What's a little light cheating among strangers?
Forum reg brags about moving into an open seat next to a player who is unintentionally flashing his cards. Forum reg and seemingly everyone else responding sees no problem with using this information while in hands with others at the table.
I guess I don't understand what counts as cheating in poker.
If I could tell that player A saw player B's cards, and both I and player A are in the hand, before my next action I am going to demand to also see player B's cards (whether or not player B is still in the hand). Show one show all, ASAP, and regardless of whether or not the cards were deliberately shown. It doesn't matter if player A is deliberately looking or not. If that is not done for me, every single time, I'm calling the floor, and explaining everything. If I am not given the same advant
If I'm the floor I'm immediately handing you a complaint card and picking you up from the table. We can skip the rest of the bullshit games that you want to subject everyone to. Of everything discussed here, what you are promising to do is the closest to actual cheating.
If I'm the floor I'm immediately handing you a complaint card and picking you up from the table. We can skip the rest of the bullshit games that you want to subject everyone to. Of everything discussed here, what you are promising to do is the closest to actual cheating.
That's insane. You think it's (close to) cheating to not want others to have more information than you?
Show one, show all is a rule in every room AFAIK.
We're not talking a situation where I'm "claiming to think" something.
We're talking a situation where some players have been stating they can see someone's hole cards, over and over.
"Show one, show all" does not apply to a live hand. It is not a ****ing thing. No floor is going to reveal the player's cards based on your testimony that you "could tell" that another player saw them.
You are threatening to use increasingly coercive tactics to gain complete knowledge of another player's live hand while you are also in the hand. Not only is that straight cheating, nothing in this thread comes close to it.
I have also had players use my speaking up as a bluff.
As a player next to me looks at his cards I see black paint. He calls. I announce to the table that I saw black paint, probably either a K or J (queens are distinctive as female but I am not really sure what i saw beyond paint).
I call. Flop comes up JJx. Someone else folds. Player calls, I fold. On the turn the player check raises and convinces his opponent to fold. Player then shows a black queen and red 10).
Now everyone wonders if we are w
Honestly you're taking it way farther than I ever would, given the context you provided.
If I wasn't mostly sure of what I saw, I probably don't speak up in the first place. (And I probably don't use the low quality info anyway, it's as likely to lead you astray as anything else. Just play your hand as normal.)
If I say something, I just say I thought I saw something flash, can't be sure what, and leave it at that. Including detail you're not even sure of yourself is a recipe for disaster.
More than likely there will be no further questions, but if someone asks what you saw, you can say "I thought I saw a black K, but really not sure" and then just leave it there, and let them do with it what they will, and you're not actively feeding them any info they didn't ask for.
"Show one, show all" does not apply to a live hand. It is not a ****ing thing. No floor is going to reveal the player's cards based on your testimony that you "could tell" that another player saw them.
You are threatening to use increasingly coercive tactics to gain complete knowledge of another player's live hand while you are also in the hand. Not only is that straight cheating, nothing in this thread comes close to it.
Of course it does! Do you seriously think it's allowed for two players to share their hole cards while others don't have the same info?
And as I already clarified, this is a situation where everyone knew the cards were being shown.
"Show one, show all" does not apply to a live hand. It is not a ****ing thing. No floor is going to reveal the player's cards based on your testimony that you "could tell" that another player saw them.
You are threatening to use increasingly coercive tactics to gain complete knowledge of another player's live hand while you are also in the hand. Not only is that straight cheating, nothing in this thread comes close to it.
You are wrong. Exposing live hand is covered in some rules ncluding RROP. Point is if B sees A hand, if B is in the hand all the other players in the hand deserve this same info.
I have definitely seen live hands exposed by the floor.
Wrong.
You are correct that there needs to be more than 'Player 1 thinks P2 saw P3's hand', but SOSA would absolutely apply if there's enough reason to believe the hand was seen by another player still in the hand.
Fair! Sorry I got that wrong. I do think that most likely, except for the most egregious cases, the floor is going to ask the other player if he saw the cards and/or to volunteer what he saw. I can't even think of a time in my experience when a player was forced to show mid-hand. We have thousands of hours of recorded poker — maybe someone can recall a relevant instance.
The window absolutely did shift from "if I could tell" to "I'm not claiming to think" and then "everyone knows". I can't be blamed for not chasing it, but I hold that trying to force a player to reveal his cards based on a feeling is closer to cheating than anything discussed here. The standard should be very high.
My standard always was based on the OP - where it had already been openly announced that a player was often exposing his hand to his neighbors, and the behavior hadn't stopped.
You decided to take it out of context and act as if I had said something about cards being seen by an opponent totally out of the blue.
Exactly what are you going to do? Write a sternly worded note to management?
Fair! Sorry I got that wrong. I do think that most likely, except for the most egregious cases, the floor is going to ask the other player if he saw the cards and/or to volunteer what he saw.
Anytime a ruling depends on asking a player what that player knows, saw, thinks, said, etc it becomes troublesome. You are giving the player an opportunity to try and gain advantage. While most players will likely answer honestly, there are some who will lie.
Dealer/floor should also not assume something that could have occurred did not just because a player says
If A in seat 2 sees a pitched card for player B in seat 7 cartwheel with the back to S3 but face exposed to seats 6, 7 and 8. You can’t assume 6 or 8 did not see the card. You should not ask them either. If you believe or have evidence the cartwheel occurred then that it could have been seen is the conclusion.
While that is true, and on a deal I would potentially force a new card on them because random is random anyway, it is much less clear later in the hand.
There is no way I am going to force someone to expose their cards mid hand if there isn't some concrete proof that they showed their cards to another player still in the hand.
As floor I am just going to say to the table that there is some dispute about whether or not A saw B's hand, and everyone should act appropriately. Depending on context I will then maybe talk to A and B away from the table after the hand and tell them there better not be any more of that **** happening or else they are both getting 86ed. If A says B is flashing his hand and it's not his problem, I will (a) basically agree and tell B that if he doesn't stop he is getting 86ed, and (b) ask A if that means he was lying when he said he didn't see anything earlier and see how he responds, and follow through appropriately.
There is never "concrete proof" of anything at the poker table.
If the situation described by the OP isn't close enough to proof, you might as well have no anti-collusive rules at all.
chillrob - Follow the thread. He said "cuz if I was there I woulda probably made you give him his money back for steeling it" if someone said the saw cards after winning the pot. The question is, how would he make anyone do anything.
chillrob - Follow the thread. He said "cuz if I was there I woulda probably made you give him his money back for steeling it" if someone said the saw cards after winning the pot. The question is, how would he make anyone do anything.
He sounded to me that he meant he would take matters into his own hands with vigilante behavior. That doesn't seem like a good decision on his part, but from reading his posts in other threads I certainly wouldn't put it past him.
I am still interested in knowing your answer to the question I asked you (as well as that of anyone else who cares to answer).
He sounded to me that he meant he would take matters into his own hands with vigilante behavior. That doesn't seem like a good decision on his part, but from reading his posts in other threads I certainly wouldn't put it past him.
I am still interested in knowing your answer to the question I asked you (as well as that of anyone else who cares to answer).
If a dealer is doing a good job trying to police this, TIPS! (This might mean dealer repeatedly calling floor)
If a dealer is not handling, no tips and let them know why.
If the floor is brought in, and it is repeated problem, but doesn’t handle the issue, I leave making sure mgmt knows exactly why.
Now reality is no one can force the return of money. I am not even sure it is a good idea. But the situation needs to be addressed. At a min I am not going to play at a known disadvantage.
He sounded to me that he meant he would take matters into his own hands with vigilante behavior. That doesn't seem like a good decision on his part, but from reading his posts in other threads I certainly wouldn't put it past him.
If I'm dealt into the hand he's also cheating me just as much as he's cheating the beginner/mentally ill guy (or whatever his ailment is that's causing him to show his cards).
I like that the word 'concrete' came up .. but then I have two different views. One for during the Deal and another once 'play' has started.
During the Deal a Player should speak up immediately if they feel a card has flashed, but keep it basic .. 'red', 'black' or 'face card'. There's still time to 'correct' the issue, although it does get harder if a Player scoops a card into other card(s) they may already have.
During 'play' if a Player sees something ..
1) They should remain quiet until action is on them and then, if they remain in the hand, they should announce what they think they saw. If a Player folds out, then there's no need to announce anything.
2) A Player should NEVER be asked to confirm, deny or show a card that another Player may or may not have seen.
In the extreme cases where a Player may continually expose cards you have the Floor come over and make a formal 'warning' but then the game goes on.
A Player who has information that is 'certain' should announce their advantage if they intend to remain in the hand. Not doing so is cheating IMO. What can you do about either side of it? Not much really, but a Floor certainly has the authority to step in 'for the good of the game' and adjust things as needed. GL
