Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

Commerce 40/80
My normal game is 20/40, but I decided to take a shot last night because the 20 line was longer than the 40 line.

The villain in this hand is an extremely loose Mexican guy who calls too much on draws. Just for clarification, an underpair is a draw, as can be a single overcard. I saw both during the course of the night. Overall, I'd say he's a bit on the passive side. Here's the hand:

I am dealt A [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] in the BB. There are 3-4 limpers and the SB completes. Hero raises. All of the limpers call.

Flop: K [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 3 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]
Hero checks. Everyone else checks.

Turn: K [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Hero bets. Villain calls and everyone else folds.

River: 8 [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]
Hero checks. Villain bets. Hero calls.

Now at this point, I'm looking at the guy waiting to see his hand. And instead, he gives me the same look as if he's waiting to see my hand. It's obvious my A-high is good and he doesn't want to show his bluff. The table starts to get impatient after a few seconds and the guy finally says, "Jack high". I turn over my Ace and this black guy next to me (he's really pissed at me because I took a large pot off of him a couple hands ago) says, "Show both cards of the winning hand". I show the second card in order to speed things up, plus, I know if he really wants to see them, he could ask anyways.

My question is, I thought the bettor was obligated to show his cards first. Is he allowed to just say "Jack high" and not show? Couldn't I just say something like "a pair of 8s" and then if they show a pair of 9s, I could be like, "Oops, I meant a pair of 10s", or if they show Js, then I muck? I understand that I could've asked to see his cards, but that's not what I'm interested in. I'm interested in standard conventions that speed the game up. If every showdown consisted of everyone waiting for everyone else to table their cards, we'd probably get a measley 20 hands/hour in. Lastly, if he says "Jack high" and I show an Ace and he mucks, is that good enough, or am I obligated to show the second card regardless of anyone else demanding to see it?

Sorry for all of my silly questions. As I'm sure any of you have guessed, I spend a lot more time with a mouse in hand rather than actual chips.

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

Yes, the bettor is supposed to show his hand first. In live games though it's very common for either player to just anounce his hand. It's a generally accepted practice and makes the game more light hearted, which is what you want. It's also common for the bettor to just say "I missed" which basically means he has nothing.

Just show your hand and take it down, if the loose player starts to think he's going to have to show his crap hand more often he's going to tighten up, not what you want!

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

1) I strongly dislike the flop check; this is perfect board to continuation bet on and fold out a ton of hands you want out.

2) A winning hand always needs to show both cards. Once you know you're the winner, just flip them up and scoop the chips. What's with this "just showing the ace" crap? Of course the Villain is supposed to show his cards first, but just because he's out of line is no reason for you to be.

3) Why is it significant that the Villain was "Mexican" and the guy who just wanted you to play by the rules was black?

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
1) I strongly dislike the flop check; this is perfect board to continuation bet on and fold out a ton of hands you want out.

2) A winning hand always needs to show both cards. Once you know you're the winner, just flip them up and scoop the chips. What's with this "just showing the ace" crap? Of course the Villain is supposed to show his cards first, but just because he's out of line is no reason for you to be.

3) Why is it significant that the Villain was "Mexican" and the guy who just wanted you to play by the rules was black?

[/ QUOTE ]

I appreciate the advice from points 1 and 2. As for 3, I use those as descriptions, not as a racist remark. Would it be better if I said something like, "tall, middle-aged man", or "short, chubby woman"? If you prefer, I could just label people guy X and guy Y.

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
As for 3, I use those as descriptions, not as a racist remark. Would it be better if I said something like, "tall, middle-aged man", or "short, chubby woman"? If you prefer, I could just label people guy X and guy Y.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the descriptions are relevant to the reads you make while playing, it's fine -- e.g. "a 93 year-old Asian woman raised the river" and "22 year-old white kid with wraparound shades raised the river" mean different things -- but in your case, the guy asking to see both cards was just a guy asking to see both cards.

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
3) Why is it significant that the Villain was "Mexican" and the guy who just wanted you to play by the rules was black?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry that a black man (I'm assuming based on your avatar) had to be the one to ask this. I wish I would have seen it first (I'm white). I really hate anything that even hints at racism (no offense to the OP, but I think you can see why people would think that).

Will

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3) Why is it significant that the Villain was "Mexican" and the guy who just wanted you to play by the rules was black?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sorry that a black man (I'm assuming based on your avatar) had to be the one to ask this. I wish I would have seen it first (I'm white). I really hate anything that even hints at racism (no offense to the OP, but I think you can see why people would think that).

Will

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for taking all the guilt for all us white people. Nice job.

NT

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As for 3, I use those as descriptions, not as a racist remark. Would it be better if I said something like, "tall, middle-aged man", or "short, chubby woman"? If you prefer, I could just label people guy X and guy Y.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the descriptions are relevant to the reads you make while playing, it's fine -- e.g. "a 93 year-old Asian woman raised the river" and "22 year-old white kid with wraparound shades raised the river" mean different things -- but in your case, the guy asking to see both cards was just a guy asking to see both cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've always found it ridiculous that people even consider this racist at all. Mentioning a person's ethnicity is just a description. Next thing someone's going to tell me is that saying "man" or "woman" is sexist. I don't feel I described them in a demeaning manner with regards to their race. If you think otherwise, let me know and I'll try to watch what I type in the future.

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]


I've always found it ridiculous that people even consider this racist at all. Mentioning a person's ethnicity is just a description. Next thing someone's going to tell me is that saying "man" or "woman" is sexist. I don't feel I described them in a demeaning manner with regards to their race. If you think otherwise, let me know and I'll try to watch what I type in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say it was racist. I don't think it is. I just find it very peculiar and surprising. It's like saying you witnessed a bar brawl, and specifying that you were drinking Corona when it occurred. Out-of-the-blue irrelevant specifications like that are always weird to me.

Oh, and by the way -- I am not famous actor/musician Mos Def.

Re: Commerce 40/80 - An LC hand and a question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I've always found it ridiculous that people even consider this racist at all. Mentioning a person's ethnicity is just a description. Next thing someone's going to tell me is that saying "man" or "woman" is sexist. I don't feel I described them in a demeaning manner with regards to their race. If you think otherwise, let me know and I'll try to watch what I type in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say it was racist. I don't think it is. I just find it very peculiar and surprising. It's like saying you witnessed a bar brawl, and specifying that you were drinking Corona when it occurred. Out-of-the-blue irrelevant specifications like that are always weird to me.

Oh, and by the way -- I am not famous actor/musician Mos Def.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, well for the record, the reason why I describe people like that is that it feels weird if I start my post with:
The two villains in the hand are X and Y. X is blah blah blah and Y is blah blah blah. In terms of relevance to the hand, no, the races of those players are not relevant.