Originally Posted by rifflemao
Can't imagine checking behind there. I saw a guy get a 1 round penalty for not betting the nuts in a WSOP circuit event. Dealer called the floor and they made the guy sit out. He was pissed.
Yeah, I see that all the time – that said, I hate the rule and think it is total horsesh*t.
The reason behind the rule is the prevention of collusion; however, it is setup as a “thumb rule” so that ill-equipped or possibly overworked floor personal can make quick no-brainer decisions. In reality, the floor man should always be on the lookout for collusion, that’s his job, and in situations where the absence of collusion is obvious and a player just checked the nuts, so be it!
Additionally, a penalty called for a last to act nut check is assigning guilt of collusion to the player that committed the check; after all, it is a “soft-play” and that is what is against the rules because it is consider collusion. We all know that at any other time, if you’re caught in the act of collusion you will be ejected and disbarred immediately and without question; except when you check the nuts on the river, then we’ll just give you a penalty and give you a stern warning. It makes about as much sense as the US tax code.
He paid his money, and there is no pre-requisite or training course that you must attend prior to playing poker. In short, it’s a thumb rule that is absolutely ludicrous. It’s not the only example either – poker is becoming so big it is becoming easier and easier to compare the rule book with the mountains and mountains of incoherent legislation currently on the books; a few more years and you’ll need a attorney to broker your tournament buy-in!
Sorry for going off but it’s sore spot with me!