Quote:
Originally Posted by AKingdom
Btw, OP's account makes it sound like Sands informed the player that he had seen his cards only because OP saw him do it. I'd also like OP to clarify this.
I doubt Barth will need to clarify much more, as he wrote, "
Knowing I am aware of what was going on, Doc turned to the man and said, 'Sir, I just want you to know before I act, I saw your hand.'" [Emphasis mine.]
I could be taking the grammar too literally, but as written, it means Doc divulged that disclaimer because he knew Barth was a witness. Written another way, the sentence becomes "Doc knew I was aware of what was going on, so he turned to the man and said..."
The entire post is well-written, which tells me Barth used the participial phrase to mean exactly what you think it means.
A couple other things:
Quote:
After saying he would not be back for Day 2, or any subsequent day, the man told Doc, "If I could give my chips to anyone, I'd love to give them to you." Doc then thanked the man.
This is probably the one point where Sands should have "acted nobly" in regard to tournament rules and the intentions of his seat neighbor. Thanked the man? I agree 100 percent with everyone who says Doc -- or anyone else within earshot -- should have spoken up as soon as the hint of chip-dumping surfaced. This is that point, and it took place long before the "All you have to do is raise, If you raise I fold" comment.
(The funny thing is that Doc DID raise and the guy did NOT fold. I'm shocked, shocked at the dishonesty.)
Finally, the OP asked if he "had a responsibility to report the situation." I'm not experienced enough with live play to know, so I'll ask the collective: what IS the protocol?
Put another way, if you were in Barth's situation, what would you say at the conclusion of the hand, if anything? Obviously, it won't undo the action. And, at risk of being results-oriented, it did not end up helping the intended beneficiary of the play. The instigator (Seat 7) is supposedly leaving, so penalizing him accomplishes nothing.