I've got Jacks!

[Steven]

51: No Disclosure
Players are obligated to protect other players in the tournament at all times. Therefore, players, whether in the hand or not, may not:
1. Disclose contents of live or folded hands, 2. Advise or criticize play at any time,
3. Read a hand that hasn't been tabled.
The one-player-to-a-hand rule will be enforced.

Years ago and sometimes players now still feel they can rightfully lie about the contents of their hands. I believe the No Disclosure rule now forbids even lying or mentioning the strength of one's own hand.

So how would you rule the following? And if you think it's a problem, who  (dealer or players) should call the floor, and should the floor be called immediately or after play concludes? And if the floor is already present, when or  should he or she intervene?

Preflop: Middle position looks to be ready to bet.
Before Middle Position can make the bet, the small  blind announces "I've got jacks!"
SB in fact does not have jacks!

[Nick C]

Steven,
 Tournament poker can impose penalties that should discourage any disclosure of a player's holding. I personally don't want to debate whether a player is telling the truth or...well, bluffing. Some players don't even know what they have so why would you believe them

 I only oppose showing cards, not table talk.

 My answer is; I think you can lie your ass off. Who talked more than Jamie Gold when he won the World Series Main Event?  Nobody, I rest my case!

[K-Lo]

I've written about this subject before and I think there are several posts already on this board as well.

In this particular example, the floor should be called to oversee the conclusion of the hand. At least on the face of it, there is a clear violation of the non-disclsoure rule.  if the floor is already present, warn the player that there is a non-disclosure rule.  TD has the option to assess penalty at the end of the hand, especially for repeat offenders.

I agree with Nick that I don't want to debate whether a player is telling the truth or not, but I come to a different conclusion.  In my view, lying IS disclosing the contents of your hand, just not truthfully.  I'm not going to waste my time and effort to check your hand every time to verify whether you told the truth, a half-truth, or a lie.  It is not my problem that what you said appears on its face to have broken the rule against disclosure -- the player must take responsibility for what comes out of his own mouth.  

To be clear, I'm not against table talk per se, in fact I encourage it (except in multiway pots). Just don't disclose (or appear to disclose) hand contents, and don't advise play, or you force me to apply the Rule. Some TDs are very strict and don't allow any talk whatsoever, and I do not agree with that approach.  At the other extreme, some players are lobbying to get rid of the disclosure rule together (arguing that it takes away from the game), but I also think that approach is problematic.  Instead, I prefer to tell players that you can say anything you want so long as you avoid these two little points; there really is a lot that one can say that doesn't constitute disclosing one's own hand or advising play, and that kind of table talk is fine by me.

[Steven]

Thanks, Nick and K-Lo!

I too think that lying like this does disclose that he does not have jacks, thus violating non-disclosure.
Also the small blind appears to be prematurely showing an interest in playing this hand, possibly affecting the action ahead of him.

I just think that the non-disclosure rule  is a bit generic and does create differences of opinion on its  interpretation. Maybe that's ok, allowing each venue to apply its own house rule!  Personally, I would like the rule to be a slight bit more specific!

[Nick C]

Steven,

 I agree with you and K-Lo, the rule is too "vague." I also think it should not apply to heads-up action.

[chet]

Nick:  How in the world can you think the rule is too vague?  It says you cannot discuss the contents of your hand or how to play a hand, etc.  I don't see anything vague about it.  You can talk about you girlfriend, the weather, the crappy chairs, the quality of the dealers, the expertise of the floor and any number of things, but you cannot talk about your cards, your neighbors cards or how to play those cards. 

Maybe I might understand better if you explain what you mean by vague.

Chet

[Nick C]

Chet,

 Where does it say you can not "discuss" the contents of your hand? That's what it should say, then it would be cleared up.

 While we're at it, how do you feel about non-disclosure for head-to-head?

[K-Lo]

I take an even broader view of permissible table talk.  As long as you do not disclose your hand or advise play, I'd say you are within the rules to say whatever you want to gain "information" from your opponent.  Asking your opponent, "did you really make your flush?"' "That's a scary river card, isn't it?" Or "I really don't think I can lay this hand down here" may elicit a reaction from the opponent but IMO is perfectly acceptable and does not contravene the rule. 

Most TDs I think agree that any talk must be kept to a minimum in multi-way pots where the talk may influence further action.  Therefore, the non-disclosure rule would appear to apply mostly to heads-up situations.  As we know the wsop this year introduced a modified non-disclosure rule for heads-up situations.  I have mixed feelings about that, as I think we've discussed in an earlier thread.

[Nick C]

K-Lo,

 We usually agree but I'm surprised that you allow that kind of table talk in a multi-way pot. I would be more strict in tournament poker.

 Do you really think that the Non-disclosure rule is for heads-up?

 I also feel that the current rule seems to apply to players that have already dropped out of the hand. Reference is made to not disclosing the contents of a folded hand, and reading cards that are not tabled 

[K-Lo]

Nick - sorry I wasn't clear.  I wouldn't allow any discussion relating to the hand in a multi-way pot.

[Nick C]

K-Lo,
 I'm relieved, you had me worried there for a minute

Where's Chet?

[chet]

Sleeping!!!

My interpretation of this rule is, based on the way written, that it is intended to prevent any activity that could/would in any possible way result in information passing between players of the sort described in the rule.  Furthermore, in my opinion, it applies equally whether there are several players in the hand or if the hand is "heads-up" or do you see some words in your copy of the rules that provides for an exemption?

We can certainly disagree about whether this rule should apply to heads-up play, but that is a topic for the next summit, is it not?

[chet]

Finally,  I believe the word "disclose" covers any and all types of communication that may be used.  You seem to prefer "discuss", which in my opinion, usually refers to verbal communication.  I grant you that one can have a written discussion, but I believe the TDA wanted the rule to be more inclusive of any and all forms of communication.

So, I continue to prefer "disclose" over "discuss".

Going back to sleep now!

Chet

[Nick C]

Chet,

 When I think of the next summit, no disclosure is not even near the top of my list. Furthermore, why would I expect favorable results when I don't agree with most of the few members that respond on the forum?

 I will probably not take the trip to the next summit so I will continue to voice my opinion on this forum. While we're on the subject; no disclosure should be more explicit and it should separate head-to-head from multi-way pots

 Please note the difference between the TDA and WSOP:

104. Table Talk / Disclosure: Participants are obligated to protect the other Participants in the Tournament at all times. Therefore, whether in a hand or
not, Participants may not:
1. Disclose contents of live or folded hands,
2. Advise or criticize play at any time, 
3. Read a hand that hasn't been tabled,
4. Discuss strategy with an outside source.
• The one-Participant-to-a-hand rule will be enforced.
Special Exceptions
• A Participant is allowed to mention the strength or content of his/her hand if no other Participant in the hand will have a decision to
make.
• In heads-up events or when down to the last two Participants in a Tournament, Participants may speak freely regarding the contents
of their hands.
• The Floor Person reserves the right use his/her judgment to determine if one Participant intentionally helped another Participant.
Participants who violate this rule are subject to penalty in accordance with Rules 39, 102, and 103.

[Tristan]

I feel like saying "I've got Jacks" is the same whether or not the player actually has them.  If non disclosure means you can only do it if you don't actually have what you claim to have, then you are actually pointing out which cards you do not have...either way you are giving out information.

I gotta say, I prefer it to stay the way it is...easier to police.  I don't want to spend time getting called over to the table to decide whether or not it was alright for a player to talk about the hand.  Maybe I'm just lazy!