Daniel Negreanu is WRONG!

[Matt Savage]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ 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?



[/ QUOTE ]

Matt,

Do you think the rules should be designed to decrease (or even eliminate) what you describe as "hollywood"? Wouldn't that also be very subjective?

[/ QUOTE ]

It is more about integrity and an even playing field. A little "Hollywood" IS good for the game and the reason people like watching it on TV. So no I do not want to eliminate all of the "Hollywood" tactics but I do think you should have to earn the right to showboat :-)

Matt

[DCJ001]

I agree with Matt. Cards should not be shown in a tournament. Players should also not state what cards they hold, while playing in a tournament. In a tournament, even if the hand is heads up, each player is still playing against the rest of the field.

Much of what Daniel says in his article below, regarding soft-playing a friend, actually contains arguments against his opinion for showing cards while in a tournament:

http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/printDS/140189

[bec1972]

[ QUOTE ]

however, i do think players should be able to expose a single card after the hand is over. I hate the fact that you have to show both cards, or none. I think it's a silly rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do think if the hand is showndown the winning hand SHOULD HAVE to show both cards, but if the opponent folds at any point, showing only one card should be allowed. I am of the camp where slow rolling is about the worst show of bush leagueness (and I am aware that those that agree with me on this, no explanation is neccesary, while those that disagree and enjoy their slow rolling, no explanation will suffice)so allowing only one card to be shown to win the pot in a contested showdown opens up HUGE doors for slow rolling, bad vibes and unchanneled anger that is ridiculously stupid, because if the geek that wants to slow roll or argue were not in a casino he wouldn't act that way. (example: the kid in the WSOP that got into it with Jamie Gold got a penalty for cussing and had to sit out, he had HUGE poker in a public place muscles, and from behind his computer monitor he is BAD ASS, but once he got knocked out on his horrible draw all in call, he reverted back to his no sun seeing, pocket protector wearing dweeb that he is. Now if he, and others like him, just respected everybody that sat down at the table and treated everyone and the game with dignity we would have no problems. Unfortunately, I think it will be a long time before the masses as a whole play it gentlemanly and gentlewomanly 100% of the time, all the time.

[Alan Goehring]

[ QUOTE ]
i do think players should be able to expose a single card after the hand is over. I hate the fact that you have to show both cards, or none. I think it's a silly rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

I completely agree. I would sometimes flash a single card AFTER my opponent mucks (i.e. hand is over). Now, with the idiotic "show one show both" rule, I simply muck both cards. It makes the game less enjoyable for me, and I think for my opponents who are now getting zero information instead of partial information.

I don't have a strong opinion on exposing cards DURING a heads-up hand. I think DN would argrue that it adds skill to the game. On the other hand it is likely to slow down play, and seeing fewer hands takes skill out of the game. There could be issues with soft-playing/collusion, etc.

On balance I think the current rule (regarding no exposing during the hand) is good as the slooooooow pace of live tourney play is the primary reason I have reduced the number of events I play------there is already way too much hollywooding/delay. And minimizing cheating/angle shooting should be of paramount importance.

A cash game is different as you are not on the clock and issues like soft playing become less of a concern.

btw, exposing your hand after your opponent is all-in is not giving free information (it is an attempt to receive free information).

[Yeti]

wrt to the new rule, couldn't you just muck one card and then show the other? would doing this repeatedly lead to a penalty? heh

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]


I don't have a strong opinion on exposing cards DURING a heads-up hand. I think DN would argrue that it adds skill to the game. On the other hand it is likely to slow down play, and seeing fewer hands takes skill out of the game. There could be issues with soft-playing/collusion, etc.

On balance I think the current rule (regarding no exposing during the hand) is good as the slooooooow pace of live tourney play is the primary reason I have reduced the number of events I play------there is already way too much hollywooding/delay. And minimizing cheating/angle shooting should be of paramount importance.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with all this, and I would like to suggest that the active promotion of SPEED POKER should be a priority for anyone looking to improve tournaments. Poker players will probably endlessly argue about things like how much table talk is appropriate and whether we should be able to expose cards HU, but speed poker would necessitate a lot less talking and jiving at the table and eliminate a lot of the brooding, coffeehousing and showmanship that slows the game down.

[Zinzan]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't have a strong opinion on exposing cards DURING a heads-up hand. I think DN would argrue that it adds skill to the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Meh. I don't think Daniel's losing much of an opportunity to "out-skill" his opponents. He effectively does the same as showing when there is four-to-a-gutshot on the board and he asks his all-in opponent, "hmmm, can you beat a set of sixes?"

I guess showing while the hand is still active would be a small deterrent to the Kill Phil strategy used by unskilled players to put the tough decision and all the pressure on the opponent. Daniel could show his cards and "look into their soul", pressing them to make a mistake and give off a tell.

But I don't feel strongly one way or the other, since I don't play live very much. Hey, we should beta this on PokerStars! It would be interesting if you could show one or both cards heads up. And I'd love to be able to show one card after my opponent has folded. Online, this would not likely slow things down too much.

-Z

[Eagles]

It seems to me allowing people to show cards just makes collusion much easier. As well I think any edge a player would get from this would be so marginal it wouldn't even be worthwhile.

[johnnyrocket]

ehhh i have no opinion either way here, i dont like how he goes on a tangent of useless nonsense like what next, we cant talk at the table? to try stressing his point

[ike]

Situations can arise in heads up pots in NL hold'em tournaments where if Player A could show Player B his cards, Player B would correctly fold and both players would benefit. This obviously can't occur in a cash game. Preventing this sort of collusion is important. The current rules are definitely right and Negreanu is definitely wrong.