Poker Etiquette by Phil Hellmuth

This has been answered but I am going to throw in my two cents because Hellmuth is such an f'ing hypocrite. It is completely acceptable for anyone to ask. For Phil to throw out the comment about what the top ten players think is about the funniest thing I've heard all year. Instead of 'poker brat' stitched on his hat he should have 'pretentious a-hole'

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Was Phil correct when he said is was poor etiquette for a player to ask to his cards when he had just showed them to the player next to him. Isn't it 1 see all see???

[/ QUOTE ]

He was not correct. The rule is that if you show your cards to one player, you have to show them to the table. Otherwise you are giving that one player information that is not available to everyone else.

And Phil knows the rules better than anyone else at the table.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you understand the difference between rules and etiquette?

It is also within the rules to keep asking to see a mucked hand at showdown in a cash game. Doesn't mean you should do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the difference. It is both against the rules and it is bad etiquette to show your cards to one player and not the others.

It is not bad etiquette to point out that Phil is violating the rules and the spirit of the game by showing his cards to one player.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
For Phil to throw out the comment about what the top ten players think is about the funniest thing I've heard all year. Instead of 'poker brat' stitched on his hat he should have 'pretentious a-hole'

[/ QUOTE ]

I may have heard it wrong, but I thought he said the "OTHER top ten players", which makes it even funnier (and sadder).

[mostsmooth]

[ QUOTE ]

It is also within the rules to keep asking to see a mucked hand at showdown in a cash game.

[/ QUOTE ]
it is?

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
The guy's an egomaniac. His enormous success in the past has lead to an inflated ego which has seriously hurt his play in past years. His play has become based entirely on self-weighting decisions and has lead to catastrophe in the main event in the last two years. Seriously, with his top notch skills, he could have eaten up the field but instead busted out early.

The only reason he finished 2nd in the tournament of champions was because he got lucky and spiked a 6 on Chan. He still flubbed the heads up play against Annie Duke, which should have been a cake-walk for him.

IMO, he puts too many chips at risk pre-flop with small edges, without considering the consequences to his stack and ability to continue on if he loses. For example, this year he re-raised with AQ against that one donk to put him all-in, without realizing the consequences to his stack if the donk got lucky or if someone behind him woke up to a hand (which someone did, QQ). IMO, the risk was to his stack was not worth the reward. I mean, seriously, the guy can play so incredibly, incredibly well after the flop why does he constantly insist on jamming the pot pre-flop if he has just a slight edge. I mean, I once saw him make a guy lay down trip jacks in the WSOP. How the hell do you make someone laydown trips heads up? I mean, Phil had two pair and he makes the guy lay down JT on a board of KJJ? That is incredible, incredible play. Phil should have busted on that hand, instead he makes a guy lay down a true monster.

Given his incredible skill post flop which is 2nd to none, why does constantly jeopardize himself by getting it all-in preflop? This not jeopardizes way too much of his stack, but more importantly, takes away his ability to out play his opponent post flop, which is where his greatest advantage is. He's giving his opponents their best shot to beat him, by getting lucky. And they do from time to time. Not only that, but he leaves himself vulnerable to getting busted. With his top notch skill, the possibility of getting busted should be the one thing he avoids. No other player suffers as much detriment by getting busted as he does. What I mean is, what does it matter to a donk if he gets busted? Chances are, if he doesnt bust now he will inevitable bust later. It makes little difference to his overall result. But to someone like Phil, who has the skill and experience to chop down Douglas fir with a hatchet, why EVER jeopardize your chip stack with a small edge (the way a donk would) if you arent forced to? With his skills, even playing AA preflop against a smaller pair for an all-in raise isnt worth it. His skills and potential are too great to leaving it up to chance to take him out of the tournament.

He needs to remain confident in his play but come down from that delusional grandiousity, stop griping about getting outdrawn, and let himself play his best game, which is post-flop, not pre-flop.

-J

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely disagree with the majority of the this post's substance.

Phil, contrary to what you've written, strives to play SMALL pots and HATES getting his money in before the flop, even with a nice edge like 70/30. One of his downfalls is that he feels that he's so strong post flop that he can effectively remove the "luck" of poker--something we all know he's doomed to fail at. Ever read about any of the times he's sucked out on? Two of his big regrets are: Losing w/AKs against Varkoni's QTs in the 2002 WSOP, and losing w/QQ to JJ against Jason Lester in 2003. He has the deluded sense that if he folds in either of those cases (which is obviously wrong results oriented thinking there) that he could outplay everyone and eventually win those tournaments. I see an unwillingness to gamble as one of Phil's chief weak points, and it is something opponents should seize upon.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

It is also within the rules to keep asking to see a mucked hand at showdown in a cash game.

[/ QUOTE ]
it is?


[/ QUOTE ]

From Robert's Rules of Poker:

[ QUOTE ]
5. Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that has been called, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

The purpose of the rule is to prevent collusion (one player betting up a pot with a junk hand and throwing it away when his partner wins). Asking to see a hand for any other reason is considered extremely bad etiquette.

[MeanGreenTT]

[ QUOTE ]
Post the same question in the B&M forum and look at the responses you get.

100% bad etiquette. Doesn't mean Phil's not a dick, and didn't go about telling the guy that in the worst possible way, but it's something that absolutely is frowned upon.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play plenty live too, and I stand by my statement. If you show 1 person and get pissy at me or anyone else because I/we ask to see, then it's you that has the etiquette issue [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]