Another ruling situation

[W0lfster]

Another situation here at the Pokerstars 2010 Caribbean Adventure http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aJQrmzc4ig. I do not understand the floor for not allowing the player who accidentally expose the hand to not reraise. I had a discussion previously on the forum that you can raise with an exposed hand and the penalty lies with an exposed hand anyway. The fact that Daniel was not 100% sure what cards his oppnent had makes no difference to me whether they were shown or partly shown IMO you should still be allowed to raise.

Ruling?
Thanks

[DCJ001]

Some floor people make more mistakes than others. Many floor people are confident that they understand the rules. Some of them do not.

[Stuart Murray]

it varies, from cardroom to cardroom, I for example will bind the player to passive action if I deem that the best way to proceed, where they have accidentally exposed their hand, it can get really messy if someone accidentally exposes their hand, and then tries to freeroll the hand.

It's a judgement call at the end of the day, their is no right or wrong way to handle a prematurely exposed hand, the rules clearly state that they (the player) will not have a dead hand, but other than that it is up to TD's how to handle it.

Just another situation where a player leaves himself at the mercy of the floor!

Best
Stu

[JasperToo]

Just watched that clip.  That was a bad call.  And I am surprised at Daniel for not knowing.. And after it is all over Daniel claims he wasn't going to call if the raise was declared valid.  What a waste of time. 

Yes, Wolfster, the exposed hand is the one already playing at a disadvantage.. if he wants to raise he takes the risk that he is already beat since there is no bluff value..

[W0lfster]

But he could raise if he wanted to yes? Are you saying its a bad call because the person who suppposedly showed their cards made it that he could only call by the floor?

[Nick C]

I like what Stuart said; " just another situation where a player leaves himself at the mercy of the floor!"  I found it interesting that the floor asked Daniel if he wanted the raise to stand? Daniel should know that he can't have it both ways and I guarantee you, that if he(Daniel) had wanted to raise, he would have. The key issue in this video is the action was head to head and the same "floor" might make a different call with other players in the hand.

[JasperToo]

Yes Wolfster, that is what I am saying.

Nick, I understand you to say that a particular floor guy would make a different call depending on the players.  For instance, if the player that exposed his hand here had been doing it several times before, would that be correct?

I can see that I guess but really the call should always be the same for this circumstance (the player exposed still gets to play his hand however he likes, at a disadvantage for have an exposed hand) and then any penalty for bad behavior of the same sort should be administered AFTER the hand.

I agree, Daniel's behavior seems really odd on this one.

[Nick C]

Jasper,
 What I meant was, if there were multiple players in the hand and not head to head. I guess I was not clear in what I was trying to say.  I agree with you that the call should always be the same but, the number of players and when the mishap occures makes a difference.