I think it's the opposite. If the dealer did not read hands, the players would try to figure out the tabled hand before deciding whether or not to table their own hand. The players trying to read a hand will usually take longer than the dealer reading the hand. They will still be reluctant to turn over a second-best hand. A dealer not reading hands will not put them in the habit of showing their cards no matter what.

If it were up to me, I'd have the cards of the player who is first to show be turned over automatically no matter what (except maybe if another player insta-tables their hand before this can be done and the player who is supposed to be first mucks), the dealer announces the hand, and you go in order. That might not please old school players who think poker should be a game where a significant part of your profit can come from angle-shooting, but I don't care about catering to them. If they truly want to be old school, then create the conditions where they can play in underground games where they should consider carrying a gun and have to assess the risk of being raided by cops.

My entire point, and the reason we're "debating" is based more on instead of your opponent just asking what you have, he says "Oh you have Ace Five for the low?" but is incorrect in reading your hand, is that someone (specifically the dealer who is there to help run the game) can and should correct his misread of the tabled hand.

My line is that the dealer should not be saying anything to influence the play of the hand and that the play of the hand is not over until all live hands at showdown are either tabled or mucked. There is a rule against a player deliberately miscalling their hand at showdown. There is no rule in RRoP or TDA requiring a dealer to announce hands out loud or correcting an opponent who misreads a tabled hand out loud.

The dealer announcing hands doesn't unfairly influence play, as any aid provided is given equally to all players. It would be a problem if the dealer selectively announces hands.

There is no rule in high school basketball that says dogs can't play, and look at the turned out.

I'm totally fine with the dealer reading out my hand...As long as you're only calling out what I do have, and not saying things like:

"Jack high straight, no low." Don't do that. So, to delve into what you were asking earlier...if you and I are heads up and I table my hand and then you ask:

"What's his low?"

...No one, including the dealer, should inform you that I don't have a low even if that is correct. I will tell you what I have always, but as far as you figuring out how to read my hand in conjunction with the board, well, that is up to you. And that's not only my opinion on the matter, it's a written rule(where I play it is anyway).

99% of these situations are all coming from your NL games anyway, where, perhaps, folks feel it's ok to further continue on in the hand with the "deceptions" and the "I WILL not speak" bs and sit there like some wanna be from t.v.. Almost every O8 player that I know could give a rats ass if the dealer called out the hands as they were being tabled. Seriously, all we care about is getting in more hands. *Maybe* in the real nose bleed limits the dealers are instructed to keep quiet and the players don't say a word...but most games? Nah, not at all.

That is a weird nit to pick. If there were no qualifier, you would always have a low (no matter how bad), so you're OK with the dealer announcing that, but not with him saying you don't have a qualifying low? I don't understand/agree with that distinction.

Of course I'd be ok with that! Why wouldn't I be? All the dealer would be doing is reading my exact hand; the fact that it might not be a good low is irrelevant. If I have a low(and obv. I do) then the dealer needs to be precise(just like he would be in holdem) and call out 100% of the *actual* hand.

Let me give you an easier and a more common scenario;

In holdem, when you go to call out a tabled hand, you don't say things like: "He doesn't have a pair." Do you? Same as saying "He doesn't have a low" in O8. In holdem you would say: "Queen high." In O8, you would say: "Jack high straight."

Do you see the distinction now, and do you see how it applies in Omaha just as it would in holdem?

Now, if someone were to directly ask me if I had a low, I would tell him that I did not, but that is my choice to do so.

I'd like to see how well it would go over and how nitty people would get if the dealers started saying things in holdem like:

"No pair, just queen high" the second a player tabled his hand.

If a flush is possible, I sometimes table my hand and confidently announce "queen-high" myself because there is a tiny, once-every-two-years sort of chance that my opponent misunderstands me and mucks because he thinks I have a queen-high flush.

Nothing wrong or even slightly shady about that. But he's probably mucking because you're a maniac thus he called you light with Jack high.

This is a stupid pedantic argument, but I will play along.

No, you don't say "he doesn't have a pair." You say what he does have. Of course, it's not possible to table your hand and yet not have a hand, because there is no high hand qualifier in hold'em.

Let me make a similarly ridiculous hypothetical. Say you were playing hold'em with a minimum qualifier, say "jacks or better". Say you table Ace high, so you don't have a hand that can win, even if no one else tables a hand. What does the dealer say here? Do he say "he doesn't have a qualifying hand"? Does he say nothing? Do he make a sound like a balloon with a leak?

Your examples above are not even close to the "same thing" as a hold'em declaration, because they are fundamentally different because of the qualifier.

I would not offer "No low" as the way I read a hand ... But if I am asked what is his low .... and he doesn't have a low then of course I will say he doesn't have a low. It would be absurd not to .....

And that is totally fine.. You'd be surprised by how many dealers do not do it your way nor do they even understand why.

What I am saying(and what Psandman replied with, and any other dealer who knows the rules for that matter): When I turn up my hand, just read what I have and nothing more. And, this is for ANY game---my comparison was NOT wrong or even remotely ridiculous because the basic principle of WHY you shouldn't say it is exactly the same, and, that's all I was pointing out.

**** the hypotheticals, theyre not important...just answer me this:

You said, and I quote:

This ^ makes me believe that you are actually one of those dealers that would announce in an O8 game:

"Jack high straight, no low."

Yes or no?

(I've got some thick skin, but your snarky, know it all tone, doesn't equate to: you being right.) Not cool.

But you seem to have been saying that it was wrong for the dealer to announce no low when asked.

^ Actually, I ****ed that part up in my response. I got ahead of myself. I was thinking of a different situation, sorry.

I'm ok with you telling the player that I don't have a low IF they ask and even if it's prior to them tabling.

And naturally, I'm NOT ok if you gave that information out willingly/on your own free will because you're just trying to make sure that Sally doesn't throw away half the pot.

And of course, once hands are tabled? Read away. In fact, I've often told players who I was in HU pots with, that, they actually scooped me even though they had a brainfart and thought I was scooping(or getting a piece of the pot or w/e). So yeah, I have no problem with awarding the pot to the best tabled hand, it's that added "assist" that you(not you, per se ) take upon yourself that I'm not a fan of prior to tabling.

I once had a dealer say to my opponent:

"Just a straight."

Instead of her just reading my hand and leaving out the little tidbits of: "THERES A FLUSH ON THE BOARD AND HE DOESN'T HAVE IT"...

Do we really need all these uncalled for situations just because everyone feels that O8 is a harder game for players to know what they have, thus giving the dealers the right to unjustly provide information to them?

"Guys, is Kings Up really gonna scoop this whole thing?" hahahaha. I've def heard that one before. Completely uncalled for obviously.

If everyone folds, doesn't A-high take the pot?

If no one has a qualifying hand doesn't A-high take it if it's the best hand?

I don't know, I don't think there are any real games where there is a qualifier to win the high.

After Rush refined his concerns, I don't have a problem with it. No, I don't think a dealer should observe "no low" on his own, though I personally wouldn't care if he did. Yes, I think he should say "no low" if a player asks the dealer to read his hand at all, but especially if he asks if he has a low.

I did mean to be snarky, because I don't appreciate the condescending tone of his response to my first post (which was made very plainly and with no derision), the weird example and wording used to make it seem like my question made it clear I didn't understand the premise, or his subsequent intimation that I don't know the rules, especially when he was the one who was in the wrong. But I recognize that it wasn't constructive, and will take two lashes with the wet noodle.

For the record, I am a player, not a dealer. But I would self-identify as being extremely fluent in the common RRoP-based rules, moreso for cash than tournies. And I frequently play O8 and E8, so I am very familiar with the nuances being discussed here.

You're stating that I was in the wrong and yet you say this. ^ And, I don't agree with it because it's clearly not the same thing. In no qualifier, the dealers are always going to read your entire hand(regardless how dicey your low may be) because, well, there's always going to be a high and a low, so, why would I have a problem with that? I wouldn't. And, how is that the same as the dealer in an O8 game who tells you that I don't have a low when I don't *need* to have a low to win the hand?

Again, just call what the hands are, NOT what they aren't.

and, after rereading my response to you it did register a tad high on the condescending meter. I get caught up, it sometimes comes across way worse than it was EVER attended to be. I apologize.

Yes, I said you were in the wrong, because you seemed to admit that you had misspoken.

Do you think a dealer should answer a player if he asks the dealer to read another player's low hand, or do you think he should remain silent? What should he say if that player has no low?

Maybe I'm just misreading you, but you seem to keep going back and forth about this. First you said "No one, including the dealer, should inform you that I don't have a low even if that is correct", then you said "I'm ok with you telling the player that I don't have a low IF they ask and even if it's prior to them tabling", and now you're back to "Again, just call what the hands are, NOT what they aren't." I can't tell what you're saying should happen.

Anyway, we both apologize. All good now.

I feel like once you table your hand then the dealer has the right to announce it. If you had tabled and she had mucked and he had given her her cards back thats different but thats not what happened. Also there is no saying that she wouldn't of see it herself a few moments later if the dealer hadn't of said anything