Non-disclosure question: player declares "I mucked one of your outs".

[BillM16]

Two players are all in pre-flop. One has TT and the other one has 99.  Another player at the table says he folded a 9 before the flop is dealt.  Does rule 59: No Disclosure apply?  How do you handle it?

[chet]

Bill:

Why bother?  Since both are all in, there is no possible further action so the statement cannot have any effect on the outcome of the hand.  At the most, I would caution the player about disclosure and remind the player that should further action be possible in a different situation such disclosure would result in a penalty.

Chet

[Nick C]

BillM16, Welcome back.

 I agree with Chet, it would be a different situation if there were action pending.  Besides, without showing the cards, we can never really be sure they are telling the truth anyway!

[BillM16]

Thanks for the replies.  I agree that this seems innocuous as all betting has finished.  However, as a matter of etiquette, I don't think it is appropriate.  Compare the wording of rule 59 to 60.  First, rule 59 says that players are obligated to protect other players ... at all times.  While rule 60 says a player shouldn't expose his cards with action pending.  Obviously, criticism shouldn't be tolerated at any time.  How about reading a hand that hasn't been table? is it OK if there is no action pending or is the player obligated at all times to refrain?  At first, rule 60 warns about exposing cards that might influence pending action.  And then, it says that folded cards should not be exposed.  So, both 59 and 60 make this point.

Besides, without showing the cards, we can never really be sure they are telling the truth anyway!

True, but the rule clearly says that live or folded hands should not be disclosed.

When it comes to etiquette, I think is good to have rules that discourage players from pissing off other players, with or without action pending.  I agree with Chet, I would give him a warning. 

Polite players often tell of the out cards that they folded after the hand has been completed. Why tell someone before the hand is complete that their chances are slim or none?

[MikeB]

Bill: As you correctly note, the intent of the rule is to limit disclosure of information that players didn't otherwise "earn", such as by seeing a bettor to showdown, or information that normally comes out in the course of playing a hand.

While it may not affect the outcome of this hand, it can provide information for future hands.

How strenuously you enforce this is a matter of your judgment at the time, given all the circumstances.