A player on the button is holding Q9. The board reads QQ952. Is he required to bet/raise on the river? I would contend he is. TD says the he would have to be holding QQ. How would you rule?

So according to that TD, if the board reads AAA87 and you hold AQ for AAAAQ you don’t have to bet because the other guy could have AK for AAAAK?

With that board, what hand beats Q9?

He says he understands my point, but isn't going to make the dealer think that hard to determine that Q9 is actually the nuts for that hand. He wants them to go by the board. In fairness, this was a question posed as a hypothetical to the TD. Obviously my point is that the player realizes he has the nuts, so should clearly be a penalty.

The floor is an idiot. Even if he doesn't want to issue a penalty his reason is absurd. It is possible a dealer doesn't realize a player has the nuts ... So what .... When it is realized you deal with it accordingly.

And there are times a penalty may not be appropriate.

Lol.

Yes player must bet/raise.

However, if the TD thinks its too hard to make his dealers figure out what hand is the absolute nuts from the handholder's perspective then it follows that the players shouldn't have to be able to figure it out either.

The only time I have ever seen this happen in real life was in a LHE 20/40 game where a woman with the nut (and only possible) straight flush just called after like 6 bets on the river because she got scared.

LOL.

I hope someday I have the stone cold nuts on the river in position...

What if I want to check behind so I get to see my opponents cards?

If I know he isn't calling a bet and I want to see what he called previous streets with, why should I be obligated to bet when I want the free information?

It's impossible for you to know your opponent isn't calling a bet, unless you are colluding with him.

You can be fairly certain based on history/how the hand has played out.

Many tournaments I dealt used to universally give a penalty for checking the nuts but more and more they're deciding not to. From the TDA:

"Checking the exclusive nuts when last to act on the river is not an automatic soft play violation; TD’s discretion applies based on the situation"

It sounds like your TD is setting the line at "exclusive nuts" rather than "nuts". Saying it has to do with the dealer not knowing it's the nuts is just silly, though. My guess is he decided not to give a penalty then searched his brain for a justification. That excuse was the only thing that came out in the moment.

Is the information value really higher than the ev of betting? At least some of the time the other player will have a good hand or decide to call hoping you're bluffing.

If you're that certain he's not going to call, you must have a pretty good idea what he has... So you won't get much benefit by seeing his cards, and other players who might not be such great hand readers will also get to see his cards.

Because none of us believe that the information gained from seeing this one hand is the reason you are doing this. We believe you are soft playing a friend or partner.

You are getting to the river in a pot that has X BB in it but you know with 100% certainty that your opponent would fold to a minimum bet of 1BB?

That requires some pretty special psych skills..

Example?

And if you check and show, he gets to see your cards for free.

The follow up post from OP said it was hypothetical.

The nit in my wants to remind readers that the player holding the nuts must take that aggressive action if not taking that action closes the action. IE BB bets, MP raises, BTN with the nuts on the river can call.

I don't know that the rule and penalty are necessary. There is already a rule against soft-play and collusion. This seems to have just pinpointed an extreme and rare situation, which some players may simply get penalized in error.

TD is a moron.

That said I don't think the rule is hugely important but if you are going to enforce it, then do so without regard to the fact that people can accidentally misread boards.

If possibly taking a penalty is worth it to see his cards, then by all means, go ahead.
Pretty much what everyone else is saying and I agree. If I truly believe the player didn't realize they had the nuts I may give a warning. Otherwise, I'm likely giving a penalty (like when the guy says " I know he isn't calling a bet and I want to see what he called previous streets with").

You are not required to bet the nuts on the river in position according to TDA rules. This rule does not exist and it never has in the TDA rule set. If the player does so in order to softplay he is subject to penalty. If done strategically or accidentally the player is not subject to penalty.


I would not be surprised, however, if it is a WSOP rule. They have some "interesting" rules.

Does the TDA define the term "nuts" or "nut hand"? Prior to the tournament, the TD says "a player in position with the nut hand must take an aggressive action after the river card is dealt, and failure to do so could result in a one orbit penalty." But this particular TD has a different definition of the "nuts" than I do. I would define it as a hand that cannot be beaten based on what's on the board. His definition is that the nuts is the best hand possible based on what's on the board. Most of the time, those would be the same, but in certain instances they are not.

Let's say the board reads 7h 8h 10h 3d 4s. If you are on the button and holding Ah 9h, should you be required to bet/raise? I would say yes, since you have the straight flush blocker. TD would say no because 9h Jh is the nuts for that board.

So if there is an accepted definition of the "nuts", then maybe this TD will see that if you're going to penalize the guy holding 9h Jh, then, for the sake of consistency, you should also penalize the guy holding Ah 9h.

I would always start with the position that it's softplay .... And then consider whether there is some other reason. But I think this play that should be presumed softplay

Here is 2017 TDA ... Rule #71 ...

B: A penalty may be invoked for etiquette violations (Rule 70), card exposure with action pending, throwing cards, violating one-player-to-a-hand, or similar incidents. Penalties will be given for soft play, abuse, disruptive behavior, or cheating. Checking the exclusive nuts when last to act on the river is not an automatic soft play violation; TD’s discretion applies based on the situation

I can't find any reference to 'best hand' or 'nuts' in the 2015 rule set and the references to soft play are pretty vague as well.

Probably the most famous version of this is when Darvin Moon was penalized in the WSOP ME the year after he lost to Cada .. and was issued a penalty on Day 2 for checking the nuts so he could see the opponents cards and 'didn't think he was calling a bet anyways." GL

As far as the TD in OP ... Pretty weak statement to not expect the Dealers to figure out the nuts based on the cards at Showdown. I don't really think we need to apply 'exclusive' to the term 'Nuts' once the cards are turned over. GL

And so what .... If it happens that a dealer misses it? If no one else mentions it then it got past us ...why should that mean that it's generally allowed.

If it's missed, it's missed .. but to indicate that the Dealers are too weak to know that quad Qs aren't possible when a Player is only holding one of them is pretty bad.

To me, 'exclusive nuts' means the best possible hand for this Board 'exclusive' of what the Player's holdings happen to be. The rule should be 'inclusive' of the Player's holdings when trying to apply it. Hand out warnings just the same as any other rule. GL

I assumed "exclusive nuts" means to eliminate the idiotic thing where someone could get a penalty for not raising with, say, 8h9h on a board of TcJsQdKhAc or AAAAK.