewpoint, the person showing their neighbor is gaining all the advantages, which doesn't seem right. I like being friendly, but I'm not really interested in handicapping myself either.

It didn't look to me like he was and he hadn't done so yet. I also talked with him after the game, and he indicated that he was actually going to muck if it hadn't been mentioned. If he had tabled his hand there's no issue, the pot's his. However, he only tabled his hand as a result of the third player's comments.

__________________
"So many losses with such a small bankroll against such weak opponents - it's like being beaten by a mob of toddlers" - Me (while learning ring games)

GTA Poker

Ok, you initially asked whether the player not in the hand was out of line. Obviously.

Now you are asking if the player in the hand should have gotten the pot. Yes. Cards did not hit any detectable muck.

Both players should get a warning which is probably meaningless.

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.

moose

Clearly the 4 colour deck should have been in play and then we wouldn't have had this issue.

__________________
To Bet or not to Be(t). That is the question. - Billy (Big Slick) Shakespeare
RC III, XI - Champions!

moose

I think philosophically it is show one, show all. Very rarely does anyone pull the IWTSTH mostly out of respect because no-one wants to embarass a player caught on a bluff.

It's a friendly game however and expecting someone to remain silent when they have knowledge about someone's hand, whether it is at showdown or any other point in the hand, ie exposed card on the deal etc. invokes an atmosphere of cutthroat, win at all costs which kind of ruins the point of a friendly bi-weekly game.

Bottom line is I know the 3rd person felt bad about upsetting you because the hand was discussed after you left but I think he would have felt worse about feeling obligated to remain silent and letting the 2nd best hand win. That seems to me, to be the greater wrong.

__________________
To Bet or not to Be(t). That is the question. - Billy (Big Slick) Shakespeare
RC III, XI - Champions!

GTA Poker

If it is just a bunch of friends playing poker then I wouldn't care either way. If it is a structured poker game where people are trying to win then it doesn't matter how "friendly" the game -- it is always the largest indiscretion possible at a poker table to talk about a hand in which you aren't involved. Pointing out that a losing hand is a winner is probably the worst manifestation of this indiscretion as it 100% rewards the loser of the hand with the money. It is the player's responsibility to table his cards. That is a concrete part of a poker hand. The hand isn't over until he decides to table his cards or muck them and that is his decision -- 1 player per hand, period.

Is he also allowed to tell the person next to him that the other player is bluffing and that he should make a call? We wouldn't want the worst hand to ever win money.

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.

beanie42

Sorry, poor choice of words. When I said "the pot is his", what I meant was that if his cards are tabled, there's no question that it's ok for anyone to declare his hand. Based on how things played out here, I think Nik's entitled to the pot, since the other player also deprived him of the chance to notice his own error, or to change his mind and table his cards. But I totally believe he's entitled to the pot, and if the reverse happened I would've taken the pot too.

I think this is the core question I have, and is why I described the game and the players involved. If it's a casual "anything goes" game, it would be overboard to enforce this. However, despite the friendliness, this game and this group of player's are all knowledgable about the game, and playing to win. Usually it's more for the enjoyment of the game and the pride of beating each other, rather than the stakes.

So when the players know the rules and they're generally enforced, is it reasonable to think "but we won't enforce this one, because it might get too competitive"? Even when you're having fun with friends, aren't the rules of a game (poker or otherwise) to ensure a fair and level playing field for all?

__________________
"So many losses with such a small bankroll against such weak opponents - it's like being beaten by a mob of toddlers" - Me (while learning ring games)

GTA Poker

From how you describe the game I think that you are correct that the rules should be enforced. The question is how do you think they should be enforced without ruining the fun of the game. I think if the player outside of the hand is a friend of most of the players that just mentioning that this shouldn't be done (and explaining why if need be) should rectify the problem in the future. This should likely be done by the host...ideally at the time of the issue, but if it is a friendly game it shouldn't hurt anyone to do it prior to the next game in a lighthearted manner. Not enforcing these sort of rules will lead to upset players and deteriorate the fun of the game faster than saying nothing.

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.

ILike2Play

If you had bet the river this wouldn't have been a problem. I think that pointing out a players hand is acceptable and I have had it happen both to me and against me without a problem. It happened at the casino on a $300 pot to me before but his hand never did touch the muck so fair is fair. It sucks but you just have to roll with the beats.

wildbill7145

GTA officially gets my vote for poster of the week. They've all been interesting reads.

Nicely done Sir.

moose

Again I didn't see the action but when you word it this way, I have to agree with you.

__________________
To Bet or not to Be(t). That is the question. - Billy (Big Slick) Shakespeare
RC III, XI - Champions!

Milo

What about the concept of all players protecting the integrity of the game? Blabbermouth knew the best hand would not win the pot if inadvertently mucked. Does he then not have an obligation to speak up?

__________________
I don't gamble . . . but I will bet.

GTA Poker

Kudos in your fine taste.

__________________
That level 5 trap really paid off...ship him the cookies.