|
|
#21
10-23-2004, 05:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
I agree, people should know their hands, so in a sense he got what he had coming. But the dealer is the final say in the matter, and like a previous poster mentioned, he/she should have pushed the cards to indicate Danial's hand (at least as I understand it, if I'm wrong please correct).
Again, was it legal, certainly. SHould the guy have know his hand was the board, also certainly. Is it right to take advantage of a situation like this, that's up to you. I'm just saying that I'm not suprised some people would feel that this play was wrong. Cody 
|
|
#22
10-23-2004, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
Speaking technically I believe intentionally miscalling a hand (not that you did, but I could see how he could misinterperet your words) is cause to forfit the pot. I'm sorry, I can't remember where I read this but I do recall it from somewhere credible. Feel free to correct me as I am curious to know the truth here. Cody [/ QUOTE ] this may be at some places, but i was playing at Caesar's Indiana a month ago. in a $10/20 game, a head-up pot on the river. one guy states his hand as "sixes and fours". other guy mucks. "sixes and fours" guy turns'em over, and only has 6's. guy that mucked claimed to have top pair on board (Q i think). dealer says "that is why you do not muck your cards. you just made a $110.00 mistake. let the cards speak." cheers!
|
|
#23
10-24-2004, 09:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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. [/ QUOTE ] I didn't need an explanation of the rule. I know what the rule states and I disagree with it.
|
|
#24
10-24-2004, 10:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
I don't think you have to turn over your hole cards if you verbally declare that you are playing the board before mucking.
Not the case in the incident being discussed, but I believe that to be the case.
|
|
#25
10-24-2004, 11:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you have to turn over your hole cards if you verbally declare that you are playing the board before mucking. Not the case in the incident being discussed, but I believe that to be the case. [/ QUOTE ] I have never seen a set of cardroom rules that allowed this.
|
|
#26
10-25-2004, 01:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think you have to turn over your hole cards if you verbally declare that you are playing the board before mucking. Not the case in the incident being discussed, but I believe that to be the case. [/ QUOTE ] You're mistaken. In every casino or cardroom I've ever heard of, you must always show both cards to have a claim at the pot, regardless of all other factors.
|
|
#27
10-25-2004, 01:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I don't think you have to turn over your hole cards if you verbally declare that you are playing the board before mucking. Not the case in the incident being discussed, but I believe that to be the case. [/ QUOTE ] You're mistaken. In every casino or cardroom I've ever heard of, you must always show both cards to have a claim at the pot, regardless of all other factors. [/ QUOTE ] If it's heads up and you both check or the bet is called and one person throws their cards in the muck then the other person doesn't have to show anything. At least that's what I've seen when playing at The Grand, Gold Strike and Horseshoe casinos in Tunica.
|
|
#29
10-28-2004, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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. [/ QUOTE ] The original post was vague. The author stated that: [ QUOTE ] ...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 ] I assumed this meant that the amateur tabled his hand, but failed to "call" straight and the dealer somehow missed it also. (How could Daniel have known that amateur had a straight unless he had tabled his hand?) IF (and I don't know the facts, so I emphasize IF), the amateur properly tabled his hand, but didn't know what he had, AND the dealer made the same error, BUT Daniel knew that the pot should be split...he is ethically bound, IMO, to draw the error to the dealers attention and to split the pot.
|
|
#30
10-28-2004, 09:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Negreanu takes the whole pot when it should\'ve been split
[ QUOTE ]
IF (and I don't know the facts, so I emphasize IF), the amateur properly tabled his hand, but didn't know what he had, AND the dealer made the same error, BUT Daniel knew that the pot should be split...he is ethically bound, IMO, to draw the error to the dealers attention and to split the pot. [/ QUOTE ] Daniel knew the pot should be split because the straight was on the board. Whatever the guy was holding was meaningless since both players were using the five board cards.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
