Quote:
|
In my mind, her not having put chips into the pot makes her hand dead since she did not call the bet....Any thoughts? |
I posted my thoughts. You told me I'm wrong. Why did you ask for my thoughts, if your mind was already made up?
Quote:
|
If a player shows his hand, it is declared a dead hand. Happens to be a standing rule of poker.
|
Oh really?
I just re-read
Robert's Rules of Poker (pdf), and saw no mention of this "standing rule of poker". It is mentioned in the section marked "Etiquette", where the heading reads, "The following actions are improper, and grounds for warning, suspending, or barring a violator". Since you give no indication that the lady in question was trying something underhanded, then I stand by my earlier decision that "a warning should suffice".
The other "official" rules of poker are the
TDA Rules. These apply to tournaments--the very form of poker that led to this myth--and rule 35 says, in its entirety:
A player who exposes his cards during the play may incur a penalty, but will not have his hand killed.
I don't know how to make it any plainer. You are 100% wrong when you say, "If a player shows his hand, it is declared a dead hand. Happens to be a standing rule of poker." There is no mention of killing such a hand in Robert's Rules (generally acknowledged as the most comprehensive rulebook out there); and killing the hand is in fact
specifically prohibited in the TDA rules.
Before you suggest that TDA Rules should not apply to a cash game, it should also be noted that Robert's Rules mention in the intro that "Nearly all the rules herein are compatible with the TDA rules, although there are some slight differences in wording." Robert is pretty much saying, "TDA Rules are OK with me."