Pot is three handed.

SB bets, cut off calls, button reraises all in.

Cut off says, 'I can see your hand.'

SB does not want to proceed because he thinks that it is 'inadvertent collusion' since two players now have information that he doesn't have.

What is the official rule on this please?

Thanks

ill be interested in what happens actually, had a similar situation.

Show one Show All is the relevant rule. Now there just has to be a decision by the floor whether the Cut-off did in fact see the Button's hand.

You can't kill button's hand because he was not careful when he looked at his cards. Hand must continue as normal.

Depends on where you are playing. At a casino on the strip, Show one Show all does not apply to this situation.

Sorry to hijack thread, but here is the example of what happened there.

9 handed nl

button seat 5

flop comes out
seat 7 bets 10
seat 9 raises to 30
seat 2 calls
seat 3 calls
seat 5 calls
seat 7 reraises to 80
seat 9 is tanking
seat 2 shows seat 3 his cards and folds out of turn
seat 3 says "well you had 2 of my outs" and folds

they both threw their cards down in front of them, they never touched the muck and you could tell whose cards belonged to who.

the dealer stops action and announces it is still on seat 9

seat 9 ask to see seat 2 and 3's cards because its show one show all and he would like to know if they threw away some of his outs.

dealer says no and seat 9 and seat 7 want to see the cards.

seat 9 asks for the floor and floor says they can see them after the hand.

then the funniest thing i have ever seen at a poker table happened. seat 9 says "if we cant see their cards then no one can see the rest of this hand" and he scoops up the flop with his two cards and throws all of the cards in the muck. he tells seat 5 and 7 they can chop up his money cause hes outta here. of course he got 86'd, but according to him, he was flying out in the morning anyway.

i thought the floor made the wrong decision.

if there is a difference in these two situations, please explain why. they both seem pretty similar to me.

Ugh, these are frustrating situations. No matter what, someone's going to feel like it's unfair and become upset. I prefer CO to wait until after the hand to discreetly inform the button, but you can't fault a guy for being honest. (Tho' this does open the angle of saying you saw cards when you didn't, just to get them exposed.)

Show One Show All immediately, and demonstrate for the button how to better hide his cards. Also encourage the CO not to look.

This seems an even easier case of SOSA, since the players who showed are no longer in the hand. Dealer and floor got it wrong. However, this is extremely unfair to the bettor, since not only are two others folding out of turn, but now the next person to act gets even more information. I recommend a warning to the a-holes who exposed and acted out of turn, with booting from the room next time.

I had something similar (actually not really, but the way the floor acted may be useful here) happen.

I can't remember the specifics, but I believe a dealer accidentally mucked a regulars hand - or actually I think someone mucked their hand on top of the regs by accident. The reg called over the floor and the floor said "Tell me what your hand was.", he whispered in his ear, and the floor looked at all four cards and pulled out the two original cards.

This was a small room - I don't think it would've flown at a bigger, more popular room, could easily be collusion (The one guy was a reg though so I'm sure floor didn't expect collusion).

Now in this situation the floor could've asked the CO to tell him what buttons hand was in order to check whether he actually did see it or was attempting some weird angle. If he did see it then the floor could rule SOSA

i actually mucked a hand in seat 8 that landed right on top of seat 10's hand. even though i knew my exact hand, and the dealer confirmed which two cards were mine, seat 10's hand was ruled dead. i felt awful. he was pissed, but cool about it. i'm not 100%, but i think he might have had a chip protecting his hand too.

The official rule is that the button cannot reraise after a bet and a call:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yY3U...e=channel_page

A check is a bet of zero. A bet is a raise from zero. A nit is no fun for anybody.

Certainly no one is going to force the all in player to show his hand to a player who has not acted yet and therefore allow him to decide to call or fold. NO ONE.

SB has action on him. He can call or fold raise if he has the chips etc.

The sequence does not say SB bets, Cutoff calls, Button (relooks at his hand and) says all in.

Cutoff is suspect here. At what point did he see the hand?

Well one problem that could arise here is the CO is holding KK. the only hand he is afraid of AA. He falsely claims that he saw the hand . . . tells the dealer he saw AA. The dealer now confirms that the player did not have AA and CO calls the all-in bet. Yeah it only works once . . . but on a big enough hand it could be an issue.

The cutoff seemed to be sincere and was trying to maintain the integrity of the game by letting the button know that he was not concealing his cards very well.

To the nits, who are here to correct every minor mistake, it could have been bet raise reraise.

The main point is whether or not the hand must be exposed to the SB, whether the CP and Buttons hands are dead or whether the game just proceeds as normal.

As PS points out, there are huge angles opening here. I have big issues with someone being able to say during a hand "I saw a red face card" and getting additional info from it. How specific does the information have to be? "I saw three spots?" "I saw black?" "I saw ace face?" Now what are you going to do? And if the player states "I saw the 5 of clubs and the 6 of clubs", what procedure does the floor now follow, and what is the result if it's the 5 of clubs and 6 of spades, or 5 of clubs and 7 of clubs... how close is close enough? How 'bout if the player refuses to say what he saw--just states he can't remember now what he saw? How 'bout if you think you spot someone getting a look at the cards, but the player denies seeing anything?

Here are 63 posts on the topic:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/27...ck-too-354324/

If he doesn't want to proceed he can throw his cards into the muck. Otherwise, action on you bro.

I had a similar situation tonight in a tournament. I was all in with A9/off and first to act. All in with 800 over the blind. Not an aggressive move by any definition. 3 callers - just as the dealer is getting ready to put out the flop it somehow comes to the dealers attention that the player to my right saw my hand (??) and the floor declared MY hand dead and mucked the hand. The dealer then flips my cards to show my A9. Mind you, we are still PRE-FLOP and all bets are IN.

I'm bewildered that the guy would draw attention to this as I'm already all in...no advantage to say ANYTHING! It happened so fast, I'm honestly not sure how it came to the dealers attention, but I think the other 2 in the hand (aggro villians) said "hey, he saw the hand!"...again not sure how it played out..but I ended up getting my WINNING hand killed. Floor said it has to be killed because "facial expression can influence the other players play". Knocked out of the tournament because I was all in with the winning hand and the player next to me allegedly saw my cards. W. T. F.

Good call or questionable floor?

I learned quite a bit from this one.

Related info, similar to OP. Hand that happened to me about 2 weeks ago at Showboat in AC.

1/2 NL. Three people in for $25 each on the flop, heading to the turn which is the 3rd club on board. After the turn is dealt, spewy drunk guy in 2 seat (SDG@2) moves all in for about $175, but thinks he is only in the hand with the 3 seat, and for his own amusement he holds up his cards facing away from himself so that everyone at the table except for the 3 seat can see them. Unfortunately, I am in the 5 seat, and still in the hand, and I now know that SDG@2 has made bottom two pair on the turn. I have not much more than SDG@2, but I tell the 3 that my next move was already determined without the info, and the information will have no effect on my play, but I encourage him to call the floor and get a ruling immediately.

Floor rules that the SDG@2's hand is still live, but will be played face up. 3 seat sees the bottom 2 pair, and slowly and reluctantly folds what must have been top pair, good kicker, possibly with one club looking to counterfeit or 4-flush. He was clearly very tempted to call SDG@2, and might have had he not seen his hand.

I felt the ruling was absolutely fair, but the revealed hand scenario may have cost me money....