|
|
#11
11-05-2007, 05:15 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Would you let him off
OP did fine. It really at this point isn't supposed to be up to the players or the dealer to decide. Floor should be called, the facts related, and the decision of the floor is final. Nobody needs to feel good or bad about it or do things differently because it's a charity event.
|
|
#12
11-05-2007, 05:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
[ QUOTE ]
OP did fine. It really at this point isn't supposed to be up to the players or the dealer to decide. Floor should be called, the facts related, and the decision of the floor is final. Nobody needs to feel good or bad about it or do things differently because it's a charity event. [/ QUOTE ] totally agree, and i doubt that any floor would ever rule in the other guys favor. if they did i would never play there again, or id call another floor over first to see if they would confirm the first floors decision, if so then i would neevr play there again
|
|
#13
11-05-2007, 05:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
I dunno. Am I the only one who thinks OP's actions are a bit of an angle-shoot? Maybe not deliberately, but I wouldn't be surprised if a retelling by an observer gave a different take on it. I see plenty of people who do various things that fall within the rules but tend to make things more difficult and uncomfortable for everybody. This seems like it could fall in that category, at the very least.
I see a lot of talk at the tables, and I can usually tell when someone's serious or not about a bet. I can also tell when someone's unsure about a bet. Why couldn't the OP just wait for the action to be complete? It seems he wanted to trap so badly, he didn't want to risk it not being a bet. That's very close to angle-shooting in my book. Context is everything, and a retelling to the floor won't have all the nuances and will have to be more black-and-white than reality. Regardless of intent of either party, I think the OP handled himself very poorly. Wait for action to complete before responding to said action. Every time. This falls well within the category of PROTECT YOUR HAND.
|
|
#14
11-05-2007, 05:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
I agree that you handled it well, and I wouldn't have let the guy off, either.
As I was reading what happened, I felt that what the player to your right did was even more inappropriate than what your opponent did. I hate when players don't observe the "one player to a hand" rule. Especially when you are in the middle of the hand, you're virtually defenseless. Anything you say to ward of the hand analysis going on at the table just provides more information for your opponent to use. Here, everything worked out ok because your rivered the nuts. But if the other player had talked your opponent into moving in once the flush materialized on the turn, you would have had a difficult decision to make. The other player's role in creating that dilemma would have really ticked me off.
|
|
#15
11-05-2007, 05:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who thinks OP's actions are a bit of an angle-shoot? Maybe not deliberately,.... [/ QUOTE ] Seconded.
|
|
#16
11-05-2007, 06:22 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Am I the only one who thinks OP's actions are a bit of an angle-shoot? Maybe not deliberately,.... [/ QUOTE ] Seconded. [/ QUOTE ] I was wondering if an unbiased account of the incident would paint the same facts in a different light, but OP says at the end that the dealer and two other players described it for the floorman. I'll give the floorman the benefit, and presume that OP's account is a fair and accurate account, and that OP's reactionary call was genuine, not an angle.
|
|
#17
11-05-2007, 11:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you let him off
Hummm...could cut both ways as the post above note. However, I would be curious to know what the guy had. If he had a 3 or absolutely nothing, if MIGHT help to clarify intent. However, not being there and knowing how he said it, in what direction he said it, etc, it is hard to pick a side. Same for the caller...without being there, it is really tough to know if the quick call was a partial angle or not or if there was any ill intent etc.
I think that the right call was made by the floor given that 2 others gave the floor the info and the floor ruled. Also think the guy that said he would go with the floor's ruling must be a good guy. I could see some others making a huge stink and get all ticked. Hats off the sucker for that. I think the only thing to take into question is the flipping the cards. I always wait for the callED to flip or muck if I am the callER before flipping ANYTHING...nuts or not. My 2 cents....
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
