PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Nick C on March 21, 2011, 04:57:00 AM
-
There are many questions throughout the Discussion Forum that pertain to showing cards at the showdown. Why would it be necessary to ask to see a called hand, when it should be autmatically tabled? Or am I to understand TDA rule #9 is for all-in situations only? There is constant reference to RRoP when it comes to order of showdown and the right for any player at the table to see a called hand. This is very clear for cash games, but there does not seem to be separation from tournaments. I think that TDA rules should apply to tournaments only and whenever there is a rule that is for cash games only, it should be marked with an asterik and added as a footnote.
Your thoughts are always welcome.
-
Nick:
The Rules adopted by the TDA apply ONLY to Tournaments. The TDA has NEVER claimed they are intended to apply to Cash Games. That said, there is nothing the TDA can do if a particular card room/casino chooses to adopt TDA rules for Cash Games.
TDA Rule #9 is also quite clear. It states, "All cards will be turned face up once a player is all-in and all betting action is complete." (emphasis added) So for TDA Rule #9 to apply there are TWO CONDITIONS that must be met, 1) there must be an all-in player, AND 2) all betting action must be complete.
Chet
-
Let's do some more quoting of RROP :D...
section 15:1 - Whenever possible, all rules are the same as those that apply to live games.
My understanding is that TDA rules have the same foundational principle, though house rules would win out over RROP or whatever other foundational rule set you wanted to use.
Therefore, if a TDA rule doesn't cover it then the foundational rules would apply. In the showdown situation, TDA only covers the all in situation with no more action, if that is not the case then the showdown rule would come from the foundation rule set. (RROP is last aggressive action or firstt player left of button)
-
Chet,
So rule #9 is for tournaments and all-in only. Okay, thank you......So in any other showdown situation, all players in for all bets, do not have to table their cards?
Jasper,
I understand the order of showdown is the same in cash and tournaments. I guess that Chet answered my question. I just wonder where the rule is that says all hands must be tabled in tournaments. I thought it was from TDA rule #9.
So....at the showdown, with players in for all bets, all hands DO NOT have to be tabled unless it is at the request of any player that wishes to see it? Does the dealer kill the hand, before showing it, in the same manner that they would in a cash game?
-
Hi Nick etc
at showdown under TDA rules in a tournament a showdown which DOES NOT involve an All-in player, mucking hole cards is permitted.
at showdown under TDA rules in a tournament a showdown which DOES involve an all-in player, all hands that reach a showdown must be tabled
My experience of cash game poker is that a player can muck at any time under any circumstance is they wish to concede claim to a pot.
Regards
Stu
-
Chet, So rule #9 is for tournaments and all-in only. Okay, thank you......So in any other showdown situation, all players in for all bets, do not have to table their cards?
This was a topic discussed at length on the floor of the '09 Summit towards the end of Day 2. There was widespread consensus out of the discussion that: 1) For a showdown where no player is all-in, a player may elect to muck his cards face down; 2) At which point the dealer should take the hand and kill it (the definition of kill was not defined, presumably because different venues have different standards for this, sometimes there's a betting line, sometimes not, etc.); 3) Say there's only 2 players and one of them mucks face down, the surviving player is the winner by default and need not show his hand; 4) Despite this, the winner or other player at the table may request to see the hand, if the winner does, the hand is definitely live; 5) It is not appropriate for the dealer to turn the cards up.
I would add to the above: 6) The declaration "fold" has no meaning at showdown, cards are live until they reach the point of being killed as defined by that venue. So we're talking about players pushing their cards face down towards the muck, not a verbal declaration.
We may never see this actually become part of the TDA rules because IMO the TDA supports the idea of encouraging all players to show all hands at showdonw, all-in or not. Mucking face down is really an aberration, this discussion just confirmed that if it's the player's wish to muck, it is to be respected.
So....at the showdown, with players in for all bets, all hands DO NOT have to be tabled unless it is at the request of any player that wishes to see it?
Right, but we may not want to print this as a rule which might start encouraging more and more players not to show at showdown. Ideally we want people to show. Amongst other things, having people delay showing their cards just adds to showdown management chaos.
Does the dealer kill the hand, before showing it, in the same manner that they would in a cash game? Yes, but as of now that varies by venue, and by whether a betting line is used or not. IMO it's more likely that we might get a common definition of what constitutes a killed hand at this Summit.
-
Hey Nick, I was going to respond to your post but MikeB beat me to it and said it like it is!
-
Thanks to all,
I'm still learning and I suspect, when I have this right the rules will change again. I don't know exactly what made me think that every called hand is live, at the showdown,(must be tabled) in a tournament. So...if an opposing player wants to see the mucked hand, it will be killed in the same manner as a cash game? Okay, got it. Thanks Mike.
PLEASE NOTE: I added (must be tabled) in parenthesis above, for a better understanding of my question. I also want to bring one of Mike B's quotes to everyones attention: 5) It is not appropriate for the dealer to turn the cards up.
-
Nick:
With regard to the last sentence in your recent post:
"I also want to bring one of Mike B's quotes to everyones attention: 5) It is not appropriate for the dealer to turn the cards up."
IF, and only if you are referring to our recent disagreement regarding the dealer turning a players cards face up in an all-in situation when the player fails/refuses to do so, Mike's example IS NOT an all-in situation. I totally agree that a dealer should not turn a players cards face up if TDA Rule #9 does not apply.
I hope this gets some discussion at the upcoming Summit.
Chet
-
Chet,
It will if I'm there.
-
But as far as Rule 9 is concerned, if a player refuses to showhis/her cards when there is for example an all in and a call so then betting is complete, I believe the dealer should turn that player's hand over as the rule says: "All cards will be turned face up when betting action is complete". However, that only applies to tournaments because in a cash game you dont have to show until the end if you dont want to. I think this discussion has been made more complex than it actually is, in my mind in a tournament cards must be tabled as soon as all betting is complete but in a cash game you dont have to show until the end.
-
Andy,
If you believe that the dealer should turn the cards over, then you can discuss that with the rulemakers, in the casino or house that you play in. There are others that share your opinion. However, the rules state that the owner of the hand is the one that should turn them over, not the dealer.
-
We'll have to mark this question down for the summit:
"Should the tournament dealer flip over a player's hand if the player mucks when he is required to show; such as in the case where there is an all-in and all action is complete."
I have been of the opinion that yes, the dealer should flip the hand over and it should be live in such a circumstance. The reason behind this is that if a player was intending to dump chips to another player, he would otherwise get away with it if he were able to muck.
The reason I don't feel this should ever happen in a cash game is because chip dumping isn't as much of an issue when a guy could walk around the table and hand another guy cash anyway. In a tournament, it could be tempting when a player has a large stack and a friend of his is all-in to try and just muck and give him the pot. If we don't REQUIRE the hands to be shown, and ENFORCE that rule, then the players are not protected, IMHO.
-
Brian,
I am with you 100%. I would be in complete agreement for the dealer to turn over the called hand of a player in a tournament, that refuses to turn it himself. However, it is not a rule (yet), and it would go against dealer training in any reputable Poker Dealing School anywhere. I know that you must agree, having dealt in major tournaments around the country. For the last time, I will state that if it is made a rule I would have no problem with it. In my opinion, until that happens, it is unacceptable.
-
I think this would be very good to bring to the table at the next summit.
I mentioned it before but the dealer not turning over cards is not addressed in TDA rules or RROP anywhere. So this must be some other fundamental Dealer's only rulebook (which I would love some suggestions on which ones to read). And that is fine, of course. Certainly in every other situation but the one we are discussing the dealer has no business tabling mucked cards. And in most places if a player does table a hand and one card is completely covering the second, a dealer is not supposed to even slide the top one over to expose the lower card, the player is asked to do it.
However, in a situation where a player has folded and another player asks to see the hand (all according to the rules :) ) the DEALER turns the cards up for all to see, he doesn't ask the player to do it. So with the narrow language of TDA #9 once the action is complete and a player is all in, it no longer matters who turns them up as they must be shown. But that is just my silly little opinion....
So where do we put the new rule about the dealers turning these hands over? In TDA rules or in a new version of Dealer School Rules :) ??? 8)
-
Jasper,
There is no rule because dealers don't have a rule book for procedures. That's like a driving manual for student's to study before taking a road test. There are rules of the road that every driver must know but, studying the fundamentals are not rules. Anyone that has ever taken a poker dealing course, or dealt in a casino will tell you that they are not allowed to touch any players hand unless it is to make the tabled hand more visible to the rest of the players. You are correct about turning over a players called hand at the request of another player, but the method is to kill the hand first by touching it to the muck. I hope this helps a little.
Fundamentals and procedures for dealers are not rules. They are required mechanical skills, accompanied with a thorough knowledge of the game being dealt.
-
Jasper:
Here is a link to the Professional Poker Dealers Handbook from the Gamblers Book Shop in Las Vegas, NV.
http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK (http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK)
This is the book Nick referred to in a prior post.
Chet
-
Jasper:
Here is a link to the Professional Poker Dealers Handbook from the Gamblers Book Shop in Las Vegas, NV.
http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK (http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK)
This is the book Nick referred to in a prior post.
Chet
Thank you! I just downloaded it to my Kindle for Android!
-
In TOURNAMENTS:
9. Face Up
All cards will be turned face up once a player is all-in and all betting action is complete.
Ideally, the player turns the hand face up at the appropriate time.The dealer, floorperson, cocktail waitress, somebody turn the cards over so that the dealer may conclude the hand. We do not need a more detailed explanation for this rule.
-
Dave,
Rule #9 only works for two players. IMO, it needs work. There are many other links on rule #9, so I won't get into that now. The way I would handle the situation of a player refusing to table his own hand (excluding head to head); the hand is dead unless another player wants to see it. I know your kidding about the cocktail waitress, but to me, that would be almost as bad as the dealer turning over the hand.
-
Jasper:
Here is a link to the Professional Poker Dealers Handbook from the Gamblers Book Shop in Las Vegas, NV.
http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK (http://www.gamblersbookclub.com/Book/Poker/Dealing___Rules/2607-PROFESSIONAL_POKER_DEALERS_HANDBOOK)
This is the book Nick referred to in a prior post.
There is an updated "expanded edition" published a couple years ago that has added NL Hold'em chapters:
http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Poker-Dealers-Handbook-Expanded/dp/1880685477 (http://www.amazon.com/Professional-Poker-Dealers-Handbook-Expanded/dp/1880685477)
-
Jasper,
There is no rule because dealers don't have a rule book for procedures. ...
...Fundamentals and procedures for dealers are not rules. They are required mechanical skills, accompanied with a thorough knowledge of the game being dealt.
So if it is not a rule then the narrow scope of the TDA #9 doesn't prohibit a dealer from turning over the cards (but, very clearly only in this setting). Perhaps we do need to put a short note in rule #9 to make it clear that it is ok.
Or since there is no rule against the cocktail waitress turning over the cards we could just call her over ;D :D :P
-
Hi all,
Dave,
Rule #9 only works for two players. IMO, it needs work. There are many other links on rule #9, so I won't get into that now. The way I would handle the situation of a player refusing to table his own hand (excluding head to head); the hand is dead unless another player wants to see it. I know your kidding about the cocktail waitress, but to me, that would be almost as bad as the dealer turning over the hand.
I question what your refer to when stating that it only works with two players, as if I reach a showdown when a player is all-in ALL players who have reached the showdown MUST table their hole cards, for example where two players have checked down an all-in player they must both show their hole cards along with the all-in player.
I agree that rule 9 does need some further work done to it, I think it needs to stipulate that a player must table their cards, but I don't think I would like to add to the rule that the dealer may table the cards if the player does not as this could cause more issues with interpretation than it solves.
Regards
Stu
-
Stuart,
When I said that it only works for head to head, I was making reference to any betting round. In other words, two players head to head pre-flop with one all-in. Both hands should be turned over before dealing begins. This of course would not be possible with multiple players facing further bets. Likewise, at the showdown in multi handed pots with a side pot or more, the order of showdown is altered. That is why I don't care for the way Rule #9 is written. If the side pots are to be decided before the pot that any all-in is contesting, why would we turn the all-in's hand over before we should? We have gone over this at great length on other threads.
I also agree with you and I will quote you: "rule 9 does need some further work done to it, I think it needs to stipulate that a player must table their cards, but I don't think I would like to add to the rule that the dealer may table the cards if the player does not as this could cause more issues with interpretation than it solves."
I'm glad you wrote it the way you did. Too many members insist that the dealer is responsible for turning over the cards, when it is clearly the responsibility of the owner of the hand. It should be handled no different than a player acting out of turn (for example), or keeping his cards in front of his chips, or not covering his cards, or splashing the pot, etc. etc.
-
Just a small point, my position is NOT that is should be the RESPONSIBILITY of the dealer, I just think there are a few instances in this particular situation that it would not be inappropriate for the dealer to turn the hand over...
-
Jasper,
I guess agreeing on one out of three is good for today. You're wrong again. It is not acceptable, until they change it.
-
LOL,
Nick, I wish I could see if you were smiling a little bit when you said that!
We will have to see if it gets brought up at the summit.
-
Jasper,
I'm always smiling. I'm good at poker and shoveling snow. When I figure out how to put those smiley faces on my posts, I'll do it.
-
We'll have to mark this question down for the summit:
"Should the tournament dealer flip over a player's hand if the player mucks when he is required to show; such as in the case where there is an all-in and all action is complete."
I have been of the opinion that yes, the dealer should flip the hand over and it should be live in such a circumstance. The reason behind this is that if a player was intending to dump chips to another player, he would otherwise get away with it if he were able to muck.
The reason I don't feel this should ever happen in a cash game is because chip dumping isn't as much of an issue when a guy could walk around the table and hand another guy cash anyway. In a tournament, it could be tempting when a player has a large stack and a friend of his is all-in to try and just muck and give him the pot. If we don't REQUIRE the hands to be shown, and ENFORCE that rule, then the players are not protected, IMHO.
Chip dumping is a sensitive topic for me. A dealer was fired over trying to enforce a rule (that was not in place in our card room. He was trained elsewhere) that he believed prevented collusion. I've used a similair rule in the past. Our rule is not exactly like what is described above so here goes.
IF:
>Player A bets the river
>Player B calls
>Player A mucks
>Player B must open before the dealer awards the pot
We don't need to see player A's hand. He may have been bluffing and we want to preserve his right to bluff so there is no sense in showing the hand. We want to open player B's hand. If player B calls with 9 high, then we know that there is collusion happening. There is no reason to call a bet on the river by another player without having a hand to do so. This isn't fool proof as players may call with Ace high, or even King high but anything less than that and we know without a doubt that these players are colluding.
Thoughts?
-
Spence: I disagree with your rule. The reason being that player A (the bluffer) may have a tell that player B picked up on such that player B knows that player A is bluffing and has NOTHING. There is no reason to suspect collusion unless you can establish over time that these two play together a lot and player B constantly wins in these situations.
Personally, I know of a individual in my local casino where I call his river bets quite often with minimal holdings (even a small card that pairs the board). This guy regularly bluffs the river with large way over pot size bets and more often than not has absolutely nothing. I have caught him several times by calling or re-raising and he just folds if he has nothing. It is not a chip dumping/collusion situation as I don't even know his name, but I know how he plays.
I would be really upset if I had to show my cards after he folds. Not that he would gain any additional knowledge, but that the other players at the table would. I can't help it if they can't figure out how to play back at this guy and I sure don't want to give them any lessons.
Chet
-
Chet, I completely understand where you are coming from. As a player myself I can count the number of times I've shown when not obligated to on one hand. I don't ever volunteer information. Why should I? It is the players responsibility to try to put me on a hand our piece together some part of my game. However, as a Poker supervisor I feel it is my obligation to create an atmosphere that removes the potential for collusion or cheating of any kind. So I stick by that the above rule can do exactly that. Only under extreme circumstances would it be enforced. I understand what you mean by calling down someone who you know is bluffing. It's only when you call him down with ABSOLUTELY nothing that this could potentially be enforced.
When I say ABSOLUTELY nothing I think I was pretty specific. Queen high or less. I don't think you're calling down any bet even if you know someone is bluffing with less than King high.
Anyone have the WSOP rules on softplay handy? I think that there may be a rule in those that can shed some light on our argument.
-
Gentlemen,
I can understand what both of you are saying, however in a tournament I think the cards should be tabled. Cash game I agree with Spence, but for a tournament (which is what the question pertained to) I have to side with Chet.
-
Nick:
My example applied to cash games not tournaments. I don't support the caller having to show if the bettor folds UNLESS there is some concrete reason to suspect collusion, even in a tournament. Why force the caller to reveal information to the other players that they have no 'right' to?
Chet
-
Chet,
In a CASH game I don't think that a player has to show his hand if he attempts to bluff and is called.
In a tournament, I think they should. I thought that I was in agreement with you on this one.
I'm sorry if I misunderstood your answer but, there is no reference to cash games on either post between you and Spence.
-
first of all my 2cents
If someone has called your bet on river he has paid the price for seeing your cards, thus the called player must show the hand and are not allowed to muck the hand.
If i was trying to cheat and use chipdumping i would do exactly like this.
Call call call and then fold.
i would never make an allin as a chipdumping.
When we go allin we show the hands to (not only) be sure that there is no cheating going on..
this is the reason in tournaments i always promt the players
"if you are called you HAVE to show the hand"
in any showdown we must se tabled cards to issue a winner. if no one shows the hand the board plays and as the rule states when playing the board player must show 2 cards to be able to win the hand.
So why would i allow the players to muck the hand?
i will still need to see the winners hands, if i dont force the mucking player to show the hand but force the winner to show his hand, then im giving unfair advantage to muckplayer.
-
NiclasG,
I agree with you in tournament play. I should have mentioned on my earlier post that the right to see a mucked hand should not be taken away from a player that requests to see it. Unless it is against house rules. Some rules will only allow players, that were in for all bets, to see the winning hand and the mucked hand, and other house rules allow any player at the table to see the called hand.
-
Edited:
first of all my 2cents
If someone has called your bet on river he has paid the price for seeing your cards, thus the called player must show the hand and are not allowed to muck the hand.
i would never make an allin as a chipdumping.
When we go allin we show the hands to (not only) be sure that there is no cheating going on..
I never stated that the person who has to show would be all-in. That would defeat the purpose because, that person would have to show under TDA rule #9
I simply said that a bet on the river that was called would warrant the dealer or the floorperson opening the callers hand