Rule question....

#1 10-05-2005, 10:09 PM

$1/$2 NL

EP raises to $12, MP calls, I call on the button with JTh.

Flop is Qh, 9s, 3h

EP bets out $30, MP calls, I push in for $75 on top. EP calls, but has about $6 more in front of him and doesn't put them in. MP calls as well, and turns over 99. I didn't say anything, b/c I ended up losing the pot to EPs AA even if the MP's hand was dead.

But that's my question - since EP wasn't all in and MP turned over his cards, isn't his hand dead?

#2 10-05-2005, 11:28 PM

as far as i know or care, no. exposed cards are a players fault. it doesn't kill the hand. it was the players fault for not paying attention but the only way to kill a hand is muck it. exposing cards AWAY from the muck should have no bearing on the hand being dead or alive as far as i interperate the rule.

tonypaladino · #3 10-06-2005, 01:58 AM

Was MP All-In with his call?

If not, did betting occur between EP and MP on the flop/turn/river for EP's last $6?

Some nitty card rooms have a rule that any/all exposed hands are dead, but generally it is in the interest of the game to keep the hand live.

ohnonotthat · #4 10-06-2005, 03:48 AM

rule ?

I could see a rule whereby repeatedly exposing your cards intentionally might lead to a reprimand or even a barring but I have never heard of a rule stating that exposed hands are dead.

I am not saying you're wrong - only that I have never seen/heard of any such rule and I have played in a dozen or so states.

Maybe I just never saw anyone attempt to enforce such a rule.

*

Most - if not all - tournaments have a rule forbidding this however I do not know if the penalty for the first offense is killing the hand of the offender.

#5 10-06-2005, 10:34 AM

I think it is against the interest of the game to rule this player's hand dead. Although most rooms have a rule that states that each player should do his or her best to keep confidential information confidential (usually to prevent collusion), I doubt that killing the hand is the punishment. This move was probably not deliberate. Either this player has watched too much TV or wasn't paying enough attention.

#6 10-06-2005, 11:22 AM

There was still betting between the MP and the EP and, yes, I think that the MP was just not paying attention. He was a solid player.

I always thought that if there was betting between two people still to be done and you flipped over your cards, they were dead. I agree that - in the best interest of the game - this should not have been the ruling, however - just curious to what the formal "rule" was.