Was I justified or out of line

[KampfHase]

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
[ QUOTE ]
Why don't you try to put together an argument, matching this rule to the OP's scenario. Then, use that to convince me that Bob Ciaffone would point to the "show both cards" rule mentioned and say "Yes, I want the second-best hand to get the pot because the winner only showed the important card. That's why I wrote the rule"

[/ QUOTE ]

The rule says that you have to show all cards to win any part of the pot. Put another way this means that you can not win any part of the pot if you do not show all your cards. Period. So, if you muck part of your hand at the showdown, which implies that you do not show all your cards (which is exactly what this guy in question did by showing/"waving" the ace only), you kill your own hand. He showed one card only (not enough to win since you have to show all of em!) and mucked the whole hand afterwards. The only live hand was the tabled KQ.
It has nothing to do with "award the pot to the second-best hand", because technically that so-called second-best hand (KQ) is the only live hand at the moment (making it actually the best live and valid hand).
I think this matches the situation, does it not?

[ QUOTE ]
How can it be hypothetical when we're talking about a situation that happened?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you got me wrong. I meant that it is hypothetical trying to suppose what Robert would say to this. How do you know how he wanted this situation to be handled? Your only source is the text. And the text says: show all your cards to be entitled to win. And I suppose that's how Robert wanted it to be ruled here.

[ QUOTE ]
Okay, so what's your threshold where being a nit on a rule entitles second-best to the pot, here- $150? $100?

[/ QUOTE ]
My threshold would be $00.01
As mentioned above, technically, there was no other hand entitled to win the pot, because that hand in question was (partly) mucked by the player and therefore dead.

If one didn't like this very rule, or if one found it uncomfortable playing according to it, one should simply erase it. But once it's set, one should apide it.

I think this very poker group would do best erasing this rule to prevent trouble and so-called "nit picking". [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]