Angle shoot - Incorrect floor ruling?

[DoubleDeuce]

Here's the situation:
40-100 Buy-in NL (1 & 3 Blinds)
Button on Seat 1
seat 4 limps (~$200)
Seat 5 all in $11
Seat 6 calls (~$150?)
Folded to Seat 9 all in $14
Seats 4&6 call ($9 side pot #1)

Flop
Seats 4 & 6 check

Turn
Seat 4 bets $20
Seat 6 raises to $60
Seat 4 calls ($120 side pot #2)

River
Seat 4 goes all-in

The angle shoot
Seat 5 shows Seat 4 his hole cards
Seat 4 can no longer act because he's all-in
Seat 6 asks for a floor for "show one show all" ruling before acting
Floor exposes Seat 5's cards giving Seat 6 an advantage (and seat 5 keeping live cards after breaking a rule)

Should the floor expose the cards since Seat 4 gains no advantage?
Should the floor keep the hand alive?
Does the "Show one show all" rule even apply here?

I thought it was a bad ruling on the floor. If they wanted to enforce the rule, he should have killed Seat 5's hand but not put Seat 4 at a disadvantage like this.

[TM1212]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's the situation:
40-100 Buy-in NL (1 & 3 Blinds)
Button on Seat 1
seat 4 limps (~$200)
Seat 5 all in $11
Seat 6 calls (~$150?)
Folded to Seat 9 all in $14
Seats 4&6 call ($9 side pot #1)

Flop
Seats 4 & 6 check

Turn
Seat 4 bets $20
Seat 6 raises to $60
Seat 4 calls ($120 side pot #2)

River
Seat 4 goes all-in

The angle shoot
Seat 5 shows Seat 4 his hole cards
Seat 4 can no longer act because he's all-in
Seat 6 asks for a floor for "show one show all" ruling before acting
Floor exposes Seat 5's cards giving Seat 6 an advantage (and seat 5 keeping live cards after breaking a rule)

Should the floor expose the cards since Seat 4 gains no advantage?
Should the floor keep the hand alive?
Does the "Show one show all" rule even apply here?

I thought it was a bad ruling on the floor. If they wanted to enforce the rule, he should have killed Seat 5's hand but not put Seat 4 at a disadvantage like this.

[/ QUOTE ]

horrible ruling! Should have spoke up im sure another intelligent player at the table would have agreed. did u complain to managment?

howd the hand play out... im assuming seat 5 has a good hand seat 6 folds maybe costing seat 4 money, then again he could have still though he had seat 4. idk

[nate1729]

This is a bizarre remedy for that particular broken rule. The rule exists to keep a player from divulging information unequally, but it is meant to apply on a time-frame of an entire session (or longer,) not during a hand. That is, exposing the hand after the action was completed would have been an equally potent remedy for the breaking of that rule.

Now, another rule was broken, namely the one that says a live hand can't be intentionally exposed (details of this rule are technical and vary from room to room.) That rule, by contrast, has impact within the course of a single hand. So it makes sense to punish Seat 5 somehow. Sometimes this is a warning, sometimes this is a dead hand. Personally, I think that a warning is a fine punishment in this case, because nobody else can act, and Seat 6 can only gain information. (If Seat 4 could have still acted... sheesh, I guess exposing Seat 5's hand or maybe killing it is the right answer.)

Anyway, punishment was possibly appropriate according to the letter of the law... just not the "show one, show all" law.

--Nate

[TM1212]

[ QUOTE ]
This is a bizarre remedy for that particular broken rule. The rule exists to keep a player from divulging information unequally, but it is meant to apply on a time-frame of an entire session (or longer,) not during a hand. That is, exposing the hand after the action was completed would have been an equally potent remedy for the breaking of that rule.

Now, another rule was broken, namely the one that says a live hand can't be intentionally exposed (details of this rule are technical and vary from room to room.) That rule, by contrast, has impact within the course of a single hand. So it makes sense to punish Seat 5 somehow. Sometimes this is a warning, sometimes this is a dead hand. Personally, I think that a warning is a fine punishment in this case, because nobody else can act, and Seat 6 can only gain information. (If Seat 4 could have still acted... sheesh, I guess exposing Seat 5's hand or maybe killing it is the right answer.)

Anyway, punishment was possibly appropriate according to the letter of the law... just not the "show one, show all" law.

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

how was the ruling correct? the hand should have never been revealed to seat 6 until he acted.

[DoubleDeuce]

About half of the table was complaining about the call. Only seat 6 (and oddly seat 9) thought it was the right call. Management wouldn't have listened to us, it was an extremely busy night and we were just a lowly 100NL table.

As far as how the hand played, here's what I remember:
Flop [K T? X]
Turn [A]
River [X]

Seat 4 (JJ)
Seat 5 (A6o)
Seat 9 (KQo)
Seat 6 (unknown)

Seat 6 went into the think tank for about a full minute after seeing the A7o and still folded.
Seat 4 shows for Side Pot #1
Seat 9 shows and mucks for Side Pot #1
Seat 5 shows for main.

Again, I was just dumbfounded with the ruling.

[TM1212]

[ QUOTE ]
About half of the table was complaining about the call. Only seat 6 (and oddly seat 9) thought it was the right call. Management wouldn't have listened to us, it was an extremely busy night and we were just a lowly 100NL table.

As far as how the hand played, here's what I remember:
Flop [K T? X]
Turn [A]
River [X]

Seat 4 (JJ)
Seat 5 (A6o)
Seat 9 (KQo)
Seat 6 (unknown)

Seat 6 went into the think tank for about a full minute after seeing the A7o and still folded.
Seat 4 shows for Side Pot #1
Seat 9 shows and mucks for Side Pot #1
Seat 5 shows for main.

Again, I was just dumbfounded with the ruling.

[/ QUOTE ]

the play of the hand is retarded too, i love 100max

once again it was a retarded ruling i agree

[Trainwreck]

I agree, the 'show one show all' rule is used at the end of a hand, I have never seen it done in the middle of a hand.

Don't see an angle shot really, just stupidity.

>TW<

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree, the 'show one show all' rule is used at the end of a hand, I have never seen it done in the middle of a hand.


[/ QUOTE ]
If the sequence had been:
River
Seat 5 shows Seat 4 his hole cards
Seat 4 goes all-in

Then the proper ruling would have been to expose Seat 5's cards, since they were shown to a player who still could, and did, act.

The original ruling was bad, but possibly due to the floorman getting 23 different versions of what happened.

[Trainwreck]

Actually, that action would be collusion and I think I'd have to kill both hands 4 and 5.

Or disallow 4's bet and finalize the hand right then and there.

I've seen similar rulings.

>TW<

[Spook]

So if someone you don't know shows you their hand - your hand should be ruled dead?

How about when a new player constantly picks his hand up and flashes it to you on accident. Should he have to show the whole table?