Show one, show all drama in the Borg $2-5 NL

[AKQJ10]

Prologue
I admit it. When it comes to show one, show all (SOSA), I'm a nit. Maybe it's because I keep flashing back to high school and thinking all the cool kids on the other end of the table are leaving me out of their clique. Or perhaps it's because it drives me crazy that, by trying to hide their hand from me but not from others, my opponents are affirming the value of information but also claiming the right to selectively distribute it. Regardless, I keep getting myself in situatinos where I stupidly make a big deal about SOSA, when the value of the information (though real) is tiny compared to the negative value of putting the whole table on edge and marking myself as a nit.

The drama
This situation from the Borgata $2-5 NL yesterday is a good example. (As usual, the irrelevant details may be slightly fuzzy.) I picked up AA in late middle position in the 10 seat with a stack of about $300. Seat 7 raised UTG + 2 to about $25. I reraised to $75, the BB called, and Seat 7 thought for a while, showed his neighbors, and folded. I asked the dealer to set aside his cards so I could see at the end of the hand, which she did.

The flop was two-suited so I bet $100 or so and took down the pot. Seat 8 now asks me to show my hand. Possibly out of pique I promptly shove them into the muck, which of course is my privilege since I hadn't shown anybody anything. At that point all hell breaks loose.

Seat 7 reaches over to his mucked cards, which the dealer had been protecting (obviously not very well!), and tries to wash them into the muck. Because she was holding them to her left, he had to reach all the way across the board to do this. Pissed off, I react impulsively and reach in to stop him and flip up four or five cards including his hand, which I made out to be AQ. The floor is standing nearby anyway, and I start to tell her the whole story, but figure it's best left for away from the table. Realizing that this episode has probably ruined the atmosphere of the table, I ask for a transfer.

Fortunately after we trade a couple of verbal barbs -- and he insists that my asking to see was against poker etiquette -- things calm down and get really silent for maybe an orbit or two. Before I get my transfer, the table appears to be back to yukking it up, so I don't think this dispute ruined anyone's vacaton or anything. Still, I'm glad to get away from that table.

After I get my transfer, I speak out of earshot with the floor. She supports me on every point up to where I reached into the muck to counteract my opponent's reaching into the muck. (I know this was an impulsive mistake on my part, and I admit much to her). "Why didn't you explain the whole story to me then?" she asks. "I could have given him a penalty of time away from the table!" I explain that I didn't want to increase tensions at the table any more than we had already done.

Epilogue
I don't blame people for treating the contents of their mucked hand as precious information. What I don't get is, given that it's precious information, why don't you grasp a rule that entitles me to the same precious information as your neighbor? If it's that big a deal to you, don't show him! Or even so, given that you don't really understand SOSA, once you get it explained to you by me, a dealer, and a floor, why do you go to such lengths to insist that we don't understand poker etiquette? (Human nature not to admit error, I know.)

I'm not without fault here -- reaching in to stop Seat 7 from washing the muck was clearly a no-no, and calling the floor instead of reacting would made it crystal clear who the offender was. But more to the point, I'm not sure at what point invoking SOSA makes me the table nit and turns -EV. Should I never have asked to see his hand?

I'll write up a few other observations of my AC weekend in a separate mini-trip report, but this was probably the least uninteresting anecdote.

[flafishy]

Insisting on SOSA is absolutely not a breach of etiquette. What IS a breach of the rules is refusing to show your cards to the table after showing them to one or two others.

Possibly what they are confusing the etiquette point with is that it isn't proper etiquette to ask to see a player's cards who just lost a hand at showdown.

[AngusThermopyle]

I also think many players assume SOSA only applies to hands on the River.

[jba]

I think you are well within your rights to see the guys hand. Them's the rules, and I agree with the premise behind it.

that said, this situation makes you look extremely nitty and if you want my advice, you should knock it off.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
that said, this situation makes you look extremely nitty and if you want my advice, you should knock it off.

[/ QUOTE ]

"It" being the original request to see his cards after the hand, right?

Thanks. Assuming that's what you meant, I'm coming to the same conclusion. Yes, there is value to knowing where your opponent's range is to call a reraise (would he have called with JJ? TT? Does he understand he doesn't have odds to call with 88 and spike a set?). But episodes like this appear commonplace and my obsession is probably losing me EV.

Angus is right: People just don't understand that SOSA applies before the river.

[AngusThermopyle]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there is value to knowing where your opponent's range is to call a reraise (would he have called with JJ? TT? Does he understand he doesn't have odds to call with 88 and spike a set?).

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that he is giving the information to his neighbors, not to everybody at the table. I just want to be on equal footing with his neighbors.

[The Ocho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, there is value to knowing where your opponent's range is to call a reraise (would he have called with JJ? TT? Does he understand he doesn't have odds to call with 88 and spike a set?).

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem is that he is giving the information to his neighbors, not to everybody at the table. I just want to be on equal footing with his neighbors.

[/ QUOTE ]

nit.

[jba]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
that said, this situation makes you look extremely nitty and if you want my advice, you should knock it off.

[/ QUOTE ]

"It" being the original request to see his cards after the hand, right?


[/ QUOTE ]

exactly. like I said it's your right, and if there was anything fishy going on at all I'd do the same, but if you're just trying to figure him out I wouldn't do it, especially if the game is already good.

honestly I think you get very little good info in situations like this, you can deduce that he's folding a good hand here, maybe 88 or TT or AQ or something of the sort. Knowing the specific hand might help a little in a situation later on, but it can cut both ways. when you ask to see it you're ensuring that the other 7-8 people at the table see it as well, and now they might start wondering if maybe they shouldnt start folding AQo sometimes preflop.


and yes the rule applies to all streets not just post-river, but post-river is where it most often occurs and really the only time it can be invoked without disrupting the game. about the only time I ever invoke it is if I'm watching a showdown, player A bets, player B folds after flashing his cards to another player.. I'll ask player B "what did you have?" most players realize that I have a right to this info and they'll just tell me, the dealer doesn't have to be involved, the game goes on, I look like I'm just curious and not trying to be the rule enforcer.

[AKQJ10]

Me too, obviously. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] This comes up enough that it's probably worth addressing as a dealer training issue.

What would be the ideal procedure here? In my view, perhaps an observant dealer should set aside the cards without being asked, and wait until the very end of the hand to integrate them in the muck. At that point an observant player could discreetly say, "I'd like to see," and she could turn them over for the whole table. The owner of the hand might object and get a lesson in SOSA, but the effect would look less like the player who asked to see was being a nit.

The problem with that suggestion is, the dealer can't possibly see what's going on at both ends of the table simultaneously. Still, it's better than making me admit in public to my nittishness.

I don't say that the dealer should go so far as to offer to show the hand, but it seems like she could facilitate it. But that's asking a lot, which is why better training on this issue might be helpful.

The Borgata staff (both dealer and floor) handled it well in this situation, as they generally do, but there's gotta be a way to grant me my SOSA rights without forcing me to piss off the whole table to get them. Doesn't there?

[The Ocho]

[ QUOTE ]
...but the effect would look less like the player who asked to see was being a nit...

... Still, it's better than making me admit to my nittishness...

... but there's gotta be a way to grant me my SOSA rights without forcing me to piss off the whole table to get them. Doesn't there?

[/ QUOTE ]

frankly, i dont see why poker rooms should make things any easier on the nits. just resign yourself to the abandonment your strict, nittish "sosa rights" and relax.

also, if you still must know their hole cards in situations like this, try and build a repore (spelling?) with the guy at the other end of the table and get him to reveal his holdings willingly to you every once in a while.

nittiness is almost never the way.