Cash game. Format, stakes, action are (IMO) not at all relevant.

Board is showing KK992 (no possible flush). It gets to showdown and villain (???) announces "pair of 7's" and shows them.

But one of the other players at the table (not in the hand) said something to the effect of "that doesn't play as a pair" (I'm a pretty bad player but not a novice. I figure that if I fall for this it's my own fault and I deserve to lose the pot.)

Villain got upset. "I've correctly announced my hand and you shouldn't say anything about it"

Is he right about that?

What if the dealer announced (before I mucked or showed) "Kings and nines with a seven kicker." Would that violate correct procedure?

I would have loved to say "nice try" and table 10,2 or some such thing. But, alas, his 7 kicker actually was good.

I don't think the other player should have corrected the announced hand, but the dealer definitely should have, in exactly the language you suggest. Technically, villain here was undercalling his hand, not overcalling it, so the dealer should clarify things by noting that he actually has two pairs, and both bigger than sevens.

agree with rob

as long as by "shows them" you mean tables them (ie actually puts the cards face up on the table) then there is no problem with what the other player said, though it would be better for him to wait and give the dealer a chance to announce the correct hand first. Then only if the dealer doesnt catch it does he need to speak up.

If OTOH the player simply showed his cards by keeping them in his hand rather than tabling them, no one, including the dealer should announce what the hand is prior to the hand being tabled.

And if they are tabled the dealer should read the hand.

"Kings and nines with a seven."


I would love to say, "And he's playing one of his sevens." as I push up the KK99.

Well he correctly announced the cards in his hand.

People like Villain are perpetually upset. If it's not this completely innocuous reason, it's something else.

This should be a moot point with even a bad dealer. KITN to Villiaj though for his “Ive correctly announced my hand” comment.

There are quite a few threads on this topic with slightly similar scenarios. This is one area that I think is pretty broad when it comes to Dealers, stakes, rooms and Players.

Primarily it's up to the Dealer to announce a 'properly' tabled hand. Any Player dealt into the hand should also speak up if they feel the Dealer has made an error. Any 'announced' hands should be ignored without comment until the 'proof' is tabled.

The 'real' issue is 'when' is a Dealer supposed to announce a hand, or even push the Board cards up. When 'any' hand is tabled, or should they wait until both/all hands are tabled for a true Showdown?

Lots of Dealers will try to keep the 1/2 games moving along by possibly short-cutting the room policy. But you will see them more reserved at higher stakes and allow the Players more leeway during Showdown.

Players not involved in the Showdown should wait until the Dealer has made a decision on the winner ... or if there's been a proper amount of awkward silence!

We have a Player with a fairly thick accent and he loves to slow roll also. Anyone who has played with him knows that if he says "I have Jack" that it means he has a set of Jacks. But new opponents unknowingly will table inferior hands only to find out the bad news in 'his' due time. Obviously thinking he has one pair of Jacks and/or Jack-S**t (as one opponent thought)!

It's easy to get excited in poker, even when you aren't in the hand. Best to just remember to always 'take a breath' before doing something too fast. GL

I think this whole issue of when should a dealer read a tabled hand is contrived BS made up by angle shooters looking for one last possible way to win a pot without having the best hand. Tabled Cards speak, period. And there is a designated order to who must table their hand first. So when the player who is required to table first tables his hands, the dealer should announce it. The cards speak at that point, and the dealer is the one who gives them a voice. If the other player chooses to voluntarily table his cards first even though he doesnt have to, then the dealer "speaks" for those cards by announcing them.

The idea that OPTAH somehow includes a player having to accurately determine an opponents tabled hand from across the table and therefore the dealer should wait is nuts.

I think it's a violation of OPTAH for random player not in the hand to speak up in this situation. The obligation comes in when the dealer starts to push the pot to the incorrect tabled hand. Yeah, the V is trying to get his opponent to muck his Ace-rag by calling his hand like he did, but in fact, he does have 2 sevens. That's not an untruth. Every player must protect his action. We've had this in other threads, and I'm in the camp that the dealer should keep his mouth shut in these situations until the other player either tables his own hand or asks "what does he have?"

I'm with you 100%.

Reading hands is part of the skill of the game. If you can’t do it, just table your hand and let the dealer award the pot to the winner. Dealer should not announce a hand when only one hand is tabled, other than saying what the two cards are.

When I'm dealing I read the hands as they're tabled. The villain did not correctly announce his hand. He shot an angle.

Just like it's proper to correct a misread hand once it's tabled ("No, it's not a straight. He's missing the 9." or "No, it's not a pair of Jack's. You didn't see the flush.") So it is also proper to correct the villain here. "No, you don't have 7's. You have kings and 9's with a 7."

Awfully funny that almost all rulesets say “Cards speak” then.

He didn't say he had 2 sevens. He said he had a pair of sevens. He doesn't have a pair of sevens.

If V says "I have pocket 7s" that'd be true. Even saying he has 2 sevens isn't technically true - the final hand he's playing only contains one 7.

FW(L)IW ....

I could have been more precise in my wording. I don't remember if he said "pair of sevens" or "two sevens." I think of that as a distinction without a difference - although I could be wrong about that.

When I said "showed" them I meant that he actually tabled them properly. No chicanery in that respect.

In terms of the game and when dealer is supposed to speak.

This was 2-4 Limit an all the players were regulars who play a hundred hours a month or more (except me).

I don't play much (maybe only 20 hours a year) and while I've been mildy slow-rolled a couple of times, this is the first time anybody has tried to angle me.

grunch.

fwiw, most times this happens i assume the person saying 7s is mini angle shooting. so i will intervene and say something. like he has 7 high.

cards are tabled players are entitled to make sure things are done properly. the whole you arent in hand stuff is nonsense.

That is not what we mean when we say that reading hands is part of the game. You are making the argument for allowing Villain to say anything at all about his holdings at showdown without an expectation of being corrected, and I don’t think you mean to do that.

I also disagree that reading hands is part of the skill of the game, though I expect this to be a controversial opinion. It may have been in decades past, but it should not be any more as we try to make poker a popular and public game. Especially at the entry levels.

This has nothing to do with protecting one’s action.

There is a big difference, from a OPTAH perspective, from declaring a tabled hand (when you are not in the hand), and correcting a misdeclaration.

My interpretation of the rules would be that if the dealer does not immediately correct the misdeclaration, any player is not only allowed but ethically required to correct the misdeclaration. It has long been established that misdeclarations are not a normal or legal aspect of the game.

^^^ beat me to it.

I actually disagree with this. If someone tables their hand and then incorrectly announces their hand, anyone that notices the mistake should correct it.

As many others have pointed out in the past. Cards Speak ... but with this 'ideal' that Players should 'hide' (keep secret) their holdings unless absolutely implored to do so creates a lot of these spots.

I'm involved in plenty myself ... the one-card show, the delayed show-feigning weakness, the 'your good' statement-until you're not good show. All of these are more and more prevalent in today's game. Lot's of it is monkey-see monkey-do which leads to the purists simply 'demanding' for Players at Showdown to just 'table your cards, please' ...

... if there's silence, remain silent
... if there's an incorrect verbal or Board pushing, then by all means get it corrected BEFORE a holding is incorrectly mucked or a pot is pushed in the wrong direction. GL

Sure it does. Don't muck until you know for sure that you lost.

it has nothing to do with OPTAH. That rule is against helping another player to play his hand, it has nothing to do with reading a tabled hand. The hand was tabled, and the cards speak. If for instance a player tabled two pair with no hearts on a 4 heart board and you told another player yet to table or muck "do you have a heart?", that would be a violation of OPTAH.

+1