Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="aliengenius, post: 647918, member: 11924"]
The argument (I think) goes something like this: player A fold, player B shows his cards to player C (heads up), who then makes a decision with information that player A did not have at the time he made his decision.

Again, I don't see how people are "agreeing" with Lee Jones' points: he didn't make this argument, or any other, so how can you agree with non-existent points?? He simply gave his opinion without any backing, alluding to some "mathematical" reason that he keeps to himself.

Of course, I don't agree that the argument is valid. Lots of information becomes available later that earlier acting players don't have access to. What if player B folds, giving player C a walk? Player A can't then demand his cards back, claiming that if he had know B was folding he would have played. Or how about if player B has some really obvious tell, but doesn't look at his cards until player A folds; again A can't say he wants his cards back now that B has given out additional information that C has access to. Or what if player B simply says something that gives C information that A didn't have.

That being said, if they must keep the rule (although I am DN's side here, and think it should be abolished), I propose a compromise:
You are not allowed to show any cards on streets that did not [B][U]start[/U][/B] heads up. Obviously this would preclude any pre-flop card showing (unless the match is down to two, obvioulsy).
[/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us