Ethical Question

[tyfromm]

The game is 7-stud. Player A and Player B are both regulars who know each other well and are friendly.

Player A has two-pairs showing and has been betting throughout the hand.

Player B has three hearts showing and has been calling.

As the river card is dealt, Player B says to Player A, "If you have a full house, you win, otherwise you lose."

Player A bets. Player B calls. Player A shows a full house.

Player B says, "That was an ungentlemanly thing to do," and genuinely seems offended that Player A bet his hand rather than check. Player A says, "Do you think I was going to bet my full-house if you didn't say anything? So why should I have to check just because you decided to reveal your hand?"

Personally, I think Player A is 100% correct here. If a player wants to accounce his hand prematurely, he is doing so at his own risk. Of course, many players misrepresent their hand, which is a completely different issue.

Other possibly relevant information:

1. Player B often talks during heads-up hands, and will say things like "tens are no good," or, "if you don't have two pairs, don't bet," or something like the example I mentioned above. I have never seen Player B lie about his hand. He views this as "giving other players breaks," even though the opponent will often do the exact opposite regardless (perhaps the opponents haven't played with him for as many hours as I have and haven't noticed that he never lies... or think he is acting strong because he is weak). Whether or not he is really giving the other player a break, in Player B's perception that is what he is doing.

2. Player B has been running over the game for many months. He's not just running good, he is running out-of-this-world.

3. This is a high-stakes game.










Was this ethical?

Please post answer before reading other replies.



































.

[The WET BEAVER]

This is Gregario the Moron with yet another name change.

[hyde]

multiple layers of flawed rationale in your story.

Player B says, "That was an ungentlemanly thing to do,"
It was not ungentlemanly.

because:
Player B says to Player A, "If you have a full house, you win, otherwise you lose."
He did not reveal his hand. that would have required showing cards. Any verbal banter is a potential bluff. REGARDLESS if he had previously told the truth. It might be 'setting up a play".

>Whether or not he is really giving the other player a break, in Player B's perception that is what he is doing.
His perception does not make it reality. He can not expect other players to share his perception. That is why there are rules. It is not outside of the rules to share information as he does, but it is a leak in his game....

2. Player B has been running over the game for many months. He's not just running good, he is running out-of-this-world.
Irrelevant. Nice that he gives back and all.....

3. This is a high-stakes game.
Irrelevant.


Was this ethical?
the bet was totally ethical.
The reaction to the expectation of his friend not to bet was ungentlemanly.

hyde

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Was this ethical?

Of course the bet was ethical. He bet the best hand. In the same spot, I'd have checkraised his overly-talkative a$$.

[dogmeat]

Of course it's ethical for Player A to bet his hand. End of discussion.

Dogmeat /images/graemlins/spade.gif

[jedi]

My answer (before reading responses)

Why isn't it ethical? Player A believes he has the best hand and thus bets it to give Player B a chance to fold and save himself a bet. Player B is making a huge mistake by revealing his hand. Player A can do whatever he wants with that informaiton.