Player announcing his own hole cards while All-in

[Boris]

Hello folks,

I have been told a situation happened in a French casino during tournament, here are the facts :

Action takes place preflop in NLHE tournament on a fullring table

3 players

Player A raises
Player B re-raises
Player C goes All-in

Player A folds
Player B asks to Player C if he has pocket Aces
Player C replies "Yes"

Player B has more chips than Player C


Action is stopped at the table and Tournament Director called

[EDIT - 2015-10-26 01:37 PM Server Time]
Player B asked the ruling about announcing own hole cards
[/EDIT]

TD said if Player C have pocket Aces his hand will be burned and so Player B wins the pot without showdown

Player B calls

Player C show Pocket Aces

Player C is eliminated from the tournament without showdown


Considering the following :

Article 12 and 13A an 13D
- at Showdown cards speaks
- All-in player Cards have to be faced up on the table
- an All-in player must protect his cards until showdown


Article 62 & 63
- Players must not disclose content of live or folded hands
- Player who exposes his cards with action pending may incur a penalty, but will not have a dead hand. The penalty will begin at the end of the hand.

I found nothing else than Article 62 speaking about telling own cards

So, decision should be : Go to showdown, declare a penalty.


What would you do in this case ? =)

Regards

Boris

[Max D]

When the action was stopped, I don't think the TD should have stated anything (except that he will make some decision at the completion of the hand) until he heard what player B was going to do as to not influence action.  If  player B calls the hands goes forward to completion... 

Once the hand is completed and based on the current situation and any other previous behaviors from either player then the TD could assess a penalty to player C & maybe B if necessary.

I don't think that player C "can be" kicked out of the game with a live hand unless there has been a repeat problem with C and/or B and they have been properly warned, and even then, unless it is blatant cheating or collusion I think you just keep making the penalty rounds higher and maybe warn the players(s) of potential expulsion...

But in the end the player did not show his hand, they were heads-up talking, I think this is very situational which is why the TD has leeway on his decision...  without more information expulsion sounds extreme.

Thoughts?

[Boris]

Thank you for your thoughts Max,

I realize I forgot something in my case

When TD is called at the table, Player B asked the ruling about announcing own hole cards
Then TD answered that If Player C's hole cards are pocket Aces, he will lose the hand

I agree TD should care about not influencing the game, but in this particular case he had to reply since players wanted to know the ruling.

(I edited my original post to include this)

[Nick C]

Boris,

 Killing the winning hand, or giving the pot to the loser is unthinkable. Players may be reprimanded or penalized but eliminating the player with the best hand is not the answer. I agree wholeheartedly with Max when he said: " I don't think that player C "can be" kicked out of the game with a live hand unless there has been a repeat problem with C and/or B and they have been properly warned, and even then, unless it is blatant cheating or collusion I think you just keep making the penalty rounds higher and maybe warn the players(s) of potential expulsion..."

 I'd like to take a look back to your original question. You wrote: Player A raises...Player B re-raises...Player C goes all-in. For some reason, many of our European players will define the initial bet as a "raise." This is incorrect unless Player A were raising a player that had bet before him. The word "bet" refers to the initial wager, others may "call," "fold," "raise" or go " all-in."
 I realize it it not relevant to your question but it does cause some confusion. Hope you don't mind my criticism, I intend it to be constructive.

 I'd like to know what the response was when the TD eliminated the "pocket Aces" I'd hate to think how most players I know would react.

[Dave Miller]

I'm shocked that the player was eliminated on a technicality.

I'm equally shocked that the TD made a ruling while the hand was in play. He should have stated, "There is a specific rule about this, but it includes not divulging the ruling while there is still pending action that could be affected by the ruling."

[Boris]

Boris,

[...]
 I'd like to take a look back to your original question. You wrote: Player A raises...Player B re-raises...Player C goes all-in. For some reason, many of our European players will define the initial bet as a "raise." This is incorrect unless Player A were raising a player that had bet before him. The word "bet" refers to the initial wager, others may "call," "fold," "raise" or go " all-in."
 I realize it it not relevant to your question but it does cause some confusion. Hope you don't mind my criticism, I intend it to be constructive.

 I'd like to know what the response was when the TD eliminated the "pocket Aces" I'd hate to think how most players I know would react.

Hey Nick,

I don't mind at all, it's always a pleasure to discuss about being sharp =)
I was not at the casino at this moment, bunch of friends who were there asked me which ruling I would apply in the scenario and the player who got eliminated posted his story on a forum.
He talked about a security agent who asks him to leave the casino. After a while, the TD came back to him and offer him a buy-in on another tournament, when the player asked for a written version of the ruling, TD canceled his offer.

[EDIT 2015-10-27 10:36 Server Time]
I just got a phone call from the Tournament Director who explained me his version of the story

- Player C showed his hand to public before his turn of action (Local rule says it could lead to disqualification)
- After Player C went out from the tournament, TD offers him a buy-in to another tournament and then goes to print a copy of the tournament rules to bring to the player
- Player C seemed to show some aggressiveness towards a security agent
- TD canceled his offer and pronounce exclusion from the Casino towards the player

Sorry, for the approximation of the facts, I should double check my sources before posting a case I did not see from myself.
[/EDIT]

About the words,
In our case, action takes place preflop in NLHE so I guess it's ok to use the word "raise" when betting at least 2x the Big Blind amount. We could assume the player in position of Big Blind is the one getting raised. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Mateus93]

I agree with exclusion of the tournament is a extreme decision.

But if in this case B folds, TD should ask then to show their cards to analyse a colussion possibility  ?

[BillM16]

Article 62 & 63
- Players must not disclose content of live or folded hands
- Player who exposes his cards with action pending may incur a penalty, but will not have a dead hand. The penalty will begin at the end of the hand.

I found nothing else than Article 62 speaking about telling own cards

But in the end the player did not show his hand, they were heads-up talking, I think this is very situational which is why the TD has leeway on his decision...  without more information expulsion sounds extreme.

Your statements seem to imply that the use of the word "expose" in #63 should be strictly interpreted to mean "made visible".  It is true that Merriam Webster's dictionary includes this definition:


3: to cause to be visible or open to view :  display: as
    c :  to reveal the face of (a playing card) or the cards of (a player's hand)

However, that is not the only meaning for the word.  Another is:


2:  a :  to make known :  bring to light (as something shameful)
     b :  to disclose the faults or crimes of <expose a murderer>

So, IMO both #62 and #63 apply here.  The hand should have played out and any penalty should have followed the completion of the hand.

See: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/expose

[Nick C]

Boris,

 Of course if the action were pre-plop and Player A wagered 2X the BB it would be a raise...however, there was no mention of this on your original post. Bottom line, I know of no rule that disqualifies the winning player unless he has been caught cheating.

Nick