Where Is The Gamemanship?

[looshle 6]

I really can't believe I haven't read more negative posts about Tobias. I'll give you the ruling isn't bad, it's probably rules wise correct. However, as Matt Savage pointed out by saying if he could retrieve the right cards he would make the hand live, there is a time to live by common sense and logic. The muck isn't some magic death hole that when your cards touch it they disappear forever. The cards touched the edge of the muck and the dealer stopped them and flipped them over. If you throw the best hand in the muck after seeing the worst hand tabled thats one thing and you should be punished, but in this situation Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS.The reason Roland mucked is because he "knew" he was beat. Roland showed he had K high and showed his king. If Tobias wants to see Roland's other card it's simple say nice hand or you got it and Roland will show the other card. Since Tobias didn't do this Roland interpreted this as Tobias has the best hand, and Roland didn't want to give away any more info. Once again Roland probably should have showed his other card, but I've never seen a situation like this where the person in Tobias spot didn't have Roland beat. I think its pretty obvious Tobias wanted to scam his way to a win in that pot and he is a scum of a poker player. Thats actually pathetic if you cant beat him just cheat him. Well done Tobias, he is lucky that Roland isn't a much of a hot tempered player because I bet there plenty of people who would have attacked him outside the casino, and some who wouldn't be able to stay calm that long and attacked him in the casino.

Yes he's such a scumbag he even make sure to tell Roland he needed to show it.It's more Roland's fault for playin a hand in a way that he was embarrassed to show.

[MNmiracleCJS 0]

I really can't believe I haven't read more negative posts about Tobias. I'll give you the ruling isn't bad, it's probably rules wise correct. However, as Matt Savage pointed out by saying if he could retrieve the right cards he would make the hand live, there is a time to live by common sense and logic. The muck isn't some magic death hole that when your cards touch it they disappear forever. The cards touched the edge of the muck and the dealer stopped them and flipped them over. If you throw the best hand in the muck after seeing the worst hand tabled thats one thing and you should be punished, but in this situation Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS.The reason Roland mucked is because he "knew" he was beat. Roland showed he had K high and showed his king. If Tobias wants to see Roland's other card it's simple say nice hand or you got it and Roland will show the other card. Since Tobias didn't do this Roland interpreted this as Tobias has the best hand, and Roland didn't want to give away any more info. Once again Roland probably should have showed his other card, but I've never seen a situation like this where the person in Tobias spot didn't have Roland beat. I think its pretty obvious Tobias wanted to scam his way to a win in that pot and he is a scum of a poker player. Thats actually pathetic if you cant beat him just cheat him. Well done Tobias, he is lucky that Roland isn't a much of a hot tempered player because I bet there plenty of people who would have attacked him outside the casino, and some who wouldn't be able to stay calm that long and attacked him in the casino.

child please......you're gonna attack someone for a mistake you made? Tobias made a hero call (that wouldn't have worked out) practically begged to see Roland's cards even after seeing the K and Roland made the decision to muck his cards. Whether you like it or not Roland had more than ample opportunity to show his cards stalling and holding your cards as they touch the muck is just ridiculous the hand is over just show your hand so the rest of the table can move on.You have to show two cards to win a pot end of story LOL at you calling a POS and scum Tobias didn't cheat he played within the rulesAlso are you serious that you've never seen a hero call be wrong like say where A high calls and gets beat because villain was bluffing with like 22 or 33? How long have you been playing?

[NoSup4U 0]

Sooooo, you admit he acted like a douche?????? J/K.......Uncle !!

He admitted his fist pump was douchey and apologized for it. And yeah, it was a douchey move for sure

I really can't believe I haven't read more negative posts about Tobias. I'll give you the ruling isn't bad, it's probably rules wise correct. However, as Matt Savage pointed out by saying if he could retrieve the right cards he would make the hand live, there is a time to live by common sense and logic. The muck isn't some magic death hole that when your cards touch it they disappear forever. The cards touched the edge of the muck and the dealer stopped them and flipped them over. If you throw the best hand in the muck after seeing the worst hand tabled thats one thing and you should be punished, but in this situation Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS.The reason Roland mucked is because he "knew" he was beat. Roland showed he had K high and showed his king. If Tobias wants to see Roland's other card it's simple say nice hand or you got it and Roland will show the other card. Since Tobias didn't do this Roland interpreted this as Tobias has the best hand, and Roland didn't want to give away any more info. Once again Roland probably should have showed his other card, but I've never seen a situation like this where the person in Tobias spot didn't have Roland beat. I think its pretty obvious Tobias wanted to scam his way to a win in that pot and he is a scum of a poker player. Thats actually pathetic if you cant beat him just cheat him. Well done Tobias, he is lucky that Roland isn't a much of a hot tempered player because I bet there plenty of people who would have attacked him outside the casino, and some who wouldn't be able to stay calm that long and attacked him in the casino.

I've bolded maybe half of what is wrong with your comments. I am glad you admit the ruling is correct right off the bat though, well played.I like how you emphasize that the cards only touched the edge of the muck, because I guess that makes it less of a fold than if they touched all of the muck?Matt Savage NEVER (that I have seen) has said he would have pulled this specific hand out of the muck and made it live. What Matt says in the quoted passage in the OP is that IF Roland had flashed BOTH CARDS and then mucked them, he would have pulled them out of the muck and made the hand live. Do you understand the difference? Roland chose to only show one, which does not make his hand 'tabled' or showdownable or whatever you want to call it.I like how Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS. I thought people win pots in poker because they TABLE THE BEST HAND?The reason Roland mucked was because he thought he was beat and was too embarrassed about how he played the hand to show his second card.Tobias TOLD ROLAND TO TABLE HIS HAND. Roland chose to muck instead.There is no 'probably' here. If Roland wants to win the pot, he MUST show his second card. Not he probably should. He must.Its very simple here. Tobias did NOTHING to scam Roland. He called him on the river with Q high, which was not the winning hand. The action is now on Roland. Tobias has to do nothing other than sit and wait for Roland to either table a winning hand or muck it. If Roland tables his hand, he wins the pot. If he mucks it, Tobias wins the pot. This is basic stuff. Everyone that plays live should know that is almost universally how it works. (some places like Commerce have funky rules about who shows first on the river, but almost universally, whoever bet shows first)Mark

[Merby 3]

He admitted his fist pump was douchey and apologized for it. And yeah, it was a douchey move for sure :)I've bolded maybe half of what is wrong with your comments. I am glad you admit the ruling is correct right off the bat though, well played.I like how you emphasize that the cards only touched the edge of the muck, because I guess that makes it less of a fold than if they touched all of the muck?I like how Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS. I thought people win pots in poker because they TABLE THE BEST HAND?The reason Roland mucked was because he thought he was beat and was too embarrassed about how he played the hand to show his second card.Tobias TOLD ROLAND TO TABLE HIS HAND. Roland chose to muck instead.There is no 'probably' here. If Roland wants to win the pot, he MUST show his second card. Not he probably should. He must.Its very simple here. Tobias did NOTHING to scam Roland. He called him on the river with Q high, which was not the winning hand. The action is now on Roland. Tobias has to do nothing other than sit and wait for Roland to either table his hand or muck it. If Roland tables his hand, he wins the pot. If he mucks it, Tobias wins the pot. This is basic stuff. Everyone that plays live should know that is almost universally how it works. (some places like Commerce have funky rules about who shows first on the river, but almost universally, whoever bet shows first)Mark

This.My only regret about your post, Mark, is that you have laid out in clear and no uncertain terms as to why the ruling was correct. In doing so, there will likely be no more "debate" on the subject.I, on the other hand, was enjoying the discussion, even though my mind was firmly made up as to whether or not the ruling was correct.

[silkyjonson 1]

Roland should have shown his 2 cards but the kid really deserves to get glassed in the eye for fist pumping when he got the pot.

[JoeWalsh 0]

He also never told Roly to show both cards, you guys are arguing on a made up fact. He implied to Roland that K high was no good. That is the crux of the argument, at what point does it stop becoming a bluff and become straight up cheating.Personally, I think at very best it is extremely unethical and on the border of cheating - you can't bluff on a showdown (or seemingly you can), all action is over.Seriously, who here makes sure all showdowns are carried out in correct order whenever they play? The game would take so much longer than it already does.

[Balloon guy 158]

He also never told Roly to show both cards, you guys are arguing on a made up fact. He implied to Roland that K high was no good. That is the crux of the argument, at what point does it stop becoming a bluff and become straight up cheating.Personally, I think at very best it is extremely unethical and on the border of cheating - you can't bluff on a showdown (or seemingly you can), all action is over.Seriously, who here makes sure all showdowns are carried out in correct order whenever they play? The game would take so much longer than it already does.

Well I know I for one will never show my cards, and when the other person shows his I will say no good and wait as long as possible for them to muck them so I can win that pot without showing. Perfectly legal to do this according to this ruling.

[James D 0]

I think the dealer made this situation 100 times worse. If he'd just mucked the cards properly, after Roland had pushed his cards towards the muck, it would've been much clearer.Instead, he flipped them up?! What was that all about? It was clearly a mucked hand, plain and simple.That said, lots of douche-baggery on display.

[fleung22 1]

I think the dealer made this situation 100 times worse. If he'd just mucked the cards properly, after Roland had pushed his cards towards the muck, it would've been much clearer.Instead, he flipped them up?! What was that all about? It was clearly a mucked hand, plain and simple.That said, lots of douche-baggery on display.

I would have to check the EPT rules but I'm pretty sure that on the ANZPT they have a rule that requires both players to show cards on showdowns to prevent collusion/chip dumping. Therefore you can never muck because the rule of showing cards takes precedence over action of mucking. Obviously plus and minuses to this rule but it would have avoided this particular situation altogether.I think the ruling was correct but it's blatant angleshooting. If this were old school poker and had Amarillo telling a story then I might find it amusing. But I don't think there's a place for this in modern poker and should qualify for an insta-unsportsmanlike penalty of some sort. I don't see this as any different than when an opponent makes a 4k bet and you throw in four 5k chips with the nuts and say "call" after it's hits the table and pretend to think it was four 1k chips. You're using the rules to angleshoot because you know the dealer will force it to be a raise.

[Potomophobia 17]

It should be a rule that the last player to initiate action is required to show first.You bet the flop, I call, then we check it down...you show first.Of course class dictates that you be allowed to say: "I missed" and let me show a winning hand etc., but when both players don't want to show, then the dealer should be able to point at the last action player and say:"Show"Too many delayed showings making the game slow.

This.

[kingcon31 0]

Also are you serious that you've never seen a hero call be wrong like say where A high calls and gets beat because villain was bluffing with like 22 or 33? How long have you been playing?

Yes of course I've seen a hero call that couldn't beat a bluff. I was saying I've never seen somebody show their king high (or at least the single king card) and not be told that it's good when its good. Once you know that your opponent has king high standard operation is to tell him that king high is good. Once you do this the king high will show gladly show their other card. The only reason I've ever seen someone ask to see the other card before confirming their own hand is when they know they can beat king high and just want to see the bluffer's other card.

Matt Savage NEVER (that I have seen) has said he would have pulled this specific hand out of the muck and made it live. What Matt says in the quoted passage in the OP is that IF Roland had flashed BOTH CARDS and then mucked them, he would have pulled them out of the muck and made the hand live. Do you understand the difference? Roland chose to only show one, which does not make his hand 'tabled' or showdownable or whatever you want to call it.I like how Roland should get the pot because Tobias is a POS. I thought people win pots in poker because they TABLE THE BEST HAND?The reason Roland mucked was because he thought he was beat and was too embarrassed about how he played the hand to show his second card.Tobias TOLD ROLAND TO TABLE HIS HAND. Roland chose to muck instead.There is no 'probably' here. If Roland wants to win the pot, he MUST show his second card. Not he probably should. He must.Its very simple here. Tobias did NOTHING to scam Roland. He called him on the river with Q high, which was not the winning hand. The action is now on Roland. Tobias has to do nothing other than sit and wait for Roland to either table a winning hand or muck it. If Roland tables his hand, he wins the pot. If he mucks it, Tobias wins the pot. This is basic stuff. Everyone that plays live should know that is almost universally how it works. (some places like Commerce have funky rules about who shows first on the river, but almost universally, whoever bet shows first)

Savage went on to say, "I would add that if Roland's unseen card could have been identifiable at all, I would have retrieved it and made it a live hand.

Savage says, if Roland's unseen card can be identified which it could since the dealer grabbed both the cards and flipped them over, then he would make it a live hand.Sorry about the way the first post came off, but I don't think people should get pots because they are nice guys and the other guy isn't. Poker is won at showdown by showing winning hands, and although I think that since the cards are easily retrieveable that they could be used as a live hand, I have no problem with the ruling. My problem is with Tobias. As someone a couple people stated earlier it's not right to try to bluff somebody on the showdown. Finally, if you don't think Tobias scammed that pot then thats fine, but I think your completely wrong. The fist pump and the jolt of excitement after Roland's hand hit the muck shows me that he was trying to scam that pot. I really find it surprising that you wouldn't think this is low. Any real gambler wouldn't even want to win like that.

[CoolHandKai 0]

I find the "Well, it's within the rules to pretend that your queen high beats a king high, so it's perfectly legal to just wait around till the king high guy mucks, instead of acknowledging that one is beat" argument to be quite weak. If we're down to that level of asshattery, people might as well practice throwing cards to be able to invalidate other people's hands by throwing their mucked card on top of them: It's not really a part of poker, but covered by the rules as well.I agree with the ruling that was made, though: Since the cards were mucked, they should stay mucked, but it was also right to tell the other guy that he's going to get a penalty, if he pulls a dishonest stunt like that again.

[NoSup4U 0]

FYI a lot of good discussion about this hand going on in the 2p2 thread. This morning Matt Savage said this:*********I just saw the video and sorry for not seeing this first before responding.Roland's hand should have been live and he should have been awarded the pot.There is no imaginary muck line in my tournaments and if Thomas uses one that is a different situation. I always want the best hand in a called situation to win the pot.********There is a lot of talk about if there is an imaginary betting line, if Tobias 'asked' to see RDW's hand, etc. It's pretty interesting imo.Mark

[GWCGWC 83]

I also based my answer on the written explanation vs watching the video. As stated by James D, the dealer made a HUGE error. Roland tried to muck his hand in a way to make it irretrievable. He was unsuccessful because the dealer saved his cards from being buried in muck and then the dealer actually flipped his cards up. Does Matt comment on the dealer error?

[NoSup4U 0]

I also based my answer on the written explanation vs watching the video. As stated by James D, the dealer made a HUGE error. Roland tried to muck his hand in a way to make it irretrievable. He was unsuccessful because the dealer saved his cards from being buried in muck and then the dealer actually flipped his cards up. Does Matt comment on the dealer error?

Yeah he says the dealer should never have pulled his cards out of the muck. He says when RDW mucks, and Tobias flips over his Q high, he should have called the floor over for a ruling. (I believe he felt at that point that the ruling should have been that Tobias wins the hand because Roland mucked.) He does say if Tobias just mucks his hand as normal, obviously the pot goes to him.MarkEdit: this is Matt's latest:It is OK for TD's to disagree on a ruling BTW but I do think this proof a rule needs to be in place for this situation. Many TD's use the rule that hands are retrievable if identifiable and I ALWAYS want the best hand to win in a called pot.

[BaseJester 1]

Kind of reminds me of when A-Rod called for a popup while rounding the bases and the ball dropped in between playersIt's not against the rules, but he got a ball thrown at his back next time he came into townClearly this dude needs to get slowrolled by Roland at some point and everyone is even

I am not a major league umpire, but in my opinion this is against the rules and he should have been called out. 7.08 Any runner is out when—. . .(b) He intentionally interferes with a thrown ball; or hinders a fielder attempting to make a play on a batted ball;DefinitionINTERFERENCE(a) Offensive interference is an act by the team at bat which interferes with,obstructs, impedes, hinders or confuses any fielder attempting to make a play.If the umpire declares the batter, batter-runner, or a runner out for interference,all other runners shall return to the last base that was in the judgment of theumpire, legally touched at the time of the interference, unless otherwiseprovided by these rules.You could certainly argue that the rules are making a distinction between hinder and confuse, but I think, by the definition of hinder, confusion is a kind of hindrance.Dictionary.com:hin⋅der1  /ˈhɪndər/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [hin-der] Show IPAUse hinder in a SentenceSee web results for hinderSee images of hinder–verb (used with object)1. to cause delay, interruption, or difficulty in; hamper; impede: The storm hindered our progress.2. to prevent from doing, acting, or happening; stop: to hinder a man from committing a crime.

[BaseJester 1]

The board read {7-Clubs}{9-Hearts}{4-Hearts}{10-Clubs}{A-Hearts} with Reinkemeier calling a 95,000 bet on the river. Neither player wanted to show their hands, but de Wolfe eventually said, "King-high.""Well, show it then," Reinkemeier said. Highly reluctant, De Wolfe eventually flashed the {K-Clubs} before pushing his cards toward the muck beneath the burn cards.

I have no sympathy for De Wolfe here at all. When you're called, show down a hand if you want a chance to win. These are the rules, and De Wolfe is wasting everyone's time by hoping that someone will bail him out. The cards should not be retrieved from the muck.

[Lucoo_ 0]

http://www.pokercast.tv/poker-media/poker-...-barcelona-2009Just great the german explains in full honesty he was shooting an angle an goes in to detail on how he was trying to not show his cards down till de wolffe mucked his hand.

[FARGOpokerND 22]

http://www.fullcontactpoker.com/poker-foru...howtopic=138631

[Tehtoe 3]

[Lucoo_ 0]

i'm ugly sorry. Well at least here is the video lol.

[GWCGWC 83]

Yeah he says the dealer should never have pulled his cards out of the muck. He says when RDW mucks, and Tobias flips over his Q high, he should have called the floor over for a ruling. (I believe he felt at that point that the ruling should have been that Tobias wins the hand because Roland mucked.) He does say if Tobias just mucks his hand as normal, obviously the pot goes to him.MarkEdit: this is Matt's latest:It is OK for TD's to disagree on a ruling BTW but I do think this proof a rule needs to be in place for this situation. Many TD's use the rule that hands are retrievable if identifiable and I ALWAYS want the best hand to win in a called pot.

Matt requires at least one hand to be shown at SD. The dealer should have mucked RDW's hand. Tobias tables his hand. RDW goes on monkey tilt.There is no argument as to the outcome of the hand. Matt could not have tried to retrieve RDW's hand if it were mucked properly. It's RDW's own fault that he didn't stack the chips. Once you muck your hand, you concede any right to the pot. A tricky situation based on the way it went down. A dealer should never affect the outcome of a hand which would happen if Matt ruled RDW's hand live.

[albasuna 0]

All this talk about mucking, got me wondering. Say if RDW mucked and then Tobias mucked... who is awarded the pot?

[FARGOpokerND 22]

All this talk about mucking, got me wondering. Say if RDW mucked and then Tobias mucked... who is awarded the pot?

Once RDW mucks...the pot is automatically awarded to Tobias, where he can then muck.

[JoeWalsh 0]

Once RDW mucks...the pot is automatically awarded to Tobias, where he can then muck.

Its a showdown, he would still need to show his 2 cards to claim the pot, otherwise chip dumping would be rife.