|
|
#21
09-24-2007, 06:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
Cliffs are quite difficult. IMO, Daniel, and people like Jamie Gold (which should tell you enough) want to show card(s) during a hand [for psychological reasons][to show off and get more camera time]. Matt Savage, and people like me, say that it people could do the same thing as a form of collusion and that the floor-people don't want to have to make a bunch of subjective decisions as to what is what.
Daniel then ignores this and/or confuses things by conflating this issue with the completely separate issue of showing one or both cards after the hand. Those are my (admittedly biased) cliff notes :-) 
|
|
#22
09-24-2007, 06:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
[ QUOTE ]
if you show 1 card, you need to flip over second one, imo. so you cant just flip your ace of hearts, and keep your 3 of clubs mucked. dealer will make you show both, imo. DN says the rule is to prevent "needeling", imo. [/ QUOTE ] This needs complete clarification. Hardly anyone has a problem with showing one card after the hand, as above. I don't have a problem with it. That is a silly rule. But DN also wants to show cards during a hand. When he says "everyone agrees with me on this", he means the first (after the hand) case, however he often seems to be implying (inadvertently perhaps) that everyone agrees about the second (during the hand) case, which they (we) most definitely do not.
|
|
#23
09-24-2007, 11:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
[ QUOTE ]
Cliffs are quite difficult. IMO, Daniel, and people like Jamie Gold (which should tell you enough) want to show card(s) during a hand [for psychological reasons][to show off and get more camera time]. Matt Savage, and people like me, say that it people could do the same thing as a form of collusion and that the floor-people don't want to have to make a bunch of subjective decisions as to what is what. Daniel then ignores this and/or confuses things by conflating this issue with the completely separate issue of showing one or both cards after the hand. Those are my (admittedly biased) cliff notes :-) [/ QUOTE ] That's just stupid. If people want to collude they can do gestures with their face, hand, whatever.
|
|
#25
09-24-2007, 12:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
[ QUOTE ]
Vince Van Patten [/ QUOTE ] Please, stop. Every time I see that name, I get the douche chills.
|
|
#26
09-24-2007, 01:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
[ QUOTE ]
probably Matt Savage [/ QUOTE ] Agreed....I believe they already did.
|
|
#27
09-24-2007, 01:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] if you show 1 card, you need to flip over second one, imo. so you cant just flip your ace of hearts, and keep your 3 of clubs mucked. dealer will make you show both, imo. DN says the rule is to prevent "needeling", imo. [/ QUOTE ] This needs complete clarification. Hardly anyone has a problem with showing one card after the hand, as above. I don't have a problem with it. That is a silly rule. But DN also wants to show cards during a hand. When he says "everyone agrees with me on this", he means the first (after the hand) case, however he often seems to be implying (inadvertently perhaps) that everyone agrees about the second (during the hand) case, which they (we) most definitely do not. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah. The after-the-hand rule is clearly retarded though. And I'm pretty sure it originated from someone misinterpretting the phrase "show-one-show-all" to mean "show one card, show all cards" when it initially meant "show one player, show all players".
|
|
#28
09-24-2007, 01:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: another \"Who is DN talking about\"
it's clearly Tomer Benvenisti
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
