You Make The Call
 

3 players to the river. On the river BB has $100. MP has $500. Button has $500. Board is 55562 rainbow.

BB goes all in for his remaining $100. MP goes AI for his $500. At this point BB for some strange reason decides to flash his 5 to the table and says "save your money boys." Button immediately calls and tables JJ while MP tables TT and starts yelling at the BB.

You're the Floor. What's your ruling?

</font><font color="white"> This happened the other night at our home game and we had to make a ruling but I want to find out what the consensus here is. It was an ugly situation and we probably lost a regular because of it. <font color="white"> </font>

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
3 players to the river. On the river BB has $100. MP has $500. Button has $500. Board is 55562 rainbow.

BB goes all in for his remaining $100. MP goes AI for his $500. At this point BB for some strange reason decides to flash his 5 to the table and says "save your money boys." Button immediately calls and tables JJ while MP tables TT and starts yelling at the BB.

You're the Floor. What's your ruling?

[/ QUOTE ]



Depending on his history the guy flashing the 5 needs to either receive a stern warning not to do that again or needs to be shown the door. The size of the pot matters also. If there is $10k in the center when this happens it is not a big deal, if it happens with $100 in the middle it is huge.

Re: You Make The Call
 

BB should lose the pot for flashing with action left to come. Split the pot between 2 remaining players.

Re: You Make The Call
 

I would rule the BB hand dead, and change the AI from MP to a call (giving him back $400) and then award the pot to BTN.

Re: You Make The Call
 

BB gets the main pot.
Button gets the side pot.

Assuming this is a cash game

If BB is a first time offender he gets a stern warning. If he is a repeat offender BB gets invited to cash out his chips and leave.

If this is a tournament

BB gets a penalty. Again depending on whether this is a first offense or a problem player the penalty might rane from 1 orbit around the table to disqualification.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3 players to the river. On the river BB has $100. MP has $500. Button has $500. Board is 55562 rainbow.

BB goes all in for his remaining $100. MP goes AI for his $500. At this point BB for some strange reason decides to flash his 5 to the table and says "save your money boys." Button immediately calls and tables JJ while MP tables TT and starts yelling at the BB.

You're the Floor. What's your ruling?

[/ QUOTE ]



Depending on his history the guy flashing the 5 needs to either receive a stern warning not to do that again or needs to be shown the door. The size of the pot matters also. If there is $10k in the center when this happens it is not a big deal, if it happens with $100 in the middle it is huge.

[/ QUOTE ]

Care to explain the last sentence? I don't really understand.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Care to explain the last sentence? I don't really understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it was a great big game there wasn't anything funny going on, he wanted to let them save the little bit on the end and didn't understand the implications of showing it. If these bets were large for the game it becomes more likely he wanted to let the JJ know he wasn't going to see 4 5s for the side pot.

edit to add: I am assuming a cash game here as touranments have specific penalty rules in place to deal with this sort of thing.

Re: You Make The Call
 

According to Robert's Rules of Poker, in the Poker Etiquette Section: "The following actions are improper, and grounds for warning, suspending, or barring a violator: ... Revealing the contents of a live hand in a multihanded pot before the betting is complete."

http://www.pokercoach.us/RobsPkrRules11.doc

The situation in the OP seems to be applicable here since the hand that was (partially) revealed was live, it was a multihanded pot, and there was still action pending.

Declaring the BB's hand dead, as suggested above by chucky and TheMuppet doesn't seem to be an option.

Re: You Make The Call
 

The ruling is award BB the main pot and button the side pot. As well, BB would get a warning or a penalty of some sort. Any compensation or departure from that ruling would simply be between those three players and their conscience.

In a casino, this may be easier but since you described this as happening a home game, it sure does have an impact as you seem to imply.

It doesn't seem to me that button would have folded if he didn't see that 5. If it had been me and this was a game with my buddies, I might have shipped half of the $400 I won from MP back to him.

This situation is not really as bad as it first seems. However, there could be a situation where it would be patently clear that one player benefitted. For example, if button had the second nuts like a K high flush and BB flashed the A, then button now knows for sure that he has MP beat. In a situation like that, as the host I might ask that button and MP take back their $400 or have BB ship his main pot to MP.

In a good home game, you can only hope that all players involved recognize the damage of such an action and find a fair way of spreading the money in the pot around.

Re: You Make The Call
 

That's an ugly one. I'm not sure right this second what the proper ruling would be.

The bb certainly should be kicked square in the nuts for this one. If this was a tourney I'd penalize the bb with significant time away from the table, at least 20 minutes or 2 full rounds depending on house policies. If it were a live casino game I'd have this guy in the back reaming him a new one.

The problem, obviously, is that JJ had very significant information before he acts that he was not entitled to have, and TT did not have when he acted.

A possible solution would be to declare that action was dead at the point where the bb exposed his cards, and to disallow any side pot action. I'm reserving this being my "final answer, Regis" until I see some replies and ask around some.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
If it were a live casino game I'd have this guy in the back reaming him a new one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously?

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Care to explain the last sentence? I don't really understand.

[/ QUOTE ]

If it was a great big game there wasn't anything funny going on, he wanted to let them save the little bit on the end and didn't understand the implications of showing it. If these bets were large for the game it becomes more likely he wanted to let the JJ know he wasn't going to see 4 5s for the side pot.

edit to add: I am assuming a cash game here as touranments have specific penalty rules in place to deal with this sort of thing.


[/ QUOTE ]

This was a cash game and there was only $140 in the pot before the river because the flop came up 555 and everyone slow played their hands. On the turn the BB and MP checked and button bet and was smooth called by both. So the big river bet and call by MP and button was worth the extra cash.

I'd like to hear more replies based on this updated info. We had to make a difficult decision and there were some angry people.

Re: You Make The Call
 

According to my interpretation of the rules of poker the main pot should be awarded to the BB. The side pot should be awarded to the Button.

Any other decision to me would be subjective. I try not to have to make those types of decisions, that's why the rules come in handy. Unless there was already a house rule or precedent for killing hands that are exposed prematurely or voiding action as a result of exposed hands there really isn't anything you can do in this situation other than abide by the rules.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
This was a cash game and there was only $140 in the pot before the river because the flop came up 555 and everyone slow played their hands. On the turn the BB and MP checked and button bet and was smooth called by both. So the big river bet and call by MP and button was worth the extra cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case I would strongly consider 86ing both the all-in player and the JJ player. Depends on if there is any history relationship between those players. A reasonable solution if this really was an "honest mistake" would be for the all-in player to pay the TT $400. There isn't any rule requiring him to do so, but that would be an honorable way to settle it.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This was a cash game and there was only $140 in the pot before the river because the flop came up 555 and everyone slow played their hands. On the turn the BB and MP checked and button bet and was smooth called by both. So the big river bet and call by MP and button was worth the extra cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

In this case I would strongly consider 86ing both the all-in player and the JJ player. Depends on if there is any history relationship between those players. A reasonable solution if this really was an "honest mistake" would be for the all-in player to pay the TT $400. There isn't any rule requiring him to do so, but that would be an honorable way to settle it.

[/ QUOTE ]

AFAIK there is no history between these two and the way the end of the hand played out it was so fast I doubt that the BB really had any idea what he was doing. He said after that he was just having some fun and didn't realize what had happened. I was sitting across from him and it looked to me like he was just being a jerk and bragging but when the guy with JJ insta-called I knew we were going to be in for some trouble.

We don't have any written rules but because we've been playing together for so long we all have a "baseline" of what is proper etiquette and we are all experienced poker players and it was clear to us that BB crossed the line by quite a bit. After separating BB from the other 2 (the button was also furious because he expected to get paid) and getting him into another room for his protection we all sat down and discussed the action and here's what we came up with:

BB was forced to forfeit his hand and all the money he put in. Button and MP split the pot. This wasn't the optimum poker solution but it was really a crappy situation with some big tempers and angry people and a couple of us felt that if BB was awarded any part of the action then he might have ended up in a stretcher.

At first BB was upset but I could see he wasn't really feeling that badly about the decision and he realized the stupidity of his actions. MP is the table fish and button isn't that far behind. A few of us really wanted to appease them, MP especially. Unfortunately, after the game MP announced he was through with our game and he hasn't shown up since but two of the guys who are friends with him say he just needs time.

Re: You Make The Call
 

Sounds like you guys made a subjective ruling and played favorites based on your own personal gain (appeasing the fish). This is why as the host/floor, you should stick to the rules.

Of all the guys to take this ruling poorly, I see no reason why MP is the one to be upset here. It confuses me because he's clearly the one who benefited the most from your decision. I really would like to hear what he thinks should have happened instead.

As it stands, without being there, I think that making decisions to arbitrarily kill winning hands is a poor decision.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, after the game MP announced he was through with our game

[/ QUOTE ]

Does MP actually think he's entitled to any part of this pot other than what he put in despite having the worst hand on all streets against all players? Even if the mistake didn't happen and JJ folded he would have lost the money already in the pot right? Or does he think it's a bad precedent?

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Unfortunately, after the game MP announced he was through with our game

[/ QUOTE ]

Does MP actually think he's entitled to any part of this pot other than what he put in despite having the worst hand on all streets against all players? Even if the mistake didn't happen and JJ folded he would have lost the money already in the pot right? Or does he think it's a bad precedent?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that the logic behind his claim is wrong but we made a group decision to set a precedent. BB is an extremely aggressive player and he has been known to try and pull a few angles but nothing malicious. BB is also the games host and he is the one who started it a long time ago so we felt justified in penalizing him harshly.

I really posted this to see if there was something glaring that we missed and based on the responses, it doesn't seem like it.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like you guys made a subjective ruling and played favorites based on your own personal gain (appeasing the fish). This is why as the host/floor, you should stick to the rules.

[/ QUOTE ]

Some home games are more structured than others and this one in particular is very laid back and casual with long time players and every now and then a new player will join. It's not a big group and we've all played at our local card rooms for many years so we know the ropes. Even the noobs aren't really because we don't want the game to degenerate into a free for all. So when I say that one is a fish and the other is a guppie I use these terms relatively.

Honestly, we were all taken aback by the level of anger and the threats of violence.

Edit to add: I forgot to mention that we felt that if we had awarded BB any part of the pot he would have been beaten to a pulp by MP. Personally I think BB was ind of relieved that we ruled that way but he hasn't said anything about it since and we have made a "gentleman's agreement" not to discuss it. He's kind of an odd character and has no social life outside of poker but he is a consistent winner playing locally.

Re: You Make The Call
 

The only thing that was affected by the flashing of the card was whether the button called the 2 allins on the river. MP would have lost the main pot either way. To give him part of the main pot seems absurd.

It seems reasonable for BB to either pay the button the amount that he would have won in the side pot ($400) or forfeit the main pot to the button, whichever was less.

I'm guessing the main pot was over $400, so I think it should have gone down like this.
MP loses his $100 on the river and whatever else he put in previously. Button loses the $100 on the river and whatever else he put in previously. BB wins the main pot, which he still deserves to win. Now instead of MP paying button the $400 for the side pot, BB has to pay that instead.

This solution was the best case scenario for MP (if button had called him anyway, he would have gone broke), the best case scenario for button (if he had called MP anyway, he would have won $400 in the side pot), and BB pays a penalty for screwing up the action.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Edit to add: I forgot to mention that we felt that if we had awarded BB any part of the pot he would have been beaten to a pulp by MP.

[/ QUOTE ]
Sounds like MP got the best deal because he made physical threats. I guess I can see how this would affect things, but it doesn't make it right.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
The only thing that was affected by the flashing of the card was whether the button called the 2 allins on the river. MP would have lost the main pot either way. To give him part of the main pot seems absurd.

It seems reasonable for BB to either pay the button the amount that he would have won in the side pot ($400) or forfeit the main pot to the button, whichever was less.

I'm guessing the main pot was over $400, so I think it should have gone down like this.
MP loses his $100 on the river and whatever else he put in previously. Button loses the $100 on the river and whatever else he put in previously. BB wins the main pot, which he still deserves to win. Now instead of MP paying button the $400 for the side pot, BB has to pay that instead.

This solution was the best case scenario for MP (if button had called him anyway, he would have gone broke), the best case scenario for button (if he had called MP anyway, he would have won $400 in the side pot), and BB pays a penalty for screwing up the action.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think that MP deserves to get the "best case scenario." He did have the worst hand and having played with these guys long enough I am 90% certain that button would have called anyways. IMO, MP gets some protection because of that 10% uncertainty.

I also have a strong belief that only the money in play should be awarded and people shouldn't be required to take money from their pockets to pay off. With only $140 in the pot BB, under your solution would have had to pay out another $260 or so.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think that MP deserves to get the "best case scenario." He did have the worst hand and having played with these guys long enough I am 90% certain that button would have called anyways. IMO, MP gets some protection because of that 10% uncertainty.

[/ QUOTE ]
you're solution gave him half of the money in the pot, which is more than some protection
[ QUOTE ]

I also have a strong belief that only the money in play should be awarded and people shouldn't be required to take money from their pockets to pay off. With only $140 in the pot BB, under your solution would have had to pay out another $260 or so.

[/ QUOTE ] Under my solution the pot was $100*3 + whatever was in the pot before the river. If this was somehow less than $400, then the BB gives the button whatever the size of the pot was.

The idea behind my solution, is everything plays out the same except for the action that needed protection. We nullify the side pot, since it wasn't fair to the MP player. Then BB pays the button what the button would have won from MP in the side pot.

Edit For more clarity:
say the pot size was $100 going into the river.
I would interpret the action as:
BB bets $100 (all-in), MP calls $100, Button calls $100.
BB wins $400 with quads.

BB pays button $400 for compromising the action for the side pot. MP saves $400 because the action for the side pot was compromised.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
We don't have any written rules but because we've been playing together for so long we all have a "baseline" of what is proper etiquette and we are all experienced poker players and it was clear to us that BB crossed the line by quite a bit. After separating BB from the other 2 (the button was also furious because he expected to get paid) and getting him into another room for his protection we all sat down and discussed the action and here's what we came up with:

BB was forced to forfeit his hand and all the money he put in. Button and MP split the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is why I don't play home games for significant money. Downright ridiculous "solution".

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is why I don't play home games for significant money. Downright ridiculous "solution".

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to agree. Rottersod, you seem like a reasonable guy and you were the one facing the situation, but this solution does look really weird and I'm uncomfortable about some of it being based on stuff like threats of violence.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
I forgot to mention that we felt that if we had awarded BB any part of the pot he would have been beaten to a pulp by MP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with other posters, this "reason" is certainly a concern for me. Who is this psycho that you guys play with? Are the stakes too high for this guy that he has to resort to violence and threats when he loses a pot with the worst hand against 2 other players?

I'd be glad MP doesn't feel like coming back. In fact, if I were the host, I'd make sure he never did come back. It sounds like he's bad for the game and can't afford to lose the money anyway.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is why I don't play home games for significant money. Downright ridiculous "solution".

[/ QUOTE ]

Have to agree. Rottersod, you seem like a reasonable guy and you were the one facing the situation, but this solution does look really weird and I'm uncomfortable about some of it being based on stuff like threats of violence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, it wasn't just me facing the situation. There were 9 of us there that night and we all had an equal say in things except for the 3 involved in the hand.

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We don't have any written rules but because we've been playing together for so long we all have a "baseline" of what is proper etiquette and we are all experienced poker players and it was clear to us that BB crossed the line by quite a bit. After separating BB from the other 2 (the button was also furious because he expected to get paid) and getting him into another room for his protection we all sat down and discussed the action and here's what we came up with:

BB was forced to forfeit his hand and all the money he put in. Button and MP split the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is why I don't play home games for significant money. Downright ridiculous "solution".

[/ QUOTE ]

The money wasn't that significant. It wasn't like an extra $400 was going to break anyone and everyone seems OK with the ruling - even BB who hasn't complained. MP is upset just because of GP (general principles for those of you who are acronym challenged), but he really did get a good deal. I posted this here because I wanted to see if we completely missed something obvious but it doesn't look like we did.

Thanks for everyone's replies.

RS

Re: You Make The Call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I forgot to mention that we felt that if we had awarded BB any part of the pot he would have been beaten to a pulp by MP.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with other posters, this "reason" is certainly a concern for me. Who is this psycho that you guys play with? Are the stakes too high for this guy that he has to resort to violence and threats when he loses a pot with the worst hand against 2 other players?

I'd be glad MP doesn't feel like coming back. In fact, if I were the host, I'd make sure he never did come back. It sounds like he's bad for the game and can't afford to lose the money anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess you like to play poker in a sterile environment? Some of like games that are edgier and can handle table talk and loudmouths. Violence isn't tolerated but almost anything short of it would be acceptable as long as the guy who threatens it realizes we outnumber him. Anyways, I think you are making too big a deal out of that part of it. I just added it in to spice things up a bit. It wasn't really a huge factor in our decisions that night.

Re: You Make The Call
 

I would never come back if the player who threatened violence was not publicly banned. Your precedent is now to make threats of violence to win. Why bother with the poker and just host fight night?

Flashing cards while still in a hand did affect the button's call, but what would you rule if the button folded?

I would award the BB the main pot and the button the side pot. I would then cash out the BB. If the MP threatens violence, I would tell him to leave and/or call the cops. MP is permabanned. BB may be temp or permabanned, too.