You make the call
 

1/2 NL game three players in the pot. We are on the river, there is around $70 in the pot with three players in. The board reads A-8-6-6-3 (suits not important).
Player A baets $30, player B calls and player C raises to $70, player A calls and while B is thinking, C reveals his hand thinking the action is complete. He immediately realises his mistake and turns them face down.
Floor is called and the dealer explains him the situation. Player B who did not see the cards wants to see them now but floor rules that he may not, as he has only $40 left he is closing the action and player A did not have the extra information either when making the call.
So far a very good decission by the floor in my opinion, but now comes the hard part. Player A tells B: "you can fold, he has J-6" and one other player at the table confirms this. Player B now mucks his 6-2 face up.
Showdown: C has J-8, not J-6 and A shows A-T.
Who gets the pot and why?

Re: You make the call
 

Player A gets the pot because he had the best hand at showdown. Player A also gets invited to leave the poker room (not because he he lied, but because he shouldn't have said anything at all)

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Player A gets the pot because he had the best hand at showdown. Player A also gets invited to leave the poker room (not because he he lied, but because he shouldn't have said anything at all)

[/ QUOTE ]

This sounds correct to me.

Player A angleshot, and won. It sucks, but Player B did not call the bet- and mucked his cards.

/Player A does need to have his ass/karma kicked. FWIW.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Player A tells B: "you can fold, he has J-6" but does not muck his own 'losing' AT

[/ QUOTE ]

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
and one other player at the table confirms this.

[/ QUOTE ]

So somebody at the table is helping Player A angleshoot? Sounds like a game I wouldn't want to play in.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Player A gets the pot because he had the best hand at showdown. Player A also gets invited to leave the poker room (not because he he lied, but because he shouldn't have said anything at all)

[/ QUOTE ]

Almost forgot -- he can take his buddy who "confirmed" the hand with him on the way out.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Player B who did not see the cards wants to see them now but floor rules that he may not, as he has only $40 left he is closing the action and player A did not have the extra information either when making the call.

[/ QUOTE ]

That does seem fair. Well handled by the dealer, who should be commended for not inadvertently blurting out "J-8 exposed."

KITN for Player A, ldo, and one for Player C too for his ridonkulous river min-raise in the first place.

Re: You make the call
 

I'm in agreement with psand here. It sucks, but player B didn't call the final bet. I think maybe the floor should toss player A (and perhaps the other guy who spoke up) unless he agrees to push player B the pot. I also wouldn't mind if he invoked the "best interests of the game" and awarded the pot to player B. I don't sympathize with player B too much, though. He has trips on a disjointed board, he's getting like 7.5:1, and his call closes the action. Unless he was thinking about putting player A all-in, what is there to think about?

Re: You make the call
 

The guy who confirmed J6 is the one player who I think deserves a serious KITN. He wasn't involved in the hand and him opening his yap is violating one-player-to-a-hand. If he intentionally lied (hard to know), he needs to at least be moved to a new table since it seems he's working with player A. But that's the only player I have terribly serious issues with.

Player A was table talking in a way that for some reason doesn't disturb me much. Not sure why--usually I'm more sensitive about this stuff than most of you guys but it sounds like in this case I'm in the minority thinking that's acceptable (if rather scummy) behaviour.

I'm not sure if I were a player at the table I coulda kept my mouth shut when a player not in the hand confirmed incorrectly what the two cards were. Not positive what I woulda done, but I think I likely would have told player B they're both lying. If player A doesn't like it, too bad. I would absolutely have stayed quiet with A alone saying "he had J6" but I don't think I could sit there and let two players gang up against player B.

Re: You make the call
 

Player A gets pot & KITN

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
So far a very good decission by the floor in my opinion, but now comes the hard part. Player A tells B: "you can fold, he has J-6" and one other player at the table confirms this.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is where the dealer can jump in and confirm the exposed hand in some way.

b

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
The guy who confirmed J6 is the one player who I think deserves a serious KITN. He wasn't involved in the hand and him opening his yap is violating one-player-to-a-hand. If he intentionally lied (hard to know), he needs to at least be moved to a new table since it seems he's working with player A. But that's the only player I have terribly serious issues with.

Player A was table talking in a way that for some reason doesn't disturb me much. Not sure why--usually I'm more sensitive about this stuff than most of you guys but it sounds like in this case I'm in the minority thinking that's acceptable (if rather scummy) behaviour.

I'm not sure if I were a player at the table I coulda kept my mouth shut when a player not in the hand confirmed incorrectly what the two cards were. Not positive what I woulda done, but I think I likely would have told player B they're both lying. If player A doesn't like it, too bad. I would absolutely have stayed quiet with A alone saying "he had J6" but I don't think I could sit there and let two players gang up against player B.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't have a problem with player A? He has quite an advantage here if he opens his mouth. If he hadn't actually seen his hand, I could let it slide, but this would look like an obvious angle.

b

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
You don't have a problem with player A? He has quite an advantage here if he opens his mouth. If he hadn't actually seen his hand, I could let it slide, but this would look like an obvious angle.

[/ QUOTE ]
I don't like what player A is doing, but this is effectively at this point a heads-up match and there's never been any requirement that players be truthful at the table. If player A said "you can fold now, I have J6" would you be upset? I'm just not seeing "you can fold, he has J6" as much different. Yes, it's an angle in my book, but it's one of those acceptable if distasteful angles. NEVER believe what another player at the table says.

There's also the point that player B just needed to engage his brain a bit. Player B should have replied to A "if he really had J6, why don't you go ahead and muck now?" Player A is not telling B "he had J6" if A has a better hand. So clearly A is trying to sell to B that C has the best hand. Why would A do this if he can't win the pot, either? Just trying to screw C out of A's call? Not likely.

What throws a wrench in to B's ability to puzzle it out is another player throwing in the confirmation. Now he has to try to figure out why an uninvolved player would lie and since there is no obvious upside to it, I understand him pitching his cards in. He got cheated. Not so much by A lying to him, but by the uninvolved player confirming it.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Player A was table talking in a way that for some reason doesn't disturb me much. Not sure why--usually I'm more sensitive about this stuff than most of you guys but it sounds like in this case I'm in the minority thinking that's acceptable (if rather scummy) behaviour.

[/ QUOTE ]

The floor here has ruled that the player isn't entitled to know what the cards are but the player opens his mouth and tells him (its irrelevant that it was incorrect) the player shouldn't have said anything.

If he was telling the truth this is also unacceptable because its unfair to the other player for him to lose a potential caller do to this players yapping. This was still a multi-way hand and this kind of table talk to influence the action is not permitted.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
If player A said "you can fold now, I have J6" would you be upset?

[/ QUOTE ]

absolutely, because if the third player had the winner this player just cost him a call.

I have no idea how you have come to the conclusion that "his is effectively at this point a heads-up match" this is a three way pot.

Re: You make the call
 

Well alright. psandman has me convinced. Player A gets a KITN, too. I'm still much more upset with the player who confirmed the bogus info, but yeah, I've come around and agree player A was also wrong.

Re: You make the call
 

wow player A just owned the table

I wouldn't have the balls to do that, but I think it's a pretty awesome play and not angleshooting

I think it'd be angleshooting if he told him his real hand though

Re: You make the call
 

so it IS an angle for A to reveal what the correct cards were, basically telling C to call, therefore losing any claim A had on the pot...

but it's NOT an angle to tell him the 'incorrect' hand info, hoping that C will muck the best hand and A can then take the pot that would rightfully be C's...

are your parents first cousins?

Re: You make the call
 

This whole story is really [censored] up, but if a floorman was still there then the players should get a stern warning at the very least if not an escort out the door.

Re: You make the call
 

I'm not entirely sure I agree with the floor's decision here. I think that once a hand has been exposed, it needs to be shown to all players at the table if it is requested. I wouldn't have a big problem with killing player C's hand considering he was effectively only exposing his hand to just one other player in the hand. Still, this is usually not correct in a cash game. I think they should have let player A take his call back, kept the hand face up, and let action continue from there.

Once the floor made that decision and the action went down as it did, I think you have to push the pot to player A. If I was another player at the table who saw the J8, I definitely would have mentioned this when the two mentioned seeing J6. I'm surprised nobody did.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
so it IS an angle for A to reveal what the correct cards were, basically telling C to call, therefore losing any claim A had on the pot...

but it's NOT an angle to tell him the 'incorrect' hand info, hoping that C will muck the best hand and A can then take the pot that would rightfully be C's...

are your parents first cousins?

[/ QUOTE ]

C hasn't called yet

A can't just tell C B's real cards to get him to call or fold (affecting action he's not a part of) - are you kidding? however, he can falsify the cards he "thought" he saw to induce a fold from a better hand, as it affects A personally

how many times does someone "tell" someone else their cards live? all the time - are they all angleshooting? of course not. how is this any different? it isn't...

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
... however, he can falsify the cards he "thought" he saw to induce a fold from a better hand, as it affects A personally

[/ QUOTE ]

No - he can't. You cannot talk about a hand in progress when it is not heads up. Not your hand, not your opponent's hand, not the 3rd guy's hand. The floor/dealer need to protect the all-in player's action. What if A actually read the cards incorrectly and the all-in player actually has the nuts - then player A talks B out of calling or one of a dozen other scenarios. You simply can't table-talk 3-way.

[ QUOTE ]

how many times does someone "tell" someone else their cards live? all the time - are they all angleshooting? of course not. how is this any different? it isn't...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know that I would call it an "angle", but it's definitely against the rules. It is very different than the situation you describe because the pot is not heads-up. The 3rd player may be all-in, but his claim to the main pot is still affected by the decisions of the other players and his action must be protected. In this case player A may "know" the pot is never going to go to the all-in player, but you can't rule on his talk after the outcome shows this.

Re: You make the call
 

Player A broke the rule about talking during a live hand in a multiway pot. The "other player" broke the one to a hand rule.

Normally, these actions get a warning. Further violations can result in a timeout and finally expulsion. Sometime guys forget about a player in a hand and sometimes guys think the betting is over, etc. These are all innocent mistakes and should get a mild warning.

However, IMHO, both of these players breached these rules in probably the most egregious way possible. I would shove the pot to Player A since there's no rule that would take the pot away from him and send him and the other player to the curb for the day and put them in my black book.

Re: You make the call
 

I'd rule that everyone gets kicked in the nuts. Square.

The player who "confirmed" and the player who "claimed" the J6 both get an extra nut-kicking for being such morons, and for talking about the hand while action is pending.

The player who folded the best hand gets only a single nut-kicking, but he still gets one anyway for not properly protecting his hand (you NEVER take someone's word, you always want to see the hand).

Because of the unusual interference, the floor should probably award the pot to the 62, but I wouldn't count on this happening very often.

Both the players who opened their big mouths during the hand should probably receive (at the minimum) a 20 minute time-out in addition to their multiple nut-kickings.

It's just an ugly situation. There isn't a "best choice" for a solution. I'm wondering why the dealer felt sitting on his hands and saying nothing was the best choice here, another nut-kicking is probably in order there too.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Player A tells B: "you can fold, he has J-6" but does not muck his own 'losing' AT

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Irrelevant...A called BEFORE the cards were exposed.

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Player A tells B: "you can fold, he has J-6" but does not muck his own 'losing' AT

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]
Irrelevant...A called BEFORE the cards were exposed.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its irrelevant to the issue of who gets the pot and who gets thrown out, but the point the poster was making is two fold: This is a clue that the player was lying since if he was telling the truth he could have just tossed away his hand. Its also a clue that the player acted intentionally, and wasn't just mistaken.

Re: You make the call
 

Okay - first off I am surprised that you are all so quick to jump on the players that said J6 versus J8 considering how similar the two hands can look at a glance...

Since the guy apparently covered the cards up quickly enough that the third guy never saw them I think it is also safe to assume that the 2 who "outed" his hand didn't get the best look at them either. Just because the player with A-T didn't muck his hand doesn't mean he didn't actually think he was beat - not everyone is an uptight nit who has a problem showing down top 2 pair despite the fact that it is beat you know?

Re: You make the call
 

[ QUOTE ]
Just because the player with A-T didn't muck his hand doesn't mean he didn't actually think he was beat - not everyone is an uptight nit who has a problem showing down top 2 pair despite the fact that it is beat you know?

[/ QUOTE ]

I said it was a clue that that he was lying, not definitive evidence. But if I'm a player deciding what to do I definately am going to think to myself the following:

"Well he says the player had J-6 but he he is still holding onto his hand. That suggests two things either he can beat J-6 or he isn't telling the truth. If he can beat J-6 then he wouldn't tell me that the player had J-6 since that would possibly cost him a call from me, so therefore its likely that he is lying" Maybe he's not lying but I have to credit to the strong likelihood that he is.