Hand exposed by accident. What's the correct ruling?

[KLJ]

are you really a KLJ?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
This kind of reminds me of an incident where I posted my big blind and the dealer dealt my first card, but skipped me on the second card! I was talking to someone behind me at the time and didn't notice it until someone had raised and someone else 3-bet. I thought this should've been a clear mideal, but the floor ruled I was SOL. It was my responsibility to protect my hand even though it was clearly a dealer error. I had to keep the blind money out there with no hand! Most on here agreed with the decision and after it was properly explained, I had to as well.

It's a slightly different situation, but one that tells how the onus is on the player to pay attention and protect his hand at all times. Otherwise, you suffer the consequences. This makes sense to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dealers and players make errors in procedure. Basically the rules try to do the least possible harm in correcting these errors. The basic point here is killing the hand after there already has been action in two or more spots is much worse than killing your hand alone.

~ Rick

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Most couldn't remember this ever happening exactly like this and it was the subject of conversation for hours afterward .

I raised, the button cold-called, and the sb started contemplating. As he did, he exposed one of his cards to the button. Being very honest, the button mentions that he clearly saw a card.

Even though I appreciated his honesty, I didn't think it was fair that he knew an exposed card that I did not. The sb wasn't in the hand yet, but the button definitely was.

The floor was called and asked the button what card he saw. He correctly identified it and the floor ruled that the card must be exposed. I thought it was the right ruling, since the sb has a responsibility to protect his cards. But one player in particular (not in the hand), had a real problem with it...

What if someone now wanted to take a shot and just declare out of the blue that he saw someone's hand whether he really did or didn't? Suppose he said, "I saw a black ace"? The floor is called and it's determined there was no black ace. That would be an advantage as well.

I admit, it's hard to refute that logic, although I think it would be a simple matter to implement a severe penalty upon a player for doing this.

Anyway, what was the correct ruling for this hand? Should the card have been exposed? Or should the hand have proceeded with the button knowing this card, but not me? Thanks.

Btw- The reason few have ever seen this situation is because few players (who were the button), would be honest enough admit to seeing the card. So I really felt bad. It was as if he (and the sb) were being punished for his honesty.

[/ QUOTE ]

The smarter yet still decent thing for the button to have done is keep quiet this hand and politely tell the player who was in the SB to protect his cards better a little later (perhaps a few hands later).

Otherwise I like Dynasty's response here.

~ Rick

[lmcjaho]

[ QUOTE ]
The smarter yet still decent thing for the button to have done is keep quiet this hand and politely tell the player who was in the SB to protect his cards better a little later (perhaps a few hands later).

Otherwise I like Dynasty's response here.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

So you have no trouble with the Button having info to act on (SB's holdings) that BB doesn't while both are still in the hand???

[bav]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The smarter yet still decent thing for the button to have done is keep quiet this hand and politely tell the player who was in the SB to protect his cards better a little later (perhaps a few hands later).

Otherwise I like Dynasty's response here.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

So you have no trouble with the Button having info to act on (SB's holdings) that BB doesn't while both are still in the hand???

[/ QUOTE ]
It's not ideal. But the very few times I've seen a card during multi-way play I do about what Rick suggests--keep quiet until the hand is over. It's just so disruptive to tell someone during a hand when it's multi-way that you've seen a card, I don't do it. Technically and ethically it may be the correct thing to do, but if you open your mouth there is going to be some yelling and the floor will be called and SOMEONE at the table is going to be very annoyed at you and the floor--either the player who doesn't have the info and is told he can't have it, or the player who has accidentally exposed a card and is told to turn it over for all to see. You instantly become a bad person to someone, and it has a high probability of spoiling the mood of the table. And all things considered, it's not MY fault that I got a look at someone's cards so if my opening my mouth ends up hurting me I have to think through the pro's and con's and this is just one of those cases where I land on the side of evil.

On the other hand, heads-up I have told my opponent during play "you just showed me an ace" when he didn't protect his hand (and didn't seem to be intentionally trying to show me). And I even once told a youngin' who after I bet was trying to make a decision and was lifting his cards up and down and up and down over and over "you just exposed your pocket aces". That's such a HUGE advantage I don't feel right playing on heads-up without telling 'em.

If there was a graceful way to deal with it in a multi-way pot that didn't always cause furor, I'd be happy to do it.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The smarter yet still decent thing for the button to have done is keep quiet this hand and politely tell the player who was in the SB to protect his cards better a little later (perhaps a few hands later).

Otherwise I like Dynasty's response here.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

So you have no trouble with the Button having info to act on (SB's holdings) that BB doesn't while both are still in the hand???

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that "no trouble" doesn't reflect my comment. Dynasty pointed out the option that is the lessor of evils and often that's the best that can be done.

I think it's best for the button to hold off saying anything for practical reasons; his statement was bound to lead to a messy decision.

This time I like bav's response from about thirty minutes ago.

~ Rick

[Kevin J]

Thanks Rick -

I agree it would've been much less messy had the button just kept quiet. But you can't undo what's already been done...

Now that he's announced seeing a card, how can you (as the floor), justify this advantage to the other players who are aleady IN the hand AND... Have money committed?

It seems that those against exposing the card have a problem with the unfairness caused to the sb (who accidently exposed his card), and I don't think anyone disagrees that it sucks to be him now. However, as harsh as it might sound, that's just too bad. It's HIS responsibility to protect his hand and he failed to do so. Others should not be penalized or placed at a disadvantage for his mistake. If he's got a good hand, it's unfortunate, but the card should be exposed to all. At least that's the way I see it, until someone convinces me otherwise, which hasn't happened so far.

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
If there was a graceful way to deal with it in a multi-way pot that didn't always cause furor, I'd be happy to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the right thing to do is to let the table know you saw a card -- and then let the dealer &/or table decide what to do about it.

However... if you think it's a card that's not likely to change your action or the action of the others in the pot, then you might risk not telling him right away. If, however, you are wrong, and it ends up being a big factor in the way you end up playing the hand, then you're now in a huge quagmire -- probably having caused more harm by not revealing it earlier.

I know that if someone saw one of my cards, and they are in the hand, then I want to know right then.

On a related note, I've been trying to find out how to best protect my hand while looking at my cards to keep anyone from seeing them. I'm doing the whole barely lift the corner, covering with both hands -- but a little testing showed me that someone to my left that has their head a bit further back than mine -- can look over & see the cards. Any ideas on how to improve this?

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks Rick -

I agree it would've been much less messy had the button just kept quiet. But you can't undo what's already been done...

Now that he's announced seeing a card, how can you (as the floor), justify this advantage to the other players who are aleady IN the hand AND... Have money committed?

It seems that those against exposing the card have a problem with the unfairness caused to the sb (who accidently exposed his card), and I don't think anyone disagrees that it sucks to be him now. However, as harsh as it might sound, that's just too bad. It's HIS responsibility to protect his hand and he failed to do so. Others should not be penalized or placed at a disadvantage for his mistake. If he's got a good hand, it's unfortunate, but the card should be exposed to all. At least that's the way I see it, until someone convinces me otherwise, which hasn't happened so far.

[/ QUOTE ]

If I came to the table as a floor the first thing I'd do is freeze the action and make sure everyone knows the hand will play on unless I make a decision otherwise (i.e., you don't want a clusterf__k of further exposing of cards in an attempt to "force a flustered floorman to declare a misdeal").

Then I'd gather facts. Let's assume at this point I'm told the story in the OP.

Since SB hasn't acted yet I'd ask the button to keep quiet regarding the seen card until I make a decision.

I'd tell the SB that if he plays on at least one player indicates he knows one of his cards.

I'd tell the button he can chose to specifically identify the card or not but the SB doesn't have to confirm his correctness if he intends to play on.

I'd tell the table that if the SB folds both his cards will be exposed for all to see out of fairness (trying to find the one card would confuse the issue even more); if the SB chooses to play they won't be exposed since this would put the SB in an even worse position (these words would make it likely the SB would fold).

If the SB plays on I'd monitor the play of the hand. This one can't be walked away from.

Of course this is what I write after being able to do some lengthy contemplation. In the real world I'd be hurried and probably do much worse as would most floor.

~ Rick

[KipBond]

[ QUOTE ]
If I came to the table ...

[/ QUOTE ]
Great solution.