what is the rule for this.
 

i was at a friendly home game the other night. first hand.

everbody started out with 2000 in chips.

UTG BETS 1000

I go all in with 99.

seat 6 and seat 7 shows each other their hands... seat 6 folds a 77....seat 7 calls.

what should have been the rule for showing each other cards?

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

Seat 7's hand is dead.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

I would tell them that collusion isn't tolerated, even in a friendly game. Then, if were my place, i would tell them they are welcome to leave if they do it again. And if it wasn't my place, I wouldn't go back if it happened again.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

What's bothering me is how you had only 99 chips on the first hand when everyone started with 2000. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
What's bothering me is how you had only 99 chips on the first hand when everyone started with 2000. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

he had pocket 9's. i do agree it was written in a confusing way. i had to read it twice.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

sorry i meant to say pocket 99's...it was a bad play on my part but still....this was the second tournament of the night and i took first in the first one!

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
UTG BETS 1000

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, was it his first time playing? What were the blinds? As far as your situation goes I would tell them that's cheating and the hand should be ruled dead. However, conmsidering how savvy your friends appeasr to be I'm assuming they don't know the rules. So explain and then let them know they'll be enforced in the future.

Good luck,
Matt

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

Dead hand and a warning for both of them

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

If both of you were seriously confused by his post, you need to work on your reading comprehension.

It was obvious what he meant, the extra detail wasn't required.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
sorry i meant to say pocket 99's...it was a bad play on my part but still....this was the second tournament of the night and i took first in the first one!

[/ QUOTE ]

Pocket 99's? So you had quads in your hand? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

Smash a chair into Seat 7's cranium that should also serve as a future warning for Seat 6.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

A similer situation happend at the game I attend it was well known before hand that the hosts sister had never I mean NEVER played any type of poker before so we were a little easy on people helping out (she even had a hand cheat sheat next to her to help recognize hands she might have) So maybe you had a simaler situation. If not I vote for chair smashing [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

I actually had a similar situation come up in a freeze out I held a while ago.

It was post flop, 1st position makes a pot sized bet and I moved in from the next seat. MP1 players contemplates a call, then folds and flashes his hand to the player on his left. He didn't realize that the player he showed still was active (there was mucho cervezas being served).

We ruled by majority that the mucked hand had to be exposed to the whole table and all was peachy.

As an aside, the guy who called after seeing the mucked hand was probably not influenced by knowing two 7's were out of the deck preflop. Nonetheless, it wasn't his fault that his neighbor showed him his mucked cards and his had can't be declared dead for that. The mucked cards need to be exposed to the whole table so all remaining players can be afforded the same information.

PG

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
As an aside, the guy who called after seeing the mucked hand was probably not influenced by knowing two 7's were out of the deck preflop. Nonetheless, it wasn't his fault that his neighbor showed him his mucked cards and his had can't be declared dead for that. The mucked cards need to be exposed to the whole table so all remaining players can be afforded the same information.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree that this is the same situation as yours. Read this again:

"seat 6 and seat 7 shows each other their hands... seat 6 folds a 77....seat 7 calls."

Note that it reads as if they showed the two hands BEFORE the sevens folded.
I still say that both hands are dead.

In your described situation, showing the cards to the table was the correct ruling IMHO.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
I disagree that this is the same situation as yours. Read this again:

"seat 6 and seat 7 shows each other their hands... seat 6 folds a 77....seat 7 calls."

[/ QUOTE ]


I obviously misread the OP

sorry.

Later

PG

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

"The mucked cards need to be exposed to the whole table so all remaining players can be afforded the same information."

The problem here is that players have acted without this information and now players get to act WITH it. Not a fair situation even after cards are shown to the entire table.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

I misread the initial post. I hadn't realized they showed 'each other' their cards before acting. Obvious collusion.

Both hands should be declared dead.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

"The problem here is that players have acted without this information and now players get to act WITH it. Not a fair situation even after cards are shown to the entire table. "

Unless I'm misreading this, it sounds as if you're saying that the hand should be a misdeal, because players acted before the two colluded?

Or by players did you mean only the two "colluders"?

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

No - I was saying you can't just turn over the shown cards and proceed. Players have acted already based upon certain facts. Now a player has been shown additional information befre he has to act. His hand must be declared dead - he can't be allowed to act now that he has seen the other player's cards.

Plus - by flipping them over, every subsequent player gets to use the additional info to make their decision - the people who have already acted are at a serious disadvantage. Flip them over AFTER the round of betting has concluded if you must, but not in the middle of the round of betting.

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Plus - by flipping them over, every subsequent player gets to use the additional info to make their decision - the people who have already acted are at a serious disadvantage. Flip them over AFTER the round of betting has concluded if you must, but not in the middle of the round of betting.

[/ QUOTE ]

There should be no need to expose a hand if the players that have seen that hand are all OUT of the hand in play. I'm not sure what scenario you're thinking of that you'd expose the dead hand or flashed hand on the NEXT round of betting... ?

Let's be clear here- the OP's situation, both the 77 and other hand are dead. No hands are exposed that haven't been already. Play moves on.

In this situation from the sub-thread: "MP1 players contemplates a call, then folds and flashes his hand to the player on his left.... We ruled by majority that the mucked hand had to be exposed to the whole table and all was peachy."

This is the only solution that works- you expose the hand to the entire table and play moves on.


Agreed?

Re: what is the rule for this.
 

I'm not sure we are agreeing or disagreeing here. The original post was as such:
<font color="purple">
UTG BETS 1000
I go all in with 99.
seat 6 and seat 7 shows each other their hands... seat 6 folds a 77....seat 7 calls. </font>

Both hands (6 and 7) should be dead and the cards NOT exposed to the rest of the table. That is my ruling. Someone else wanted the cards exposed to everyone else - I was stating that they should not be exposed - I did say that if the cards had to be shown to all, then wait until this round's betting was over. In hindsight it would make no sense to expose them to all at any point. Kill 6 and 7 and move on.

I think we actually agree now..... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

Final Answer
 

Greetings. My first 2+2 post...

I was watching Poker Royale (Comedians vs. Pros) last night and this actually came up. The commentator said something like...
"In the older days you could show your opponent your hand to get a read on them, but they no longer allow it."

We are in agreement
 

My expose the hand reply was for PokerGoblin's situation, that he described in his reply.

Re: Final Answer
 

My understanding is that is true for tournaments. Cash games might still allow it, supposedly. Check your local cardroom to be sure.