Not Betting The Nuts

[Poker_Mike]

I can't tell you how many times I am shocked when the dealer stops the game and explains to the winner of the last pot that he had the stone cold nuts and it is a mandatory bet in a tournament - because he was the last to act.

They usually shrug their shoulders and sometimes the dealer repeats themselves because they think the player doesn't understand that the next time will be a penalty.

But in online play there is no authority warning the player that they must bet the nuts because they were the last to act.

Usually I associate this behavior with bad play or outright cheating.

Does anybody see this online?

 

[Funtast]

Wouldn't that be the worst cheat of all time? (except the hand was ment for chipdumping and the wrong guy won)
I often see similar things online mostly by calling stations.
They usually donkcall the board twice with very little equity and when they hit their dream out for a nutty hand, they don't raise or they check behind. Sometimes this kind of terribliness tilts me very hard.

 

[Poker_Mike]

Wouldn't that be the worst cheat of all time? (except the hand was ment for chipdumping and the wrong guy won)
I often see similar things online mostly by calling stations.
They usually donkcall the board twice with very little equity and when they hit their dream out for a nutty hand, they don't raise or they check behind. Sometimes this kind of terribliness tilts me very hard.

Does this sound like bot behavior?

Either way it is completely exploitable in an easy way.

I'm always looking for it in my opponents.

 

[pentazepam]

There are only two absolutes in NLH: Never fold AA preflop and never check the nuts in position on the river.

Why would someone do that on purpose?

 

[Poker_Mike]

There are only two absolutes in NLH: Never fold AA preflop and never check the nuts in position on the river.

Why would someone do that on purpose?

Soft play is one reason.

Not paying attention to your nutty hand is another.

But in a couple of circumstances I think it was a limit player playing NLH.

Still they would be required to put out 1 big bet in limit....so....

Or they don't want to feel greedy?

Or they're still distracted by the fight they had with their wife, hours earlier, who said to them, "Go to the damn poker room and get out of here!!"

 

[0546474]

I can't tell you how many times I am shocked when the dealer stops the game and explains to the winner of the last pot that he had the stone cold nuts and it is a mandatory bet in a tournament - because he was the last to act.

They usually shrug their shoulders and sometimes the dealer repeats themselves because they think the player doesn't understand that the next time will be a penalty.

But in online play there is no authority warning the player that they must bet the nuts because they were the last to act.

Usually I associate this behavior with bad play or outright cheating.

Does anybody see this online?

I’m interested, he warned that this should not be done, but he said what the punishment for this action could be!!!

 

[mr.fers_one]

It's weird to throw off nats. it's just that if a player doesn't see that he has nats, then it's more like a fish.

 

[Nate420]

I have never met a studied player who checks the stone cold nuts on the river (in position)

The fact you get punished for it is kind of hilarious... It's already a punishment in itself

 

[gustavofuentes2]

I can't tell you how many times I am shocked when the dealer stops the game and explains to the winner of the last pot that he had the stone cold nuts and it is a mandatory bet in a tournament - because he was the last to act.

They usually shrug their shoulders and sometimes the dealer repeats themselves because they think the player doesn't understand that the next time will be a penalty.

But in online play there is no authority warning the player that they must bet the nuts because they were the last to act.

Usually I associate this behavior with bad play or outright cheating.

Does anybody see this online?

Well, I only play online so the answer to your question is no. But I never knew that you would be required in live play to play the nuts even if you decide not to. Now I assume that you mean after the river since you mentioned the winner of the last hand. But in this case the winner of the last hand had the nuts so I'm kind of confused of this scenario that you mention. Could you please clarify and maybe give an example. Thank you.

 

[Pokerpoet2]

The only time I witnessed a player not raise on the River with the stone cold nuts, was when I was playing at my local Pub and a friend of mine just called a River bet saying he had a Flush, With a pair on the table he was afraid of a possible Full House, What he didn't realise was his Flush was actually a Royal flush, after he had it pointed out to him, He was kicking himself, but it certainly wasn't his intention to "Chip Dump" or anything, he was just a novice player.
From my own experience in a Casino game I have found that if a Player was chip Dumping to a Friend at the table he would not show his hand to the Dealer and simply fold his hand if the other players had already shown their hands, Declaring a Fold at any point keeping his cards hidden, Because if he saw a hand beating his there is no rule to say he must show his losing hand. At least in my own experience.
Might be a different rule in other Casino's but the ones I have played at there is nothing forcing you to show a losing hand on the River if you have no chance of winning.

 

[Poker_Mike]

Well, I only play online so the answer to your question is no. But I never knew that you would be required in live play to play the nuts even if you decide not to. Now I assume that you mean after the river since you mentioned the winner of the last hand. But in this case the winner of the last hand had the nuts so I'm kind of confused of this scenario that you mention. Could you please clarify and maybe give an example. Thank you.

Yes, it's after the river and no bet in position. It could be any hand.

Sometimes a player is looking for a flush and after missing their flush they rivered the nut straight and didn't bet it.

 

[Fosterbio]

Very often, the fish plays like this

 

[Miyagi not miyaji]

It's very common to misread your hand when you're multitabling. Even Phil Ivey mucked his winning hand at a wsop main event. So I see it as an honest mistake

 

[takinitSLEAZEE]

I can't tell you how many times I am shocked when the dealer stops the game and explains to the winner of the last pot that he had the stone cold nuts and it is a mandatory bet in a tournament - because he was the last to act.

WTF? Nothing is mandatory when it comes to betting, other than the sequence itself. I've checked the nuts out of position after hitting the river just to let the villain take a stab at it, that is if I think they're going to try and steal the pot. It's just a strategic play for those against over-agg-players, imo.

 

[Poker_Mike]

WTF? Nothing is mandatory when it comes to betting, other than the sequence itself. I've checked the nuts out of position after hitting the river just to let the villain take a stab at it, that is if I think they're going to try and steal the pot. It's just a strategic play for those against over-agg-players, imo.

Checking the nuts OOP is ok as a trap to check raise.

But if you are last to act with the actual nuts - which depending on the board - could be top set, straight, flush, quads, straight flush - it is mandatory to bet.

From a news article:

Those who watch a lot of televised tournament poker might be aware of this rule, as will most experienced tournament players. However even those who play a lot might not have personally faced this particular situation and so might not be aware of the rule requiring you to bet when holding the best possible hand when last to act on the final betting round.

The rule is enforced in tournaments at the World Series of Poker and elsewhere (though not everywhere). To give an example, a player holds A♣9♣ and watches as an opponent checks the river with the board showing 9♥5♣8♠6♣K♣. The player checks back and shows down the ace-high flush — an unbeatable hand on that board. That player would then incur a penalty and be made to sit out a hand or more (at the tournament director's discretion).

The reason for the rule is to prevent collusion or "soft play" between players, although in most cases a player checking back the nuts often does so without realizing he or she has an unbeatable hand. In the above example, for instance, the player might have missed the backdoor flush having arrived and simply checked back only thinking about the vulnerable-seeming flopped pair of nines.

The rule is generally only part of tournament poker, where any form of soft play (intentional or otherwise) affects all players, even those not in the hand.

When facing a bet with the actual nuts on the river - the player must raise - just calling would incur a penalty.

 

[takinitSLEAZEE]

Checking the nuts OOP is ok as a trap to check raise.

But if you are last to act with the actual nuts - which depending on the board - could be top set, straight, flush, quads, straight flush - it is mandatory to bet.

From a news article:

Those who watch a lot of televised tournament poker might be aware of this rule, as will most experienced tournament players. However even those who play a lot might not have personally faced this particular situation and so might not be aware of the rule requiring you to bet when holding the best possible hand when last to act on the final betting round.

The rule is enforced in tournaments at the World Series of Poker and elsewhere (though not everywhere). To give an example, a player holds A♣9♣ and watches as an opponent checks the river with the board showing 9♥5♣8♠6♣K♣. The player checks back and shows down the ace-high flush — an unbeatable hand on that board. That player would then incur a penalty and be made to sit out a hand or more (at the tournament director's discretion).

The reason for the rule is to prevent collusion or "soft play" between players, although in most cases a player checking back the nuts often does so without realizing he or she has an unbeatable hand. In the above example, for instance, the player might have missed the backdoor flush having arrived and simply checked back only thinking about the vulnerable-seeming flopped pair of nines.

The rule is generally only part of tournament poker, where any form of soft play (intentional or otherwise) affects all players, even those not in the hand.

When facing a bet with the actual nuts on the river - the player must raise - just calling would incur a penalty.

My apologies. I feel enlightened. Thank you very much for your post.

 

[Poker_Mike]

My apologies. I feel enlightened. Thank you very much for your post.

The problem my friend - is that this is unenforced in online play.

Nobody stops the online tournament to give a player a warning.

Honestly - it is such a rare occurence that it doesn't matter too much.

But soft play itself occurs online all the time.

You will see players check the river with a full house that is the 2nd nuts because their wife is the only player that remains in the hand.

And that is soft play that hurts everyone in the tournament even though they were not in the hand.

Soft play is a form of collusion and is actually cheating.

 

[Station_Master]

I actually came across a spot where I didnt bet the nuts in position the other day in a cash game.

I raised AQo preflop, BB called
Flop QJT, I cbet he calls
Turn K, I cbet, he x-raise me
River a blank so any A is the nuts, board unpaired and no flush available. Villain bets into me, do I call or raise?

Apparently with the nuts I am meant to raise, but it felt like a rake trap. Villain almost certainly has an Ace and if not he isn't calling my raise anyway, so I thought raising would be a mistake.

In a tournament, with no rake I guess there is not reason not to raise so can understand the rule.

By the way villain had AT (shock!)

 

[Gallarado777]

I think it's just that weak players just don't bet when they have no other options here. It's just that this player is either inattentive or a very weak player. I understand if you lure a player to flop but you have to bet on the river if you have a strong hand how can you not bet it's strange

 

[Poker Orifice]

I think it's just that weak players just don't bet when they have no other options here. It's just that this player is either inattentive or a very weak player. I understand if you lure a player to flop but you have to bet on the river if you have a strong hand how can you not bet it's strange

You're completely missing the point. Maybe it's the translation that is lacking. But whatever it is.... You've missed the mark!
(sometimes big moosekles can mean puney cranial muscle or small pee pee)

 

[Gallarado777]

Вы совершенно упускаете суть. Возможно, дело в том, что перевода не хватает. Но как бы то ни было... Вы промахнулись!
(иногда большие мускелы могут означать маленькие черепные мышцы или маленькую мочу)

if you have the strongest combination, you can skip the flop turn but on the river you just make a check to see your opponent's map, but it's stupid to place at least some bets to collect chips just show that you have a cool hand no I think it's very stupid

 

[Poker Orifice]

if you have the strongest combination, you can skip the flop turn but on the river you just make a check to see your opponent's map, but it's stupid to place at least some bets to collect chips just show that you have a cool hand no I think it's very stupid

The thread is about >>> NOT betting 'WITH' position (Last to act) while holding the NUTS (the best possible hand). You MUST bet in this circumstance because it is against the rules to check in that spot (in tournament play) as it considered as 'soft playing'/collusion.

 

[Poker Orifice]

if you have the strongest combination, you can skip the flop turn but on the river you just make a check to see your opponent's map, but it's stupid to place at least some bets to collect chips just show that you have a cool hand no I think it's very stupid

This response did answer a big question for me though and one that happens frequently for me when playing the CC games. And that is "WTF are they thinking? Are they thinking??"

 

[cracker]

So what happens in this scenario. After the river player A checks then player B checks to see player A's cards but player A doesn't want player B to see his cards so he folds. Player B wins and no one sees any cards.

 

[Poker_Mike]

So what happens in this scenario. After the river player A checks then player B checks to see player A's cards but player A doesn't want player B to see his cards so he folds. Player B wins and no one sees any cards.

I don't quit understand what you mean to say.

Poker is not a game about seeing your opponent's cards.

Poker is a game about accumulating chips.

Not betting the nuts in position is soft play and is actually illegal.