Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should've been split

[PokerPaul]

I did not really miscall my hand here, intentional or not.

I either said "aces win it" or "your aces win it", can't remember exactly, as i was in motion of flipping over my hand.

He threw his hand so fast into pile out of frustration, it was truly his own fault.

Of course, i think i did put a couple of people, him included, on tilt that evening, so that probably contributed to it.

He was a good sport about it afterward and said that it really was his own fault. Of course, the fact that i likely gave much of winnings back later on made him say that, but who knows

[Richard Tanner]

Thanks Johnny, I knew I read that somewhere.

Cody

[tipperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically Negreanu is all in short stacked vs an amateur and they both have a ten high straight, however the amateur (and dealer too apparently) both missed the fact that the pot was split so Negreanu takes the whole thing knowing it should've been split.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I haven't seen the article, but that's unethical behavior. Intentionally dragging a pot that you know was awarded improperly isn't OK in my book. Daniel should have split the pot.

[jomatty]

daniel didnt miscall his hand he correctly stated ten high straight, while turning his hand over. An opponent who mucks his hand can not win any part of the pot so technically neither daniel not the dealer did anything unethical or made a mistake. some may construe this as angle shooting but its not his responsibility to tell his opponent what he has at the end unless his opponent turns his hand over. cards speak if they are turned over but you have no responsibility to try to make someone turn over their hand, and if his opponent did that and daniel took the pot it would indeed be unethical. from what ive read and heard daniel cares very much about the rules of poker and is ethical. note: if daniels opponent was all in after river i believe the dealer and daniel would have correctly made him turn over his hand and take his half of the pot
matty

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]

Well, I haven't seen the article, but that's unethical behavior. Intentionally dragging a pot that you know was awarded improperly isn't OK in my book. Daniel should have split the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

How was it improperly awarded? Daniel's opponent mucked his cards and forfeited the rights to contest the pot.

[DimensionPresident]

I still think this is a pretty lame rule. If the best hand is the five cards on the board, it doesn't matter what each player holds. If the betting is over, the pot should be split. No one should even have to show their hand if the cards they are holding are meaningless.

If "cards speak", the five cards each player is using for their hand are ALREADY flipped over.

[felson]

If the amateur mucks his hand, he forfeits his right to the pot. If you want to claim the pot, showing your hole cards (or making an uncalled bet) is the price of admission.

On the other hand, when Daniel turns over his cards, the dealer should promptly push all five board cards one inch, making it obvious that Daniel is playing the board. Apparently the dealer did not do this.

[Richard Tanner]

This seems to be one of those "Yeah it's legal but if you have to resort to that..." arguments. Was what Danial did legal, certainly. He didn't miscall his hand. Was it ethical, well that's touchy. Poker is one of those games where after the hand the cards sould tell the story. The players have had their chance to bet and bluff their way to the win, now let's see the result.
I don't like that he would resort to that at all, but at least he's increased our attention to our cards.

Cody

[fnurt]

[ QUOTE ]
I still think this is a pretty lame rule. If the best hand is the five cards on the board, it doesn't matter what each player holds. If the betting is over, the pot should be split. No one should even have to show their hand if the cards they are holding are meaningless.

If "cards speak", the five cards each player is using for their hand are ALREADY flipped over.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to show two cards to win, this is the rule almost everywhere.

If there are three jacks on the board, you cannot just flip over the fourth one and claim the pot. You need to show both cards, whether you're using them or not.

[Regulator]

But where do you draw the line between ethical representation of your hand and being the table watchdog, watching over the things they should already be watching for themselves? If you can't recognize something like playing the board, other people shouldn't be required to do it for you.