Daniel Negreanu is WRONG!

[Matt Savage]

I usually respect Daniel's opinions but I do feel that he is way off here. In his most recent blog entry he challenged Tournament Directors to get rid of the the rule that you cannot expose cards during a hand when there is still action pending. Here is the quote from Daniel "Then I squeezed my cards. After squeezing the first card, I revealed it to Sammy. Remember now, this is REAL poker, with no interference from tournament directors that are trying to take the psychological aspect of the game away from us. Frankly, it's a tragedy what these tournament directors are doing. The players need to unite and get rid of this ridiculous rule that prevents players from showing their hole cards in heads up pots. I don't know of ANY professional player who thinks this rule has any value. Ask anyone from Phil Hellmuth to Howard Lederer and they will tell you that the right to show a card is part of the game."

First of all it was during High Stakes Poker and NOT a tournament, I agree that in a live game showing cards is a legal move. He then goes on to say "Taking this out if the game is so unnerving to me. What's next, no speaking at the table? No prodding for information? Then finally, no bluffing at all? It's absurd! I would happily challenge Matt Savage, Jack McLelland, and any other tournament director in favor of this rule to a public debate on the merits of it. The only reason I've ever heard them give is that it prevents people from "needling" their opponents. Give me a break! We are poker players here and don't need anyone out there to hold our hand. It's free information, and if the guy doesn't want to look, he doesn't have to.

Has anyone ever heard of a poker player getting upset, and thinking it was "unfair" that an opponent, in a heads up pot, showed him a card either during or after the hand? Are you kidding me? It's time that we rethink some of the rules and ask ourselves if they really make any sense at all. This one, the "how one show all" rule, clearly doesn't."
He is so WRONG here if he thinks that showing another player cards during the hand should be legal in tournaments. BTW, he also feels that you should be able to say whatever you want during the play of the hand. So I suppose he thinks what Jamie Gold did during the 2006 WSOP Main Event should also be allowed? Even Norman Chad and Lon Mechron could see that he was breaking the rules by claiming what he had in his hand with action pending. Here is just some of the problems that could arise if this was allowed. Let's suppose Daniel was involved with a friend of his and shows him the best hand before that person calls, should that be allowed Daniel? When you are in a tournament you are never heads up until there are two players left and TD's should not have to make constant judgment calls about whether there is collusion or not and that would definitely happen if this was allowed.

David Lamb writes "Remind Daniel that tournament player's are on a clock and the inevitable inequity occurs anytime one player takes a long time to do the mental sparring- showing or talking about their hand to induce action. It becomes more inequitable if the pro takes a long time messing with the amateur but not their contemporaries. In fact, it seems like allowing rules that favor the seasoned pro and prime time TV are more important than maintaining an even playing field."
While we all know it makes for great TV and it is what the Steve Lipscomb's of the world want we cannot make this concession in tournaments.
He mentions needling as the only reason we as TD's use that rule and that is just another reason to stop players from exposing their hole cards verbally or by showing cards. Could you imagine if players were allowed to show cards when they wanted to needle someone, some players would do this constantly and only to particular players. We need to create an event playing field and showing cards becomes totally subjective. I love Daniel but I would welcome a debate with him on the subject........BRING IT ON!
I welcome your opinions and thoughts on this topic, please send your emails to Matt@SavageTournaments.com.

Matt Savage

[Cornell Fiji]

Matt,
I believe that in a heads up pot when one player is all in the player who is contemplating the call should be allowed to show his cards to the player who is all in.

This allows for the the player who is being put to the test to gain information via psychological warfare something that is, and should always be, a part of poker.

The player who shoved all in should not be permitted to show his card to his opponent because doing so would make it easier for those players to collude.

I do not agree with the wording of your poll. I do not believe that a player should be permitted to show his cards "at any time" rather that he should be permitted to show his cards if his opponent is all in and it is a heads up pot. I also do not believe that it is "too subjective"

FWIW I voted for the first option as I do not believe that Daniel is wrong in this instance.

[Matt Savage]

[ QUOTE ]
Matt,
I believe that in a heads up pot when one player is all in the player who is contemplating the call should be allowed to show his cards to the player who is all in.

This allows for the the player who is being put to the test to gain information via psychological warfare something that is, and should always be, a part of poker.

The player who shoved all in should not be permitted to show his card to his opponent because doing so would make it easier for those players to collude.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see your point but again it is way too subjective for an even playing field. Can you imagine the amount of "hollywood" that would take place if this was allowed?

Matt

[Cornell Fiji]

So is your argument that you do not think that players should be permitted to show their cards because you want to speed up the game or is your argument that players should not be permitted to do so because it could lead to collusion which is unfair to the other players at the table and the other players in the tournament.

Unfortunately, hollywooding has become a significant part of the game. You see it when you walk by a 1/2nl game and the guy in the ipod and sunglasses stands up and waits for 5 minutes talking about how sick his decision is before mucking his middle pair on the river. This is created by the TV side of poker. The ESPN announcers have made it seem cool to do a song and dance before making your decisions and because those players are more entertaining for the TV audience the casual player has begun to think that this is how the game should be played.

The fact of the matter is however, that in a $10,000 buy in event players should be able to use all of the tools in their aresenal before making a decision for all of their chips. Does this slow up the game? Of course it does. But, does this allow for players to make better decisions and to get their moneys worth in big buy in events? I would argue that it does that too and that the rules should protect players who are trying to make correct decisions.

There is currently a rule in place where any player at the table can call the clock on a player who is taking too long to make his decision. If someone shows their opponent a card and then does a song and dance for a few minutes anyone is in their right to call the clock on that player. It should not be your priority (in my oppinion) to rush the game, rather it should be your priority to protect the integrity of the game and to allow players to play their hand in the best way possible (provided that they are not cheating the other players through collusion or something similar.)

[westhoff]

I'm still not sure on this and would love to hear you and Daniel debate this. I'm thinking this should definitely be allowed in cash games, but I'm not sure about tournaments.

[TStoneMBD]

you're right that allowing people to show cards makes it easier for people to collude in tournaments and chip dump.

the counterarguement to this of course is that people who collude like this in tournaments would set up signals anyway.

however, allowing this rule allows colluders to justify their collusion. ie, a friend of the chip leader is on the bubble and to help his buddy out, the chip leader shows his hand after going allin to give his buddy the chance to double up if ahead or fold if behind. when players accuse the leader of collusion he can simply say that he didn't break any rules, showing cards is allowed. it shouldn't be the tc's responsibility to determine if this is collusion as the chip leader could just lie about his intent of showing his card(s).

I think the current rule is the right one. I see no practical reason for why "pros" need to show other players their cards midhand.

[Matt Savage]

Remember, Daniel thinks you should be able to show your cards or disclose your hand whenever you want. Strangely enough, I can only remember having this complaint twice during my three years as TD of the WSOP (I ruled the same way then) and neither incident was with Daniel. The first time was with Amarillo Slim and the second was "Oklahoma" Johnny Hale when he turned his cards face up when he was all-in and there was still action pending on the sidepot.

Matt

[Cornell Fiji]

Matt,
Is the under the current rules is the offender's hand declared dead or is he just sent to the penalty box following the hand?

[Matt Savage]

[ QUOTE ]
Matt,
Is the under the current rules is the offender's hand declared dead or is he just sent to the penalty box following the hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Never a dead hand, just a penalty

Matt

[Bonified]

Here's a situation. Daniel (or anyone else who thinks you should be able to show while heads up) is three handed at the FT. Any time he folds, his two opponents table their hands and the one with the worst hand immediately folds. DN wouldn't have a problem with that ?

Of course he would. I know that's not why DN and others want to show a card, but it's indistinguishable in terms of the rules. Matt is right. If you want to Hollywood and show cards, do it in cash games.