Check nuts = penalty

Hi, guys

Look at this: YouTube - 2010 WSOP Episode 8 1/4 Main Event - DAY 1D

Darvin moon gets a penalty for NOT betting the nuts in position on river. What the heck? Have you ever heard of that rule? How lame..

Then I remembered I saw this video:
YouTube - NBC Heads Up Poker - Kristy Gazes vs Chad Brown
where kristy gazes does something INCREDIBLY stupid, but the guy playing her isnt much smarter himself, he didn't bet the river with the absolute nuts!!
But you don't see him get a penalty do you ? How long does this rule exist? Never heard of it

Its a good rule because the assumption is that the only time someone is not going to bet the absolute best hand possible when last to act on the river is because he is in collusion with his opponent and betting buts his opponent in a bad position. Its a good rule, yes sometimes people misread their cards but its the rule is in place to prevent collusion. In the second hand they are HU in a shootout, that element of collusion is not there because of that.

but the rule isn't that effetive 'cause you could just min bet if you are in collusion, and not break the rule

True but atleast you stop them from checking back against each other.

If you heard him, he said he didn't think there was any point in betting, because he put her on an Ace, too, therefore they would split the pot.. but as marginal said anyways, it was heads up. Not much collusion really goes on in HU, somebody's gotta win it, lol.

Yeah, it has been a rule in many live Tournaments for many years. Just doesn't come up all that often.

wow I just learn something new, I never knew that.

i dont really understand that. you are palying, and you see 'i've a good/great hand' but sometimes you don't imediatly see ' i've the BEST POSSIBLE hand'

besides, if it is HU collusion is not an issue

very interesting...

I can see that Moon didnt bet because he wanted to see the opponent's hand. if Moon HAD bet, the guy wouldve folded. (but he could watch the reruns on tv later...lol)

glad to learn about a new rule in tournament play: you HAVE to bet the nuts on the river if you have the last play.

thanks for the post

what a fu*****g rule is that?! if i would like to try to slowpay the nuts i can't because i may receive a penalty?! and the problem is that appens at the wsop... horrible!

It's AFTER the river and you're LAST to act. It's not a slow play anymore if the playing is over.

It's not about slow playing the nuts, you can slow play it, but if it comes to you on the river and you're last to act, surely you would bet to get some value? If that's how you slowplay the nuts, then it's stupid. Atticus says that you can see it on the reruns later but Moon says he didnt bet so he could see what he was playing with so he could work on that later but A) Moon doesn't have the poker ability to work on reads and B) I'd much rather make a value bet with the nuts and get a few mroe chips, how does he know he won't call? If he has such a solid read on him that he won't call, why does he need more? It's pure donk play checking back the nuts.

I agree the idea that you would check the nuts last to act on the river is just crazy. The only reason you would do it on purpose is because you are being nice to someone and that is what the rule is trying to stop.

re: second video

duh, Kristy Gazes…and your giggling is annoying

and why didn’t Chad Brown get a penalty for not betting the nuts and last play on the river like Moon did?

Because they are HU and not at a 9 handed table. One person had to win etc

Two things:

1 - It's not a new rule.

2 - The main reason Darvin Moon didn't bet is that he's clueless.

It is a rule - been for a while. Look up "Men the Master"

Watching Darvin Moon in the WSOP was the first time I had ever heard of this rule; but it makes complete sense, and I'm glad its in effect.

but that's how he explained it when interviewed... he wanted to see what kind of hand his opponent played like he did. It is a good rule, but I wouldn't call him clueless.

He said he knew his opponent wouldn't bet... Which I hope he means call instead of bet, but he is clueless. The board made three to a flush. Lot's of hands would check that river and might pay him off. To say, "I knew it" is just complete stupidity.

Yeah... and he also told his wife he folded a big hand at his main event final table when in reality he had nothing. What he says after the hand clearly has nothing to do with anything. The guy is clueless, it's as simple as that.

Or he is the smartest man in the world.

only reason i knew this rule existed is b/c of wathing the wsop and darvin...lame rule imo

If it is check check heads up on the river, both players have to show thier cards. Any player at the table can ask to see both hands.

if you weren't involved in the hand you cannot ask to see another players cards...wtf?

I should have said any player involved in the hand. You are 100% right.

The Showdown

1. A player must show all cards in the hand faceup on the table to win any part of the pot.
2. Cards speak, meaning regardless of what a player declares he has in his hand, he only has the hand denoted by his cards.
3. The dealer reads all hands, and declares the winning hand.
4. Players are responsible for holding onto their cards until the winner is declared.
5. Although verbal declarations as to the contents of a hand are not binding, deliberately miscalling a hand with the intent of causing another player to discard a winning hand is unethical, and may result in forfeiture of the pot.
6. Any player, dealer or floorman who sees an incorrect amount of chips put into the pot, or an error about to be made in awarding a pot, has an ethical obligation to point out the error.
7. All losing hands will be killed by the dealer before a pot is awarded.
8. Any player who mucks her winning hand before the dealer has declared the hand as the winner forfeits the pot to the next best live hand.
9. Although it is within the rules for any player who has been dealt in to request to see any hand that has been called, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked, it is considered extremely poor etiquette, and insulting, to do so.
10. If a player shows cards to another player during or after a deal, any player at the table has the right to see those exposed cards. This is known as "show one, show all."
11. The player who made the final aggressive action on the final betting round must open his hand first at showdown. This means the player who called on the river can wait for the player who bet on the river to show his hand first.
12. If all players check on the final betting round, the players must open their hands in order of table position. The player closest to the left of the dealer must open first.
13. It is considered a grave breach of etiquette for a player to withhold showing a clearly winning hand at showdown until her opponents have shown first. This is known as slow-rolling. Regardless of position, a player holding the best possible hand is expected to show her cards immediately as the showdown begins.

That's the first time I learned about that rule. Until that show, I had never heard of it before.

How can this be a lame rule. i dont want to be in a tournament where one player in position turns over his nut Ace high flush without betting it.... while his buddy turns over the king high flush and gets off with a minimum loss.

Rule makes 100% sense.

notice i said lame rule IMO...to each his own dude...i felt bad for darvin b/c he had no idea and if i were in his shoes one day to where i had the nuts and checked and got penalized for it id be pissed off ...therefore its 100% lame IMO

Fair enough Patty... to each his own

FYP

<3

Sorry bout that Brian

Personally I can't feel bad for anyone that enters a tournament (especially one with a $10K buyin) and doesn't bother to learn the rules of the game.

You're entitled to your opinion, but as has been pointed out above it's not a new rule. It's not even a contentious rule like forward motion vs cut and release that's different depending on where you play. Aside from that you're ignoring the fact that there are no good reasons to check the nuts in position in the river in the first place. So even if you choose not to read the rules of the game there's still no reason to be doing it.

well oz aren't you a dealer in poker rooms or were? so im sure that my perspective and yours is entirely different seeing as i have yet to play a live game.

Yes, I deal live games. I don't see how that can change the following facts though:

Fact 1 - Anyone who pays to enter a tournament (especially one with a large buy in) should make it their business to have read the tournament rules. It doesn't cost you any extra to do so and it could save you money and hassles.

Fact 2 - Even if you haven't bothered to read the rules there still aren't any good reasons to be checking the nuts when you're last to act on the river.