Last nite, 5-10nl, 15 mins into the down, 12-14 hands dealt, $1 in my pocket. There were plenty of substantial pots. If every down was that bad the players would never have anything better than a break in wsop dealer. Because all the good dealers would be homeless.

I aint asking for redbirds or even $1 @ hand. But $1 in 15 mins is just ignorant. Down to granny gear baby, you aint getting 20-30 hands outta me. (Time game).

When it's $7 or less avg per down, and many of these people have left the Rio because they can't stand the dealers, well, imo, they get nothin. I couldn't even pay rent on $7 down.

Lets explore this ..... Why would you turn her hand up?

There are two possibilities here:

1) Q knows what J has.

2) Q does not know what J has.

If the 1st is the case ..... you gain nothing by turning the hand up. Q already knew.

If the second is the case, then all is right with the world so why would you now want to let Q know what J has.


I think you may be confusing this with the scenario where there are multiple players in the hand, in which case you must make sure that all the players have equal information during the play of the hand. But since they are heads up here that is not a concern.


The reason I asked what you would do .... is that we all responded based on TDA rules about the hand not being dead. If your room has a rule that an exposed hand is dead then obviously I would expect the floor to rule the hand dead. (It would be a bad rule) So I couldn't blame you for thinking that should happen if those are your house rules.

Can we please have a moratorium on dealers complaining about bad tippers/tipping in general?

While this certainly does happen in real break rooms, it seems unsightly when you consider that there are players who lurk and post here.

I think that stuff can be put into the tipping thread, should anyone be foolhardy enough to want to go that route.

Fwiw - I never thought it should be a dead hand and I don't think I implied it. I'm also not confusing it with there being other players in the hand. To be honest, I simply didn't know. My logic led me to believe that the hand should stay face up. Your post puts it way more clear than previous posters.

With your two possibilities - a point I was trying to make was what if Q saw J's hand, but lies and said he didn't? Is J deserve that disadvantage since it was her mistake? To think Q didn't see her hand when he did?

J has to unfortunately have that disadvantage. J needs to consider that it is a possibility. But which is a worse disadvantage. to know it is possible that your opponent saw your hand and is lying about not having seen it ..... or to be certain your opponent has seen your hand?

If this were a cash game (so we didn't have the chip dumping collusion concerns that a tournament brings) and you were J ..... if you were given a choice between playing on as is ..... or showing your hand and playing on ....... Would you choose to show your hand? I don't think you would ..... because you would inherently understand that doing so put you in the worst possible position (unfortunately you are already in a bad position)

Yes. The player who exposes his/her hand before action is complete deserves everything that he/she gets.

Makes sense. Thx

There are places that would deal with it like this:

The exposed hand stays face up and loses all aggressive action in the hand. J can only call any bets. After the hand, 1 orbit penalty.

If the rule was that the hand must be turned over, we never would have gotten this gem:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sKsV6oqZW38

for our non-mobile friends: http://youtu.be/sKsV6oqZW38

Ha, I like them. They make me, Mr. Dollar a Pot (Two If It's Really Big) feel like I'm respectable.

I heard my favorite tipping story ever at a PLO table at the Rio today, but I need to rest and then head back to the tables so I'll leave it as a teaser for later.

If J is so bothered by not knowing whether Q is pretending or not, she should be welcome to turn her hand face up of her own volition.

This is not a tipping thread.

Last night in a NL game, Player A bet $15. Player B put out $45 in red, then went back to his stack and added $1 to his bet.

Half the table stood, pointed, and shouted, "J'accuse!"

After that, the word "technically" was heard at least a dozen times before I got pushed out of that game.

I might do this next time I play for the lol's.

You, of course, admonished them that the house rules are, "English only" during a hand.

Just turned down an EO opportunity. What is wrong with me?

I don't understand what you mean? I thought that it was just a formality when they came to my table and said "do you want to go?" What's it like in the wilderness of voluntary hours???

EOs are a funny thing. Most of us get about 4 deep on the EO list. Other times we have to be forcibly removed from the rotation.

I only take eos when I'm too tired and will end up costing someone money via mistake or myself money by not wanting to put in the effort.

Or when the games are super juicy. (Then I get stuck and don't EO for weeks)

This is probably also the reason J didn't see Q call.

The ruling is the correct one imo

Both Q and R sound like psychopaths.

Limit is different than no limit

You guys are familiar with a palindrome ....

well I have discovered another interesting phenomenon. I don't have a name for it yet. Apparently there are phrases in one language which have the opposite meaning in another language.

For example I have discovered that the English phrase:

"Please do not speak a foreign language at the poker table."

in Dutch means:

"Go right ahead and continue your foreign language conversation"

Means the same thing in Spanish.

But from their perspective English is a foreign language. They probably figured speaking anything but Nederlands would get them in trouble!

In Spanish it means
"Start speaking your roughest version of English at your loudest tone while rising out of your seat and enunciating with your hands"