....Wanted to get the Royal Flush badge on PTR

its only if you're last to act and u check with the nuts. that's called soft play

So am I allowed to call a river bet with the nut low(Example: Board is AT962r, I call w/ 34o) to see what he has? Or is that considered also as chipdumping.

Furthermore, "English only" also works towards the goal of ensuring that everyone (including the dealer) knows what the action is. To the extent that you can argue that it penalizes players for not knowing English, you could argue that letting people speak other languages penalizes players for not knowing those other languages. There is a standard that is chosen as a matter of protocol; it is not a question of discrimination.

If a major poker event were to be held in China, the directors would be well within their rights to declare "Cantonese only". Or, hell, even "Mandarin only". (Although I suppose that would be sort of like insisting that American players say "pass" rather than "fold".)

You can reason that he also has 34off.

FYP. Otherwise, +1.

To summarize your position:

1) You aren't denying that checking the nuts on the river is soft-playing.

2) You want soft-play to be legal for everyone in poker tournaments, at least this type of soft-play, so you can get your Level 2 meta-game on.

If only tournament directors had your Level 2 vision and insight.

what really makes checking the nuts on the river in your ******ed attempt at information gathering unacceptable to me is that you are 100% intending to slowroll your opponent at showdown as well.

you have to realize that even though you might find out what their cards were, you are also giving your opponents crucial information about whether or not you are a douche.

this.

I got sick of reading the 6+ pages, so this may have already been said.

The rule isn't to prevent colluding, per se. It falls under the TDA rules of "no softplaying allowed". If a player checks the nuts to close the action, they are clearly softplaying their hand and so subject to a penalty.

There are alot of situations of softplaying that slide by (like checking the board down when a player is all-in) because to create rules to protect players from those situations becomes problematic; too often any specific rules would do more to harm the good player's ability to play ethically than it would to protect the good player.

This isn't really one of those situations. If you gave a penalty to every player that checks to close the action when they are the only one in the hand with the nuts- you would never be harming a good players ability to play their game ethically.

This is the dumbest rule ever and needs to be scrapped immediately. The last thing we want to do is discourage bad players from making bad plays. And checking the nuts back on the river is almost always a bad play.

Was in five table shoot-out - the top two move to the final table with their chips they have accumulated. There are four players left - I am MONSTER chip leader - two are severly short and one is super short - two bbs. I fold the SB to his BB every time so that he can stay in and I can keep picking off the other short stacks so that when one of them goes to the final table with me - I should have all the chips on the table except a few BBs in his stack.

One hundred thousand chips started the tournament and I had 95,000 when the dust finally cleared. If I had knocked him out - then not only would I have had less chips but I would have brought an opponent with me with more chips as well.

For those who saying that checking the nuts can only be a softplay, would they argue that a set-up play, where someone purposely does something stupid in a small pot in hopes to trap his opponent on a bigger pot, would also be a softplay? Poker is longer than just one hand.

Player A and Player B are colluding SOBs.

Player A and Player B play a hand to the river where Player B is last to act with the nuts. Player A checks to Player B who also checks. Player A turns over the losing hand, Player B mucks the nuts.

Colluding team wins.

I love how everyone is assuming out of the colluding players, the one with the best hand should win. If they're working together, it doesn't mean dick.

On the other hand, for two players who aren't actually a team, just softplaying, the rule sort of works, but not really as a min bet with the nuts is...well...pretty soft anyway.

fyp.

This rule that ANYONE can ask to see the hands is being allowed less and less in casinos these days - it is still allowed but the days of being able to ask for it "just for information" is a thing of the past.

So - have we established that there are some instances - rare - that it is ok to check the nuts in position.

A. To gather information or to make your opponent perceive you as dumb - as in the Heads up match with quads on the board and the last player checks because they "didn't want to waste time"
B. In a shoot out where multiple players go to another table
C. To move up money positions

I'm a poker noob. If you're not colluding, is there any benefit of checking the nuts on the river in position? If there's none, I don't see what's wrong with penalizing this behavior...

go back one post - examples posted

Now I get B and C, but not A. Can any seated player request to see a mucked hand?
Or do you have to show your hand in order to request to see another player's hand?

.


This has to be the worst thread on 2+2 ever

how the **** did this not get made fun of more? jesus christ

*must grunch*

Stories of card marking at the WSOP are heard almost annually

[ ] Poker
[x] Nuts

Table image(look im a fish i checked the nutz)
Abuse the bubble
Want to see his hand.
Don't penalize a bad player for playing bad

Those seem solid.

GGK


[ ] bubble abusers in this thread

wtf? if u cant lose.. y wouldnt u bet? *** the "information". u need to get paid with the nuts to evaluating what u opponent has on the river and decide an amount he can call with those hands. nutchecking is dum like this thread. BONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think OP is right in his assumption, that checking the nuts being penalized will end up in less colluders getting caught simply because it prevents them from being dumb about it.

Also, I think the mods should do something about the posters who think every single post in nvg is stupid and pointless. This post does have a valid point. I am tired and bored of having to read this forum, and having to skip 2/3 of the posts that are nothing but first class ego tickets to ego land, with posters stating how stupid the thread or a post in particular is.