Author Topic: show one show all  (Read 8110 times)

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
Re: show one show all
« Reply #15 on: July 28, 2016, 10:18:14 AM »
Thanks for the mention, "experienced and respected." I'm not looking for respect, but the experience can't be denied. :D

 You're also correct about the posts. I have 2757 (plus this one), mainly because I've been repeating myself about 2000 times. Why? Because I don't get answers, that's why.

 Bill, I'll ask you again, "which proposal did I suggest that you don't agree with?"


Let's not forget, the MAIN PURPOSE of this forum is to discuss the interpretation and application of the TDA Rules as they are. As such the focus should be on questions related to the current rules and how they apply to specific situations. It is not a forum for an endless list of proposed changes. Those can be discussed in private e-mail and through the "my messages" feature of this forum.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 11:59:15 AM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3220
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: show one show all
« Reply #16 on: July 28, 2016, 01:41:54 PM »
Mike,

 With all due respect. I've probably sent more "private" messages than any other member. The last one I sent to you on June 18 went unanswered. I've never forgotten "the MAIN PURPOSE" of this forum. That is why I reply as often as I do. You expect me to apply the TDA rules as they are...I want to know where they originated. Or why, a perfectly accepted time tested rule was changed. If I were given a good reason, I would accept it.

 I've asked questions, given my answers to questions from others, and was passed over as if I never responded. Once you told me that you thought I should look to another online poker site to express my opinion, because you felt I was too unhappy with the direction the TDA was headed.

 My INTENT has always been improved explanations for the betterment of the game.

 Shortly after my return from the TDA Summit in 2011, you were introduced as the newest member on the board of directors. I was one of the first members to welcome you and recognize you as a great addition...I still feel that way. I know we don't agree on some of the rules, but that's to be expected. Meeting you and several of the other TDA members was a positive experience.

Back to your last post: You said this is not a forum for an endless list of proposed changes. Last year I fought like hell to get "the first card off" changed, and we succeeded. I probably had little to do with that change, but in my gut, I feel I did.

 Anyway, I don't understand some of the rule changes, and I don't believe they've improved anything. I don't live in Las Vegas anymore, so I don't mingle with the in-crowd like I used to. I can only voice my opinion on this forum and I believe it should have an impact on each and every Summit. There is no reason, in this day and age, that we can't have an on-line vote at the Summit instead of relying on a show of hands from less than 10% of the members that are usually in attendance.

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1136
Re: show one show all
« Reply #17 on: July 28, 2016, 03:08:36 PM »

My point is simply this:  All to often the TDA Rules presume that the reader is an experienced poker player or tournament director that knows all of the common knowledge rules and perhaps even all of the RRoP rules.
That has historically been true... that the TDA does not intend to completely re-write all the conventional rules of poker, but rather: 1) those rules that are unique to tournaments; 2) those rules for which there isn't a commonly practiced standard; 3) where there are 2 or more popularly-used conventional rules; 4) a few conventional / standard rules that are so important they deserve re-mention or are often mis-applied OR misapplied in certain situations.

It doesn't recognize that there are many novice players who lack that level of knowledge and experience.  In most cases these details are left out of TDA in an effort to keep the rules concise. 
The TDA does recognize this, but again it's a trade-off between keeping the TDA Rules concise and focusing on the 4 areas listed above to, as you write "keep the rules concise".

However, brevity should not be at the expense of comprehension.  Sure, most everyone knows Show One Show All ... and IMO in belongs in the TDA Rules.
So there's a great example of the trade-off: A) "most everyone knows show one, show all", so does it really need to be in the TDA Rules? And this will probably be answered in terms of: "is there anything about show one-show all that isn't clear?", "is there a common situation or situations that occur where the application of the rule needs to be clarified?".
« Last Edit: July 28, 2016, 03:19:02 PM by MikeB »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 503
Re: show one show all
« Reply #18 on: July 29, 2016, 07:30:52 AM »
However, brevity should not be at the expense of comprehension.  Sure, most everyone knows Show One Show All ... and IMO in belongs in the TDA Rules.
So there's a great example of the trade-off: A) "most everyone knows show one, show all", so does it really need to be in the TDA Rules? And this will probably be answered in terms of: "is there anything about show one-show all that isn't clear?", "is there a common situation or situations that occur where the application of the rule needs to be clarified?".

Good morning Mike,

Apparently, the OP thought that there was room for clarification here - and I agree.

In TDA, there is Rule #62: No Disclosure that says:
...
One-player-to-a-hand is in effect.

IMO, the following is a very small change and is worthwhile.

Show-one-show-all and one-player-to-a-hand are in effect.

« Last Edit: July 29, 2016, 07:36:27 AM by BillM16 »

Terence Bertault

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 65
Re: show one show all
« Reply #19 on: August 17, 2016, 01:03:03 PM »
Hi guys,

Very basic and smple rule.

One hand, one player. Show one, show all.
If a player show one of his card to a player or a spectator, the dealer has to open the two cards at the end of the hand.
Showing a card is forbidden during a hand and have to be penalyze.

Uniden32

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
  • Tournament Director at the Isle Casino
Re: show one show all
« Reply #20 on: August 21, 2016, 09:18:23 AM »
One hand, one player. Show one, show all.
If a player show one of his card to a player or a spectator, the dealer has to open the two cards at the end of the hand.
Showing a card is forbidden during a hand and have to be penalyze.

Personally, I hate the phrase, "Show one, show all."  While I agree with the intent and spirit of the rule, the wording is awful.  It gives the impression that the flashed cards should automatically be opened by the dealer.

I'd no more want my dealers automatically showing cards and giving free information, than I would have them automatically count all-in stacks.

As far as penalties go, again, I believe that each situation needs to be addressed individually.  I'll try and give some examples:

1.  If I have a player who is last to act in a heads up situation and exposes their cards to their neighbor, I'm only going to ask/warn them to stop.

2.  If I have a player accidentally expose their hand in an all-in situation where they don't realize they weren't called yet and they only player it's affecting negatively is themselves ... again, probably only a warning.

3.  If I have a player expose their hand with multiple all-ins, or raises, and pending action ... penalty.
Ralph Brandt
Tournament Coordinator
Isle Casino - Pompano Beach, FL
@uniden32

Guillaume Gleize

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
Re: show one show all
« Reply #21 on: September 08, 2016, 05:31:22 AM »
Hello ... And here comes one of my most hatred situation:

Big multiplayer pot - Middle of a betting round (some did bet huge amount & some still have to act) - One player (in the hand or not) shows (accidentally or not) his hand to the players who still have to act - The hand shown has a huge influence on the next player decision (giving an information the first player to bet didn't have) ...

---> Here my question is not about the punishment on the guilty player (I'll manage that): My question is about the continuation of the current hand? I really had some situations were the shown hand did created a huge mess in the poker etiquette ... giving different levels of informations to the different players in the hand!

---> Most of the time I keep the hand to continue (while punishing the guilty player) but I admit that it happened to me some (few) times with huge amounts were I did split the pot between the remaining players in the hand (while heavily punishing the guilty player)!

Your opinions? ...
« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 05:32:43 AM by Guillaume Gleize »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 503
Re: show one show all
« Reply #22 on: September 08, 2016, 06:25:48 AM »
Your opinions? ...

Hello Guillaume, here is my opinion.

So, assuming that the scenario is similar to this:  Blinds are 100 and 200.  Preflop, Alice opens for 1,000 and gets four callers, Bob, Carol, Don, and Erin.  The pot is 5,300.  On the flop, Alice bets 10,000.  Bob, exposes his hand and folds.  Carol raises to 35,000.  Before acting, Don says: “I saw Bob’s hand.”  The floor is called for a decision before Don and Erin are to act on the flop.  The pot is now 50,300.

We can assume that Alice did not see Bob’s hand before she made her bet.  Carol acted after Bob folded and she may or may not have seen Bob’s hand.  Don told us he saw Bob’s hand and he has yet to act.  Also, Erin may or may not have seen Bob’s hand and will act after Don.  Both, Carol and Erin may or may not tell us the truth when asked if they saw Bob’s hand. 

In this scenario, my ruling would be:  Show Bob’s hand to all players and allow the hand to continue, having now given equal information to all.  Alice should realize that the Carol may or may not have seen Bob's hand when she made her raise.  Alice and Carol also know that Bob and Erin are going to act after seeing Bob’s hand.

Regardless of Bob’s two cards and regardless of the three flop cards, everyone is now proceeding with equal information.  I don’t want to begin an endless discussion here on speculation of various boards, holdings, influences, and outcomes - to no avail.  However, the players must take all of that into consideration as they proceed.

Finally, if there were reason to suspect cheating (collusion) my ruling would be different.  Including, killing the hand, returning all bets, and disqualifying players.

Regards,
B~
« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 06:28:08 AM by BillM16 »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3220
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: show one show all
« Reply #23 on: September 08, 2016, 11:25:02 AM »
Guillaume,

 Great question...I will respond to Bill first. I'm not sure allowing the action to continue would be fair in your situation. Alice may not have wagered if she knew the identity of Bob's exposed hand...and likewise, Carol may not have raised.

 Guillaume, I do understand your awkward situation. There are a couple of different solutions that would be in the best interest and fairness to all.
                       #1) Stop the action, announce the exposed card and not allow Carol to raise, but only fold or call. Might not be the best option because it appears to penalize an innocent player (Carol) for the error of Bob.

                      #2) Stop the action, announce the exposed card and allow Alice the opportunity to retract her bet of 10,000. This might not be too popular either, but I believe it to be more fair.
   
                       #3) Suspend all action, and award the pot to the best  hand. This would be more likely on the final betting round when the exposed card could greatly effect the outcome and cost undue financial loss. My example would be: 2H, 10S, JS, 9C 6S...the exposed hand AS QH. Any player holding the King of spades and any other spade will now be holding the nuts.
         
« Last Edit: September 08, 2016, 11:27:08 AM by Nick C »

Guillaume Gleize

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 245
Re: show one show all
« Reply #24 on: September 09, 2016, 05:30:38 PM »
Hello,

Yep the traditionnal rulling is to never cancel the hand but it really happens sometime to times cases like:

- On a flop QQ7 rainbow with 3 players left and big pot

- Player A open bet a big amount (with no Queen but big pair or pure bluff)

- Player B (completely forgetting player C) folds and shows Q3 saying like "look at my hero fold!"

- Player C (with Q5) now can play more safely ...  :(

I mean those situations can change the odds for the remaining players so much ...
I usually stand the hand but it happened to me to stop and split when (on my own judgement) the amounts or the consequences were so big and the situation so unfair for the first bettors!

But if all of you (plus the TDA) tell me to never do it again: I will follow and never do it again. But before I will wait (here and on many places) for the maximum number of advices.
TY for those first ones.

Registered! ;) 
« Last Edit: September 09, 2016, 05:41:35 PM by Guillaume Gleize »

BillM16

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 503
Re: show one show all
« Reply #25 on: September 10, 2016, 07:22:17 AM »

- Player C (with Q5) now can play more safely ...  :(

I mean those situations can change the odds for the remaining players so much ...


Good morning Guillaume,

Yours is a very good example of why the TD should stick to the rule - show one show all - and reject any temptation that the TD might have to become Aequitas Augusti (the goddess of fairness). 

Unless there is cheating involved, it is wrong to stop the action early and rule that innocent players must limit their actions to those a misguided TD determines to be fair.  Even worse would be to ridiculously award the pot early to whomever happens to be holding the best cards before the hand plays out!  This is poker and either Player A or Player C may win, with or without the best hand in the longer run.

In your example, you presume that Player C can now play more safely because the last Q was exposed.  However, Player C is certainly not safe! For example, Player A may be holding 77.  However, regardless of the actual holdings, Player A and Player C both have the same information:  Player B had Q3 and decided that his weak trips are beat.  The fact is, there are two cards yet to come and they could change any outcome that the Aequitas Augusti TD might predict.  My advice:  Stick to the rules and drop the blindfold, scales of justice, and cornucopia of the goddess of fairness.

Finally, the actual odds have not changed at all.  The real odds of winning for Player A and Player C are the same as they were before the cards were exposed.  After all, those cards were in Player B's hand and whether or not they were visible doesn't change the real odds of making their hand after the cards are dealt.  True, both Player A and C know that the other player is less likely to be holding a Q or a 3.  True, Player C knows that he has the last Q and Player A does not.  True, Player A knows that he does not have the last Q and that Player C might have it.  This is poker!  You have to adjust your predictions of the odds with all of the information as it becomes available.  Player A and C have the same NEW information!

What if Player A is holding 22 and it comes runner runner 22?  Or, he's holding 56 and 48 come? Etc. etc. etc.  We can come up with millions of scenarios and in the end, I would show one show all and play poker. (Unless someone is cheating.)

Best regards,
B~
 
« Last Edit: September 10, 2016, 07:22:48 PM by BillM16 »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3220
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: show one show all
« Reply #26 on: September 11, 2016, 07:44:49 PM »
Bill,

 I'm sorry but I can't agree that a standard rule "must" apply in every situation when a card is shown. Show one show all is fine before action takes place and no wagers have been made. It's much to easy for players to "cheat" if you are going to allow play to continue in the situations Guillaume has explained. There are always exceptions to every rule and I think Guillaume should continue to use his better judgment and side with Aequitas Augusti...the goddess of fairness...(I'll take your word on this one!).

  I will quote one of my favorite authors of poker rules, Chuck Ferry. In one of his books, RULES OF POKER he discusses Decisions Beyond The Rules: At times a situation may arise which is not expressly covered by the Rules. In such situations the floorperson shall weigh the facts and render the most appropriate decision. He goes on to say: When strict enforcement of a rule will cause an obviously unfair result the floorperson shall execute the unrestricted right to waive that rule.