[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
His reasoning was that the practice was often being used to needle or tease an opponent who folded to a bet and wasn't good for the lower limit games, especially the lower limit no limit games.

I thought he had a reasonable point. What would be your counter-argument?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see it as needling. Could you give an example of a player showing one card, in a way to offend/incite somebody?]

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that I was soliciting counter-arguments, and only thought the expansion of the rule was reasonable (when speaking to the shift manager) without thinking about it much prior to the conversation. That said, I've seen where it is used as a needle, but would be hard put to come up with an example right now. Perhaps others can.



[ QUOTE ]
I see cardrooms put up with the most vulgar trash talk. Of all the things they could do to stop needling, this seems the most misguided.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, although putting a stop to the trash talk is a big nut to crack given the influence of TV.



[ QUOTE ]
The only reason I don't like the rule is, it slows down the game, in the same way as the IWTSTH does. Players who couldn't care less what that guy was holding, suddenly sit up in their chairs, and cry, "IWTSTH! He opened the door to my right to see it, so I want to see it! Dealer, stop the game, and turn up his cards!" THIS creates far more ill will at the table, than any alleged "needle" that showing a single card could ever create.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point again. Perhaps the better policy would be to move toward getting rid of the IWTSTH rule all together, as so many of us believe and have discussed on this forum!

Thanks for the input.

~ Rick