P
Phosphorous
Rising Star
Bronze Level
It was. It's the whole point of this thread...
M
MAX101
Visionary
Silver Level
House rules are implemented because of situations like these,you should know them,I play in a bar league that has the same rule,and there are players of all skills that play,I think this type of rule is more helpful towards a novice, to bad but house rules come first!!! :withstupi
TheKAAHK
CardsChat Elite
Silver Level
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
It's there to prevent collusion.
If it weren't there Player X and his friend Player Y could make an agreement before the tournament that if they get seated at the same table, when they get the chance Player X is going to shove and Player Y is going to call regardless of their cards. Player X will show their hand and Player Y will muck, even if they have the best hand, because the deal was that Player X is the one that gets the chips. This gives Player X an unfair advantage in the tournament.
Forcing hands to be turned face up when there's an all in and a call isn't a complete solution to this problem but it certainly goes some way to discouraging it and forces people determined to collude to at least do it in more subtle and less effective ways. At the very least it forces Player Y to actually have the worst hand and if the cards show something suspicious (like Player Y made an insane call with absolutely no hand) it can give the tournament director some kind of cue to investigate and maybe take action against one or both players.
P
Phosphorous
Rising Star
Bronze Level
This was my entire point. In the scenario described by this thread, collusion could have been a possibility for what happened (although I personally doubt it was). By allowing Player A to muck his cards the tourney director could have (and may have) allowed collusion to take place amongst two of the biggest stacks in the tournament.
A
ALSALEFTY
Rising Star
Bronze Level
I believe I understand the spirit in which the "asian" comment was made. My daughter inlaw is Thai. Many times her frasing on sentances in english are very different than ours. I have to ask for clarifications often. So no offence taken on the reference.
As far as the ruling, it is spot on. The house rules are in play, know them, obide by them.
As far as the ruling, it is spot on. The house rules are in play, know them, obide by them.
Last edited:
LarkMarlow
Legend
Silver Level
Read what Oz has to say--he's a professional and knows what he's talking about. I always appreciate his thorough explanations of rulings and have learned a lot from him.
Re ethnicity, what were Players A and B? I mean fair is fair, right?
Re ethnicity, what were Players A and B? I mean fair is fair, right?
OzExorcist
Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
True - but by the time a tournament director arrives at a situation like the one described in this thread he's really just making the best of a bad situation. If he rules the hand is dead then what seems to be the worst hand is dragging a monster pot. But if he rules it live then he's rewarding stupidity and there might be controversy over exactly which cards are supposed to be retrieved.
Long story short, the fact that this situation ended up a complete mess doesn't mean the rule about having to show both hands at an all-in showdown is any less effective at preventing collusion. It just needs to be enforced.
