No reason to have any listed rules just let the floor do whatever they want then.

I can confirm this... I lived in that area for a number of years. I've seen a guy turn his hand face up and tank for 3-4 minutes contemplating a call(where no action is behind).

Rulings are different all over, even within the same state.

This move is made in desparation by the player. I'm pretty sure we've all been there where we make a significant raise or all in with AA only to get 2 callers immediately to our left. Last thing we want is a whole table calling with "odds" to win. Most of us know better than to expose our hands, but it doesn't mean we can't relate.

A warning from the floor that the next incident will result in a daily/weekly ban seems appropriate. The hand is live.

Stated rules are usually the result of applying "do what's fair" to specific situations. Since the situations recur, it is useful to have a specific rule so you get a consistent result.

But the overarching principle is still "do what's fair". So when it would be unfair to enforce a rule or something isn't covered, the floor can do what is fair.

Please respond in a mature and reasonable manner to the (IMO) valid arguments I offered. Let me repeat them here:

In a tournament yes, that would be the ruling, but in a cash game, while it is ethically wrong because it kills the action behind him, 9 out of 10 times there are no rules against this.

Both the above are wrong.

I would never kill the hand, even in a tournament. Tournament rules specify that the hand is NOT dead. The player gets penalized after the hand, usually time away from the table.

In a cash game, multi way pot, this is not going to be tolerated. As described in the OP, the player would be asked to leave after the hand is over.

Heads up in a cash game you can do whatever you want but multiway while action is still going on it's collusion and each card room is different. Some will kill the hand some will let him play it out face up with no more action.

Please explain how OP's example fits "collusion".

While I agree that the guy's actions 'benefit' the Button, SB, and BB while perhaps harming the initial raiser, "collusion" is not the proper word for it.

You don't know who he knows at the table, sounds fishy either you call it an angle shoot or collusion it's all sematics.

It depends on the poker room. I am not familiar with Hustler's policy. Where I play, it would not kill his hand. His hand would be played face up for the remainder of the hand. If he had chips, he could raise if he wishes. In many casinos, any player may expose one or both of his cards at any time. The only problem here is if it considered to be collusionary with other players.

Action from last night in the Hustler 5/5NL: I raise ATs UTG, shortstack on the button and BB both call. Flop is AT6r, I bet half-pot, shortstack shoves $100; BB tanks, then raises to $500 with $1000 behind. I shove about $580 but didn't realize the BB hadn't called yet. She asks if I have AT, so I said "yes" and turned my cards up; she tanks again and finally calls the extra $80 with A8o [LOL]. Button also had ATs, so we chopped the main, and I [obv] hold up for the $1000 side pot. Sweet!

Nobody complained about my cards going face-up early, as it was an obvious error that should have cost me $80. I guess she was planning on runners for the straight or 8-boat? Funniest part was one guy at the table saying she was priced in for the extra $80 even after seeing my cards.

This.

Hand is not dead, but it is his last hand of the night. Player gets rest of night off and a KITN on the way out the door.