Sunday, November 28, 2010

Here we go again

Once again, I have had somebody grouse about my alleged bad behavior when he was the one at fault.

It happened at Imperial Palace tonight. I limped from early position with Jc-10c, then called a late-position raise to $8 from a big, bald, British, tattooed guy, who I shall call BBBTG. Flop 10-J-Q rainbow. I liked having two pair, but this is about as dangerous a flop as you could name for two pair. I was beaten by 10-10, J-J, Q-Q, Q-10, Q-J, A-K, and K-9, all of which were probably in his pre-flop raising range. I was obviously currently ahead of any one-pair hands, but A-A, K-K, and A-Q all had lots of outs, and even A-J, A-10, K-Q, K-J, and K-10 would give me a good sweat. I didn't want to risk a free card, so I bet $20, the size of the pot. He almost instantly moved all-in for $46 more. This only narrowed his range a little, by effectively ruling out pocket pairs lower than 10-10, which wasn't much help to my decision. The vibe I got from him was more "I'm not going to let you weasel this pot away from me" than "Let's please get all the money in because I have the nuts." So I called.

He did not show right away, so neither did I. The turn was a 4, I think. The river was another 10. That helped me, but was by no means a cinch. I was still losing to J-J, Q-10, and Q-Q. He wasn't moving, so I reminded him, "I called you, sir." He announced, "Two pair."

Not good enough. You don't get to win the pot by just declaring what your cards are, even if you're more specific than "two pair." Oddly enough, other people might not believe you. You have to show them to win. This concept seemed too advanced for the feeble mind of BBBTG to grasp, so I gave him another reminder, more slowly this time: "I. Called. YOU."

He finally took the hint and rolled over his pocket aces, whereupon I quickly showed my full house and took the pot.

Had that been the end of it, I wouldn't be writing this. But it wasn't. BBBTG was playing next to one of his friends, and I overheard scraps of their ensuing sotto voce conversation, the gist of which was that I had acted with unspeakably atrocious manners by not showing my hand when he declared himself to have two pair, because I must have known I could beat any two-pair hand.

Grrrr. How many times do we have to go through this, people? Could it be that there are, somewhere in the world, poker players who do not read this blog regularly, and thus have not heard the word about one's showdown obligations? Hard to believe, but perhaps that is the case.

If you take the last aggressive action, and somebody else calls, then you have the responsibility to show your hole cards first. Alternatively, if you're embarrassed about them, you can just throw them in the muck. But your obligation is not discharged by saying what you have, nor by showing just one card. The even more annoying practice of starting to quiz your opponent about what he has is, or at least should be, grounds for execution on the spot. At least BBBTG didn't do that. (Being a merciful kind of guy, I would be willing to commute his death sentence to castration with a dull, rusty knife and no anesthetic, thus ensuring that his rudeness and stupidity genes were not passd on to the next generation.)

No matter how long I play this game, I will never understand why so many people have such a hard time understanding and complying with this simple, universal rule and practice. Nor will I ever get why people who fail to abide by it feel comfortable bitching about those of us who do, as if somehow we are the source of the problem. It's like veering across the center line into oncoming traffic, then blaming the people who stayed on the right for the resulting head-on collision.

At least BBBTG didn't make me wait for the heat death of the universe. I hate when that happens.

10 comments:

dmbfan41cnLV said...

I agree completely on your opinion of people who try to pull that garbage. Also, I don't know about you but I even get irritated when I'm not involved in the hand and would like to see the player's cards who is obligated to show... only to be bailed out by their opponent who, more often than not, doesn't understand this rule and allows for the losing hand to hit the muck without showing/giving away to me (and the rest of the table) the valuable information about what two cards they were making the play with.

Snuffy said...

and every time you post something like this I am going to say just turn your hand over after you boat and move on to the next hand. Definitely turn it over after he says two pair.

Do you really need to see his hand for information? Move the game. I know he is required to show first but just get the game going.

Michael Moulton said...

I blame the pros a lot for this one. You discussed the hand on the Big Game a month or so ago where the aggressor wouldn't show his hand. I think the average poker player gets his idea of the proper way to conduct himself at the table from watching the pros do it, so if the pros are using bad etiquette people will follow their lead.

Anonymous said...

A quote from Ambrose Bierce comes to mind: The immunity of these persons from swift and awful death is one of the most striking proofs of God's mercy to those that hate him. [He was talking about folks with bad table manners, but etiquette is etiquette.]


-Chuck

Pete said...

I understand your position. yet it bugs me to no end. You knew you had the winner. Even if we accept your concern for the unlikely situation where you were beat .... you really had no reason to think he was not being truthful when he said he had two pair.

Now even if I accept your reasons for wanting to insist that he show first or muck (personally i would prefer that my opponent NEVER show his cards).

Your simply insisting that he show has a certain characteristic of a slow roll.

Is there a way that you could insist that he show or muck first without also slow rolling (that is teasing him with the idea that he was a winner)? yes there is a very simple one. When he says "Two Pair" rather than telling him you called him ... just say "not good enough."

Now the slow roll aspect of what you are doing is gone, he can believe you and muck or show his hand to force you to show.

I still think you have wasted everyone's time (both of you - not just you) but at least you didn't taunt him in the process.

PKDS said...

Have you seen the movie Hard Candy? Your comments about what you would do to this guy made me remember it. It's a good one.

By the way, thanks for your blog. I've been reading for quite a while and always enjoy it.

Anonymous said...

Its a slowroll plain and simple and many home games that might get your ass kicked!

Anonymous said...

I like you and I like your blog, but I'm sorry, once he said "I have 2 pair", you knew your hand was the best and the human thing to do would be to end his pain and show your winning hand. There are times when strictly sticking to the rules is not necessarily the best option (unless you were trying to get under his skin, if that were the case, you reacted appropriately). Sorry if this sounds harsh, it's not meant to be, but I've been that guy before...

Mike

hfrog355 said...

I think it is important to see his hand here. He put you in a difficult spot with bottom two. I would want to know if he were doing with something as light as 88 or 99. A9 probably isn't totally out of his range here either.

Anonymous said...

slowroll imo