POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS > Non-TDA Tournament and General Poker Rules Discussion
Why did Antonio have to show his cards?
chet:
As I remember it, Antonio asked the attending floor, I think it was Jack Effel, if he could fold and the response was yes, but he would have to show his hand.
I think it very important that he asked before acting. This, in my opinion, removes any question about ethical play.
Chet
K-Lo:
--- Quote from: chet on July 04, 2012, 10:27:49 AM ---As I remember it, Antonio asked the attending floor, I think it was Jack Effel, if he could fold and the response was yes, but he would have to show his hand.
I think it very important that he asked before acting. This, in my opinion, removes any question about ethical play.
--- End quote ---
I guess... As long as he doesn't say "never mind then, I check"... And then check-raise! ;)
MikeB:
--- Quote from: K-Lo on July 04, 2012, 08:18:31 AM ---In any case, I'm pretty sure that accepting Antonio's fold when fold is not an option, and having both players turn up their cards is not an explicit WSOP rule, but is done for transparency. If the fold was allowed and the hand simply moved on, viewers would be wondering what the heck just happened there, isn't that soft play, etc..1:
The only potentially related WSOP rule/policy that might be considered is that at showdown, if a player wins the pot because the opponent decides to fold (e.g. it goes check-check and 1st player mucks before other player shows, or it goes bet-call and the bettor folds before caller shows), the remaining person must still show his complete hand in order to win the pot. In contrast, in some other non-WSOP tourneys, you may not need to show one or both cards to win the pot so long as you are the "last man standing" at showdown. 2:
Perhaps Jack is effectively treating this situation as check-check-muck, thus Einhorn at least would need to show anyways. And showing Antonio's hand would temper any accusations of soft play. ET is right that if the action actually went check-bet-muck, 3:
--- End quote ---
1: Right. The WSOP 2012 Rule #82 specifically makes a fold when facing no bet subject to penalty, consistent with TDA Rule 45 "Non-Standard Folds". Requiring Antonio to reveal his cards can be seen as a mild penalty with a view towards ensuring against collusion.
2: Because there are these two camps: i) the must show every winning hand (if hand moves to showdown) camp and ii) the camp that allows a winner not to show in the case of an "uncontested showdown", there was a significant change from TDA 2011 Rules Version 1.0 and 2.0. Version 1.0 formally recognized an uncontested showdown as the standard. In order to keep the TDA a large tent association, the uncontested showdown language was changed in Version 2.0 in favor of the language in Rule 14: "Except where house policy requires a hand to be shown...", so that the policies of both camps can be accomodated.
3: Yes, in the case of check-bet-muck, Antonio would be folding when facing a bet, the hand would not progress to showdown, and the winner would not have to show his cards.
This is a great case to look at, thanks for posting it.
EbroTim:
I wrongly assumed that everyone else also watched the broadcast. To clarify, here is the situation.
The river card has just been dealt. Antonio is first to act (of two players). Before acting, Antonio asks the TD whether he can fold (instead of check or bet). The TD then says that Antonio may fold, but that both players would have to show their hands. So Antonio then tabled his hand and folded, which forced Einhorn (the other player) to also table his hand. Showdown was never reached.
My curiosity about this ruling lies in the fact that Player A may exploit this situation by folding (instead of checking or betting) in order to force a gain of information (Player B's hand) that he ordinarily would not receive if he acts (checks or bets) as normal.
I understand that obviously by forcing both players to table their hands, it may expose chip dumping. What I want to know more specifically, if anyone here knows, is
1. Is this actually a rule? Or did the TD come up with this ruling on the fly?
2. Other than to expose chip-dumping, was there any other possible reason that the TD required both players to show their cards? (Not that exposing chip-dumping isn't enough of a reason by itself.)
The reason I ask the above is I have never seen this rule applied in a non-showdown situation before, and I am curious about its origin and purpose. I'd like to hear others' opinions on whether the benefit of exposing chip-dumping outweighs the consequence of players exploiting the rule by open-folding in situations when they have no intention of check-calling on a river they think their opponent will likely bet.
EbroTim:
I didn't see MikeB's response before I posted my last response.
So then it sounds like, MikeB, you were implying that a WSOP TD may allow players to violate WSOP rule 82, even if it wasn't in the best interest of the game or in the spirit of fairness?
Based on the reasonings for the ruling I have so far, I think a better response by the TD would have been to rule that Antonio may not open-fold, and that he must check or bet.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version