Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="ssbn743, post: 3149595, member: 72863"]
I’m not completely disagreeing with the ruling, I guess, but I think there are a lot of issues with this ruling and the spirt and intent of poker rules.

Also, after re-reading my post, I didn’t do the best job of describing the situation.  2 players drew cards and the player with Jacks was first to act (check/bet).  He asked the question, “Can you beat Jacks” – shrugged his shoulders after Sam’s “Ummm…yeah!” response and mucked his hand – out of turn.Yes, Sam was guilty of even speaking, I know.  Nonetheless, he was the only player left with cards.  Now maybe he did give false information – but not really, we has drawing to the stone cold nuts, and hadn’t even looked at his complete hand – information that was available and should have been obvious to his opponent.  His opponent showed the Jacks knowing he was beat based solely on the fact that Sam drew a single card – the table talk was just a circus act.

So, yes, there are several issues at play here – but he intentionally mucked his hand, out of turn with action pending, no less, then wanted it back.  “I fold……on no….wait, I can beat a straight, I call!”  Whatever loophole there is in poker rule books, that’s wrong; right?
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us