Had a very unsettling situation last night at my home game:

Rewind to two months ago. Players A and B are all in for a pot over 400BB before the river on an Omaha hand. Final board reads Q82Q8. No flushes possible. Both players have what are essentially missed draws. Player A tables his hand and is playing AK from his and and QQ8 from the board. Player B is holding his hand out in front of him but has not tabled it yet and declares "I have a deuce." Player A declares "Deuce is no good." Before Player B can complete the action of tabling his hand, Player C declares, "Duece IS good." Player C completes the action of tabling his hand and claims the pot.

Player A flies off the handle. He is irate that Player C has violated OPTAH and that either he should be awarded the pot, or that Player C should have to reimburse him for the size of the pot. I am running the game and determine that Player C did technically violate OPTAH. However, to my best knowledge, no casino poker room would award Player A the pot nor sanction Player C any more harshly than a warning, so that is my decision.

The next couple times that Player A comes to play at my house, he texts first to ask if Player C is there. He isn't, and Player A comes and plays without incident.

Last night, Player A again texts before coming to ask if Player C is there. He is, and I get no response from Player A for almost two hours. Then Player A shows up. He is staring down Player C while asking me if I'm going to make Player C leave. I tell him that I'm not making any player leave. Player A says, "Either you make him leave or I'm not playing." I repeat that I am not making any player leave. Then he says, "Either you make him leave or your game is over." I repeat that I'm not making anybody leave. He then says to me, "Your game is over." He then says to everybody else present, "I strongly suggest you cash out and leave." He left, and we never heard from him again as we continued playing for about 8 more hours.

We weren't taking a rake, so we weren't too worried about him sending cops to bust our game. He also has sole custody of his 3 y.o. son, so we weren't terribly worried about him orchestrating any kind of theft/violence against the game.

Anyone have any similar experience of have thoughts on this?

Ugh, what an ugly situation.

He's off the invite list. Lock the doors next time.

Omaha is an emotional game.

As you tell the story, A says "deuce is no good", which is out-of-bounds at showdown. C is completely in the right to correct this bit of misinformation, and I would have a serious talk with player A about this, since he disrespects the game by attempting to get a player to muck the winning hand. Show him the rule about misdeclaring hand strength at showdown. It's the only rule in RRoP that could result in KILLING a player's hand as a penalty.

On the other hand, I can sympathize with player A somewhat that player Cs statement comes CLOSE to violating optah in a way that could cost someone 4 buyins (or more, in a different pot). Did you take the accusation seriously? You do need to let him know that you understand the importance of the rule, and can use this as a teaching moment with your group to clarify what is and is not allowed.

Sounds like A thinks you don't understand his point of view. Let him know you DO understand OPTAH and intend to enforce it. I agree with you that a well-run game wouldn't do anything other than issue a strong warning to player C in the case of a true optah violation. Repeat problems would result in asking him to leave, but never forcing him to reimburse someone. You also can't award the pot to him, since we don't know if payer B would have realized his hand was best on his own. Until he concedes, he's obviously still thinking it over.

A is certainly off the invite list indefinitely.

if you don't have rrop memorized, here's the link:

Action was concluded when all this went down, right? So there's no optah violation here because there's no more play in the hand. Player A actually thinks he should get the pot for convincing the person who has the winning hand that he doesn't? So if he were able to convince some player that a stright beat a flush, he would be mad at some other player for correcting him and allowing the guy with the flush to claim the pot? Player A seems an all around jerk and his threats were only the final proof of it.

Ugly thing to happen but take player A off the invite list. Sounds like he had sour grapes , the game is better off without him.

Player B didn t do anything wrong BUT, I would mention to him that next time, just table your hand when you declare it.

Calling out an angleshoot isn't even close to violating one player per hand. Plus, the rule only applies to the times when action can be made. At showdown it isn't even relevant.

This isnt true. You can violate one player per hand at showdown. I dont believe this was a violation though.

Say there is 4 clubs on the board and its get to show down and a player not in the hand coaches someone like saying do you have a club? Thats a violation of one player to a hand

Player A is a d bag and needs a KITN and/or to get uninvited. I would tell him in no uncertain terms that:

1. He was wrong
2. You will enforce OPTAH
3. He can either be nice or go away.

Seems like he is a reg at your game and maybe you do not want to offend
him? Given that behavior, he is probably not good for your game regardless.

GL OP--that is unpleasant.

I don't think I agree with this. If there was still action left, of course. However, I don't think trying to make a player misread the board and muck ones hand at showdown is part of poker strategy. As far as I'm concerned, once it gets to showdown, whoever has the best hand wins. The "play" is over so it is impossible for more than one person to "play" a hand at that point. This is especially true at home games.

It's almost universally accepted that helping a player decide whether to table his hand or muck it is interfering with the hand.

I don't know how things go down at casinos because I rarely play there. However, I have never been to a home game where this was accepted to be the case, and I imagine that the people who "universally accept" this are pretty big ass holes. I suppose it could be the case, however, (and not even all that unlikely) that the majority of poker players are pretty big ass holes .

Player A is a dick, and would not be allowed back in my house . . . EVER. I no longer care about the situation that caused his actions, he has crossed a line.

One Player To A Hand at showdown, until all cards are either tabled or mucked. Once all cards are flat on the table or mucked, then you may assist reading the board. Until then, no.

I agree, it's an awkward rule, and especially confusing for players new to casino poker. I've even started threads in B&M asking if maybe the rule was outdated, but I've been shouted down every time.

If you go to a casino and tell someone about a hand possibility that he didn't see, which causes him to table his hand and win the pot, then you are the a-hole. That's poker etiquette.

No body tells me who I have at my home game or gives me ultimatums, otherwise it is no longer my game. Our game is a legal Ky social game, but we could get busted for fights in public or Dis the peace and such, so their conflict would affect me. I make this pretty clear and have total backup from several longtime player/friends who understand how this problem must be addressed. GL but don't back down to A.