Author Topic: Checking nuts on river......  (Read 15736 times)

Desi

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • The Fortune Rooms
Checking nuts on river......
« on: October 09, 2010, 02:33:49 AM »
Darvin Moon checked behind on the river with the nut flush. In his defence he said he wasnt aware of the rule, and he wanted to see what the other guy had because if he bet he was sure the other guy would fold.
He received a 1 hand penalty for this.
Whats everyones view on this? Was the 1 hand penalty fair or not? If so, why was it just a 1 hand penalty?

MaxH

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #1 on: October 09, 2010, 03:47:34 AM »
This has been the subject of much discussion:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=193.msg1281#msg1281
I assume that the TD accepted the explanation that Darvin did not know about the rule hence the lowest possible penalty (a warning is not a penalty).
Max

Stuart Murray

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 645
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #2 on: October 09, 2010, 04:32:36 AM »
I now support the policy of issuing a penalty in this situation.  Interestingly, I was recently reading the FIDPA Rules (who support the TDA rules) and a rule is included:

53-6. In certain situations, a player with the last right of action that 'checks' an indisputable wining hand, 'the nuts' will incur a penalty and may be found guilty of soft playing; that may result in 'disqualification.'

Regards
Stuart

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3293
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #3 on: October 09, 2010, 05:19:07 AM »
Stuart,

 That's the best rule that I've seen for those that support a penalty for "checking the nuts. I will list the rule the way you wrote it, and then I will give my reasons why players and TD's have problems with the interpretation.

 Please understand, I am not in disagreement of this rule, only in the way it is written.

53-6. In certain situations, a player with the last right of action that 'checks' an indisputable winning hand, 'the nuts' will incur a penalty and may be found guilty of soft playing; that may result in 'disqualification.'

In my opinion, this is what we need to see. The rules are too vague and allow too many areas for debate.

53-6 ANY player with the last right of action that 'checks' an indisputable winning hand (the nuts), will incur a penalty and WILL be found guilty of soft playing. The rules for soft play will apply. A warning and a one round penalty will be enforced for first time offenders and disqualification from the event for repeat offenders.







« Last Edit: October 09, 2010, 10:06:34 AM by Nick C »

Desi

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • The Fortune Rooms
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #4 on: October 09, 2010, 09:15:42 AM »
Sorry for the repost, can someone delete this thread maybe?

Thanks

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1151
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #5 on: October 09, 2010, 10:03:44 AM »
Sorry for the repost, can someone delete this thread maybe? Thanks
Desi, it's fine to have a second thread. You're talking about a specific situation, the other thread is more of general background discussion.

Desi

  • TDA Member & Active Poster
  • **
  • Posts: 30
    • The Fortune Rooms
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #6 on: October 09, 2010, 10:09:38 AM »
Ok, I had replied to the other thread. (now deleted and pasted here lol )

After reading everything in the old thread, im still a bit stuck as to what the rule should be.
Darvin Moon checked behind in position holding the nuts during this years wsop main event. His reason was he knew he wouldnt get called, so he checked behind to see the other guys hand. For me this a valid reason for checking behind. He is playing a big pot with plenty of action, surely getting to see his oppenents hand here is more valuable to him? Especially when he thinks he wont get called. He got a 1 hand penalty for this.
So if theres a rule that states players MAY receive a penalty for soft play, his reply will become the most common used by experienced players as a 1 hand penalty doesnt mean much ( you miss more running to the toilet).
Regarding the replies where its suggested the player must bet a significant % of the pot, I disagree. They could bet small crying for a call, or to induce a raise. So to have a rule like this would be very hard to police.
So the hardest part for me is deciding whether or not is is soft play, or did they have genuine reason for their action, ie wanting to see their oppenents hand, or to induce a rasie etc. Again, if the players are allowed to check behind to see their oppenents hand, or to bet the minimum to induce a bluff, then there cant be a rule for checking the nuts in position.
Just to confuse things further, if its a satelite and its on the bubble and a player was to check behind with the nuts, this would be soft play and worthy of a penalty. Because checking behind to see his hand would be of far less value than in normal tournament play.
A very hard rule to get worded correctly.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3293
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #7 on: October 09, 2010, 10:14:25 AM »
Thanks Desi,
 Finally, I might have one member in my corner.

Martin L. Waller

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2010, 11:26:06 AM »
Hi fellows,

I hate to be the lone dissenter out here but the TDA has no rule for this and personally I don’t see the need. This isn’t usually a “soft play” move. It is a controlled move. The player is looking for information form his opponent.

If we tell him he has to bte the nuts then we have to make him raise the nuts. That’s fair isn’t it? How can we tell a player that he has to bet or raise.

We shouldn’t make a player do anything to force action. Again if he checks, he can ask to see his opponents’ cards. If we require a bet, his opponent folds and mucks. Then his opponent can ask to see his. We have given the strategic advantage to the other player. That shouldn’t be our role.

IMO, the players should play the hand as they see fit. Checking the nuts can be a strategy that could affect future hands.

Nick, I do agree that we need to take as many mays out of the rules as we can.
 
Good luck,
Martin

AleaLeedsCardRoom

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #9 on: October 26, 2010, 03:10:11 PM »
I agree with martin, ifsomeone bets and I call with the nuts he has to show his cards, so I can see if he was trying to bluff me off the pot of if he thought his two pair was good etc.  Information is a powerful weapon in this game.

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: Checking nuts on river......
« Reply #10 on: October 26, 2010, 04:50:22 PM »
Gaining "information" is nowhere near as important as gaining everyone's chips.

Soft play is worthy of a penalty.

Most people who want to gain "information" overestimate their ability to use said information, and use the "gain information" phrase as a substitute for "curiosity."