|
View Poll Results: K8s | |||
Auto-fold | 32 | 72.73% | |
3-bet only maniacs or people on tilt | 10 | 22.73% | |
3-bet LAGs or oportunistic blind stealers | 2 | 4.55% | |
Automatic 3-bet | 0 | 0% | |
Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another Interesting Home Game situation
I think we can safely hold back the flames on misunderstandings the rules here.....I've read SEVERAL rules in detail and to the best of my knowledge until this past week with this thread - exposed hands were dead. I've read casino rules that call them dead. I've read tournament rules that call them dead. I've read more rules that call them dead than not. I was very surprised to learn there is some contraversy on the subject.
Thanks for linking the TDA rules. I'll check those out soon. I still contend that an intentionally exposed hand SHOULD BE declared dead. ... at least it would be if I wrote the rules. (though I still would have declared the example this thread is about as a call in a friendly home game.) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another Interesting Home Game situation
[ QUOTE ]
I still contend that an intentionally exposed hand SHOULD BE declared dead. ... at least it would be if I wrote the rules. [/ QUOTE ] Why? Because it can be used to get a read on someone? Isn't that part of poker? Its a nit rule. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another Interesting Home Game situation
[ QUOTE ]
I think we can safely hold back the flames on misunderstandings the rules here.....I've read SEVERAL rules in detail and to the best of my knowledge until this past week with this thread - exposed hands were dead. I've read casino rules that call them dead. I've read tournament rules that call them dead. I've read more rules that call them dead than not. I was very surprised to learn there is some contraversy on the subject. Thanks for linking the TDA rules. I'll check those out soon. I still contend that an intentionally exposed hand SHOULD BE declared dead. ... at least it would be if I wrote the rules. (though I still would have declared the example this thread is about as a call in a friendly home game.) [/ QUOTE ] I haven't read very many sets of rules, because I consider the TDA and Robert's rules to be fairly authoritative, so you may very well be correct that house rules tend toward another interpretation. I would note, though, that the WSOP uses the TDA rules with some minor modifications. See WSOP main event rules Look at rule 37 which is identical to the TDA rules and states that an exposed hand may be subject to penalty but is not dead. However, it looks like in circuit events they may allow house rules to modify the TDA. I can't find any rules specific to any circuit events except of the Jeff Gordon Foundation Charity event, that does have this rule: A Participant may not show any cards during a hand. If a Participant shows a card to induce action, the hand may be ruled dead. [Emphasis mine] link. I'm not sure if I can only find this one because the regular ciruit events follow the main event rules, or because they are a bunch of slack-asses. In any case, all this "may" stuff doesn't provide as much guidance as the TDA rule so I'm not wild about it. --Zetack |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another Interesting Home Game situation
[ QUOTE ]
I've read casino rules that call them dead. I've read tournament rules that call them dead. I've read more rules that call them dead than not. I was very surprised to learn there is some contraversy on the subject. Thanks for linking the TDA rules. I'll check those out soon. I still contend that an intentionally exposed hand SHOULD BE declared dead. ... at least it would be if I wrote the rules. [/ QUOTE ] Thank god, your not writing rules then. Care to quote the author of the rules you've read where that's a dead hand in this case? By you contending that, I'm gonna contend that your being a nit, and looking for a reason to keep the best hand from winning, you know damn well it was a call, after all he didnt throw em face down in the muck did he? Don't be a nit, because you pushed into the nuts. Man up. I've just got done watching the wsop from the 70's and 80's, quite frequently people would show their hands before calling a bet.. this was common, The guy had the nutz do you really think he was looking to gauge a reaction? Come on, this is a silly. If you were to pull that protest crap on me, I'd never even consider playing with you again. |
|
|