I think someone mentioned this before, but dealers have both hands free at this point, so it's not a huge deal.

That said, the fact that you have even considered what you can do to make the game go smoother/faster/more efficiently puts you in the top 5% of players most desirable to have in a game.

LOL at players noticing the dealer's struggles. Players don't even SEE dealers, it's like we're the Invisible Men. A player walking by a table accidentally bumps into a player's chair, and says, "Oh, pardon me." But he can smash into a dealer's swivel chair, spinning him completely around, and act like he just spun an empty chair. Who says "pardon me" to empty furniture when they bump into it?

I once called the chip runner over to the table because it was painfully obvious the dealer needed a fill of his tray of $1 chips (was down to 3 or 4 in an 8/16 game where change is needed every hand for the drop) and it was clear he was on something and wasn't really there at all.

Question: In a tourney (in case it matters) UTG folds, UTG+1 shows cards to UTG before folding. Does anyone tell player to not show cards? One player per hand apply here? Had a disagreement about this today.

That's clearly outlined as an infraction with a penalty where I work, so it's an insta-call for the TD.

Thank you. I warned a player to not show his cards and he went on a rant about all the stupid rules in the room. I tried to reply politely as possible that this is a standard rule in any major casino in the country. He disagreed of course and went on with stories about being a pro playing wsopc events etc. lol.

Then I guess the problem is just the particular dealers. They don't place the button, they more sort of toss it in the direction of seat 3 or 8. I think they want to get it to the betting line. But then it's out of their reach. So it's a self inflicted problem by the dealers.

Its really not a standard rule as you stated. Showing cards to a player no longer in the hand is EXTREMELY common. As a standard matter it is permitted unless a player is objecting to it, or it appears that the player is soliciting assistance.

Show one show all is still applicable, but show one show all's application is generally at the request of the players. So if someone wanted to see the hand, they would be entitled to see it (at the conclusion of the hand).

The TDA rule against exposing a hand is not generally considered to apply to this type of exposure.

Just because it isn't enforced doesn't mean it isn't a rule. Where I work there are a lot of older folks who like to complain. So, I try and eliminate stuff like this to keep the game moving and Bitching minimal.

I think AJBergy has got the wrong end of the stick somewhere. Clarkwt isn't arguing for breaking the rules at all, it's the opposite.

I enforce it I'm saying it isn't consistent because many dealers let this type of thing slide.

See rule #1.

Your kind of enforcement -- at leasts how it appears from these few posts -- leads to bad games.

This TDA rule is not applicable to this situation. I have played poker in many places AND NEVER EVER EVER EVER heard anyone suggest that showing your hand to the guy next to you who is no longer in the hand is exposure of your hand as addressed by this rule.

This rule you cite is about exposing your hand to the players in the hand during the play of the hand.

If you think that rule should be strictly read as baring exposing or discussing the contents of your hand to anybody at any time I assume you impose a penalty on the player who announces after the hand what he folded. After all that violates rules 51 which doesn't say "with action pending" it says "at all times"


It is important that you read the rules. But its also important that you understand the rules in context. These rules are not about the guy who lets his neighbor sweat him, or shows his neighbor his hand right before folding so that his neighbor can know what bad luck he has ......

These rules are about exposing your cards to give information, or induce tells, or induce ordiscourage action.

Inspector Javert ITT.


You may find it interesting to know that the room where I work has a "no sweating" rule in tourneys, and I'm pretty sure they got it from the TDA, which is always evolving, it seems. You may further find it interesting that I hold the rulemakers in my room in great esteem, if that means anything to you (ie, I don't think it's some nutty rule in a room that's chock full of nutty rules--I think it's legit).

+1

I'm not sure if you and I are talking about the same thing here. I am not talking about a "sweater" who is not in the game but sita behind a player and watches. Though I do not see it mentioned in the TDA rules that seems to be fairly standardly not permitted in tournament play.

But if we are talking about the same thing ..... are you saying that your room simply doesn't allow it or that your room considers it be exposure of a hand subject to penalty under the above discussed rule against exposure? (My position is not that i have never heard of a rule against it ----- but that i have never heard it considered to be the subject of the rule above)

The only potential problem is that it could be used to solicit advice.

Ok guys I am pretty livid right now so my typing may be even worse the usual.

Your thoughts on tonight's episode:

Background: This is a second job for me, but I have put in my notice and have three scheduled shifts remaining. This is a small room on the the strip. Mostly tourists playing $1-$2 NL and small buy-in fast structure tournaments. Generally unsophisticated poker players, but you do get some people who have a clue .....

Floorman: Due to schedule adjustments the past few weeks I have come in to find a dual rate running the room. I generally only work with him for a couple of hours until the shift change. I have not been particularly impressed but haven't had any issues until tonight.

My first down of the night I get sent to deal the tournament. About half way through the down the incident occurs.

The hand is heads up between a player I have never seen before..... and a regular tournament player. Regular is not a particularly sophisticated player but he plays this tournament frequently.

On the river the unknown player is first to act and checks dark. I put up the river and the board reads 8 10 J Q K (not in that order with no flush possibility). The regular says to the guy who checked "You checked before .... I appreciate that so I am going to be nice, I check" He then turns up AK for the nut hand. His opponent tables his hand it does not have an A so it is a loser, I muck the loser and then call the floor.

Regular is perplexed that I am calling the floor and is asking me why ..... I sense that this isn;t going to go well so I wait for the floor.

When the Floor gets to the table I tell him that the gentleman checked the nut hand while last act closing out the action. The player looks at me and shouts ....Why can't I do that. I point to the floor. The player then demands he wants to here from me why he can't do that. I point to the floor. The player then explains to the floor that he appreciated that the other guy checked dark and was just being nice to him....., then asks why he can't do that.

The Floor then says "Well you can do that .... but its unusual" The player starts syaying that I was callinmg him a cheater and he is offended. The floor walks away and the player continues going on about how I called him a cheater. This whole time I have not said a word to the player. I certainly didn't call him a cheater (although I must admit I was thinking it). I didn;t argue with the floor when he made his ridiculous ruling. Our rule book includes the TDA rules.

Now I get tapped out at the end of the down and the floor confronts me and me and I tell him that I just have a few more days at this job and he should just keep that guy away from me.

Floor guy starts giving me a hard time and we end up in office arguing about this. He contends that I shouldn't have even called him over for this...... Its just a low buy in tournament not the WSOP. Floor wants me to apologize to the player is very upset that won't do so.

I belive that he could have completely defused the situation had he handled it properly instead he made it blow up.

I believe he should have told the player that in fact he is not allowed to softplay by checking the nut hand to close out the action, AND THAT WHEN IT HAPPENS THE DEALER IS REQUIRED TO CALL THE FLOOR .... but that he understood it wasn't done maliciously so he wouldn't impose a penalty but now you know for the future .....

I believe it would be impossible for me to make any kind of apology here because the only thing I DID WAS CALL THE FLOOR.

Your thoughts...........Was there anything I could have done better? Or as I am inclined to think was this the floors screwup?

Of course you're right and the floor is wrong. Only thing you could have done better would be to not lose your temper. If it were me, I'd definitely clear the air with the player, away from the table. "Look, there's a little rule you obviously weren't aware of, let me explain it to you....I know you don't believe me, especially since that floorman didn't know the rule either, but a few years ago, it came up in one of the WSOP telecasts, and people were talking about it for weeks...but most importantly, I didn't scold you, I didn't accuse you of anything--heck, I never even said a word to you! All I did was call the floorman over here, explain to him what happened, and give him a chance to do something about it. He chose to do nothing, and that's fine with me! I'm not looking to be the Poker Sheriff! But most of these floors are real fussy about these tournament rules, they don't give me any leeway, they don't want me to handle it, they WANT me to call them over, so what else can I do?"

Even if the player thinks you're nuts and that you're making up rules now, he'll still calm right down, out of respect for you manning up and hashing this thing out with him.

I'm talking about letting the player next to you sweat your hand when he doesn't have cards. When the TD sees this, he races right over and lets the players know that isn't allowed, and asks that they please don't do it again. They don't issue threats involving penalties, because they don't NEED to--the friendly warning always suffices. I'm sure if the behavior continued after the warning, then the topic of a possible penalty would have to come up, but I've never seen it get that far.

I think where you went wrong was when the player asked you why you are calling the floor, you didnt answer him. Staying silent when a customer asks you a question is just rude.

You could have either informed him of the rule, in a polite maner, and told him you needto call the floor, (IMO the preferred option) or at least say you have to ask the floor about a ruling. To just ignore him is guaranteeing an incident. Then acting like a smart ass by just pointing your finger towards the floor instead of speaking to the customer compounds the problem.

Then, if I read your post right, you told the foor to keep the customer away from you for a few days, is that correct? With that attitude, you should just quit now. No sense hanging around customers with a bad attitude.

While you were technically correct about a relatively obscure rule, the way you handled it turned a simple thing into a big blow up and a pissed off customer.

Actually I thought I held my temper. perhaps I didn't, but it felt like I did.

I don't think a discussion with the player about this would a good idea without the floor. Even though I think the floor was wrong and really botched this (not just by getting the ruling wrong but by leaving out to dry) I am not inclined to go to a player and tell him the floor was wrong, that doesn't seem to be much better than what I am complaining about (If I was a floor and heard that a dealer did that I would probably lose my temper).

My imminent departure resolves some of the issues as I do not have to worry that every time I go to work there will be a potential issue.


This in and of itself doesn't strike me inconsistent with my statement. While I have never seethis sort of enforcement, I don't think this is based on the TDA rule ( though they may say it is). But if they claim that this based on rule 51 or 52 as quoted above I would say they are misreading the rules. If it's based on a general one player to hand concept I would just say they are unusually strict.

BTW I would prefer that we always be strict about this (in both cash and tournament), its just my experience that this is commonly allowed until there is an objection.

Does anyone have a link to the TDA rule that states that you must bet with the nuts on the river? i looked for it, but the best I could find was the rule that simply says you can't softplay, but then doesnt define it.

I found a TDA discussion forum where this ruling was discussed, and while some heavyweights like Matt Savage stated they believed it was softplaying and should be penalized, some others disagreed. The discussion seemed to end with the conclusion that it was up to the TD to decide if it would be penalized as softplay, but there wasnt an actual rule discussing not betting with the nuts.

But this was all dated around Dec 2011, and I couldnt find a more recent discussion.

There is another argument I have seen advanced. It could be in a player's best interest to not bust a player to extend a bubble situation.

There is not a rule that says if you have the nuts .....

The rule is the rule against softplay, and the checking the nuts to close the action is generally considered evidence of softplay.

While there are people who contend that there are legitimate reasons to make this play (and though I won;t buy the "I wanted to see his cards argument " there are some instances where I agree it may be a legitimate play ... bubble of a tournament where you don;t want to burst the bubble because you are able to use the bubble to your advantage)

However in the case I wrote about any argument about whether it could be a legitimate play is destroyed by the fact that the player stated his reason to do this was "To be nice" which is clearly soft play.

I agree with this. Just start with 'Sorry sir, but we have a rule in this card-room that I need to call the floor if anyone checks back the nuts on the river. I understand you were just being friendly, but the rule says that I need to call the floor'.

It doesn't sound like the player realised that what he was doing might be wrong, and then I think your refusal to tell him what was going on aggravated things.