Noses and mouths causing problems at Foxwoods

Two interesting back-to-back stories on rules and etiquette over at the "Aces Full of Ducks" blog: See here and here.

The first story is another cautionary tale about the wisdom of just habitually turning your cards face up, even if you think you lost, because otherwise once in a while you will have misread your hand, and accidentally muck the winner. I have done that three times (once where I would have won the pot outright, and twice where I would have split it) that I know of.

I wonder what happened to the dealer. He or she should have had a new orifice chewed open, for (1) not mucking the guy's cards when he pushed them forward and stood up to leave, and (2) not preventing the nosy player from looking at them. Even after the cards were revealed, the dealer should have taken them from the intervening woman and shoved them deep into the muck, just as would have happened without her injecting herself. I think the floor should have ruled the hand dead, because it clearly would have been dead if the dealer had done his or her job right.

Furthermore, the woman should have been asked to leave for the day for such an abominable violation. No matter how she gets scolded or warned, she is going to feel that she did the right thing, likely on some warped version of the "do unto others" concept. She needs to feel enough sting as a consequence that she actually makes a decision not to interfere like that in the future, even if she thinks she should intervene. I think it does no good to try to persuade her that she was wrong; she has to know that she gets penalized for breaking the rules, even if she disagrees with the how the rules work. The saying is "once burned, twice careful." Well, she needs to get burned a little bit there.

I'd probably make a really lousy poker room manager. I'd be kicking people out right and left, until there were no customers left to play. But at least then the place would be quiet and orderly, the way it should be!

Same with the woman in the second story, by the way. She should have been shown the door, too. Three times in one hand is completely inexcusable. (Incidentally, why was the dealer not shutting her up at her first peep?) And again, it's clear that she left that day certain that she had done exactly the right thing. No amount of words will convince her otherwise. You have to make it hurt, so that the next time such a situation arises, she remembers the day she got kicked out, and makes a different decision.

I've mentioned several times that my main hobby (at least before moving here) has long been competitive handgun shooting. In particular, most of my experience was with the United States Practical Shooting Association. It may not be possible to have more fun than shooting one of their matches. But because the whole deal is about people running around with guns, firing at targets as fast as they can, there have to be some pretty stringent safety rules. And the USPSA is absolutely fanatical about enforcing those rules, with a sterling safety record as a result.

There are about half a dozen things you can do that violate one of the major safety rules, such as dropping your gun, taking it out of the holster when you're not supposed to, having it loaded when you're not supposed to, having your finger on the trigger when you're clearing a jam, having any part of your body get in front of the muzzle, etc. Break even one of them, even once, for just a second, and you are done--ejected from the match, sent home for the day. No excuses, no exceptions, no mercy. It's all done with kindness, though, and you're welcome back for the next match.

I had it happen to me--once. I wasn't paying attention when I should have been, and jostled my pistol in such a way that it fell out of my holster and plopped onto the ground. There was no actual danger to anybody, but it's one of those zero-tolerance rules--because if your attention is waning enough that you can drop your gun, well, then just about anything can happen. The awkwardness and embarrassment of having everything stop while they fixed the problem and gave me the friendly boot out of the range really sank in. It was impossible to think of anything else for the entire 45-minute drive home. Shame can be a powerful motivator. As a result, I never again let my attention lapse in such a careless way. If they had just let it slide, and let me off with a warning, I might not have achieved the higher level of vigilence that thereafter accompanied me to every match.

Human brains are wired perfectly to respond to positive and negative incentives and reinforcements. We remember acutely how actions in the past have been rewarded or punished. We're all Pavlov's dogs. I firmly believe that poker rooms need to be a lot more aggressive about ejecting players for the day when they egregiously violate rules--because actual negative consequences change behavior much more effectively than just warnings do.


Addendum, May 27, 2008

I received the following email from a reader, presumably in reaction to the above post, with a couple more interesting stories of a similar nature:


I'm still reading your blog regularly. It is one of my favorite poker blogs.

I spent a few days in Vegas and have a couple of stories that you may have interest in discussing.
The first involved myself not reading my hand correctly. I was playing at Mandalay Bay. I was in seat 3 and limped with A-9 offsuit. Several people saw the flop of A-K-4. Seat 8 made a small bet and I just called with my weak kicker. I don't remember the turn. Seat 8 made another small bet and I called. The river came and seat 8 checked and I checked. He turned over A-10. I was out kicked. I then did something I rarely do, I showed my Ace.

I was about to muck my hand when the dealer said "you have to show both cards". I was confused. Initially I thought this was a new house rule like they had at the WSOP last year where if you showed one card you had to show both. I said "what?" and the dealer repeated his statement. He was looking at me waiting for me to do something. So I showed my 9. He immediately said "split pot". Shocked, I looked back at the board and realized that the river card was a 4. Because I was playing the hand passively and was happy to get a check on the river, I hadn't realized that the board had paired negating my kicker.

Seat 8 then objected and told the dealer he shouldn't have helped me. The dealer said that I didn't make a clear action if I was mucking the hand or trying to claim the split with only one card. He explained to seat 8 that he was simply instructing me of the rules. Seat 8 asked for a floor decision and after hearing the replay, the floor concurred. Since I didn't muck my hand it was not clear if I was showing the ace for half the pot. I told everyone that honestly I didn't realize it was a split and that seat 8 could have the pot (it was a very small pot). He said no just split it and we were fine.

However, seat 4 turned into an expert and he now objected. He said that my intention of mucking my hand should outwiegh my actual action of showing my hand. The floor upheld his decision and we played on. For the next 2 hours I had to endure seat 4 retelling the story to every new player at the table.

Story number two involves a situation that you often hear could happen, but this is the first time I actually saw it happen. I was playing at the Golden Nugget. At the opposite end of the table, seats 7 and 8 were involved in a hand that went to the river. Seat 7 said all in on the river and seat 8, who had a much larger stack, said call. Seat 7 turned over his cards and showed 2 pair. Seat 7 hadn't counted out his chips so the amount of the bet was unclear. Seat 8 said something and started stacking his chips next to seat 7's stacks. I didnt' hear what seat 8 said, but is was problably "that's good" or "you win" or someting like that. He was clearing counting chips to pay off the all in bet. Seat 8 still had his cards. Seat 7 said to the dealer I want to see his hand. The dealer reached over and turned over the cards. The dealer then announced "straight". Seat 8 had top pair, but didn't realize that his kicker had made a straight. Then all the money went to seat 8.

Two other players at the table objected and said that the dealer should have killed the hand in the muck before showing it. The dealer explained that it was a house rule that if any player involved in the showdown asks to see a hand then the shown hand is live. The hand is only killed if the request comes from a player not involved in the show down. There was an appeal to the floor who upheld the ruling.

I also played at Red Rock for this first time. I haven't actually been keeping track, but I think they have the most comfortable poker chairs that I have sat in.