Tourney What tilts you?

Taghkanic

Flush
Joined
Jul 11, 2017
Messages
1,052
Reaction score
647
Location
Hudson Valley, NY
* Old guys who still try to say, “I see your bet... and raise you [x].” (Yes, this is still a thing.)

* People who keep loudly arguing/debating a hand from half an orbit ago, talking over the new action.

* Guy on his phone nonstop who has to be reminded that it’s his blind or action every single hand.

* String betters.

* People who habitually either act out of turn, OR never know when it’s on them.

* Amateurs who try to hide their lone high denom chip begins their stack.

* Players who constantly try to quiz you about what you had in a hand, well after you’ve made it clear that you’re not the type to tell.

* Dealers who make mistakes because they are so busy talking with regs, or trying to be the life of the party.

* Players who are more focused on shouting to their buddy at another table about what just happened, or (in a tourney) more focused on their $10 Last Longer bet with a friend at another table than keeping things moving at their own.

* People who in a tourney who never know what level the blinds are at, including when you just told them last hand.

* Players in a self-dealt game nittily stack every chip they just won in a hand before bothering to cut/pass the deck/clear cards/deal.

None of these things individually really “tilt me.” But I enough of them occur in combination or in succession, I can start feeling exasperated with the game, and start playing less than optimally.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
What is an example of "a huge mess"?
it will never inadvertently cause some kind of issue (if a player didn't think the betting had actually ended, or mis-heard an "ALL-in" vs "cALL", etc.).
One example: Player B shows instead of waiting for Player A to show (or fold). Immediately upon Player B showing his cards, Player A yells "CALL" and flips over his cards, thinking action was on him to call or fold to Player B's all-in bet. Only gets uglier from there (he-said she-said), and that's not the only scenario where acting out of turn can only cause problems, while acting in turn never does. A simple "the actions's on you" comment from Player B to Player A is always correct, and never generates an issue due to somebody misunderstanding something.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
* Old guys who still try to say, “I see your bet... and raise you [x].” (Yes, this is still a thing.)

* People who keep loudly arguing/debating a hand from half an orbit ago, talking over the new action.

* Guy on his phone nonstop who has to be reminded that it’s his blind or action every single hand.

* String betters.

* People who habitually either act out of turn, OR never know when it’s on them.

* Amateurs who try to hide their lone high denom chip begins their stack.

* Players who constantly try to quiz you about what you had in a hand, well after you’ve made it clear that you’re not the type to tell.

* Dealers who make mistakes because they are so busy talking with regs, or trying to be the life of the party.

* Players who are more focused on shouting to their buddy at another table about what just happened, or (in a tourney) more focused on their $10 Last Longer bet with a friend at another table than keeping things moving at their own.

* People who in a tourney who never know what level the blinds are at, including when you just told them last hand.

* Players in a self-dealt game nittily stack every chip they just won in a hand before bothering to cut/pass the deck/clear cards/deal.

None of these things individually really “tilt me.” But I enough of them occur in combination or in succession, I can start feeling exasperated with the game, and start playing less than optimally.
** sigh **

* People who continue to defend shuffle-ahead for self-dealt games even after it has been proven to be less efficient and more error-prone than the shuffle-behind method.

;)
 

MattyMatt

Pair
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
133
Reaction score
69
Location
New York
One example: Player B shows instead of waiting for Player A to show (or fold). Immediately upon Player B showing his cards, Player A yells "CALL" and flips over his cards, thinking action was on him to call or fold to Player B's all-in bet. Only gets uglier from there (he-said she-said), and that's not the only scenario where acting out of turn can only cause problems, while acting in turn never does. A simple "the actions's on you" comment from Player B to Player A is always correct, and never generates an issue due to somebody misunderstanding something.
As far as I can see you're describing two different things now. I don't think anybody is going to disagree that the above is just plain stupid.

I always advocate speaking one's decision clearly rather than relying on gestures and motions, and what you're describing is someone acting without speaking before the betting round has completed and then someone else misunderstanding that.

But to me that's entirely different from:

A: Says "check"
B: Says "check"
A: Hesitates
B: Shows first to speed up the process.

Whether or not betting is involved is irrelevant to me as long as betting concludes before B shows before A. And I have no recollection of seeing a rule allowing for tabling the hand = checking and tabling... or that it's even an accepted etiquette.

Just seems like fundamentally different things; your case is someone checking by showing cards (is that even legal?), 'our' case is betting rounds are over and we're in the showdown - someone takes initiative to show "out of turn".

PS: I personally verbally check behind to close betting and if the player in front of me is hesitating and I feel like it I just show my hand. I don't care if they muck it if I show first. If two other people do this and both are hesitating then of course the rest of us who pay attention push for the first to act to show first, or the aggressor to show first.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
As far as I can see you're describing two different things now. I don't think anybody is going to disagree that the above is just plain stupid.

I always advocate speaking one's decision clearly rather than relying on gestures and motions, and what you're describing is someone acting without speaking before the betting round has completed and then someone else misunderstanding that.

But to me that's entirely different from:

A: Says "check"
B: Says "check"
A: Hesitates
B: Shows first to speed up the process.

Whether or not betting is involved is irrelevant to me as long as betting concludes before B shows before A. And I have no recollection of seeing a rule allowing for tabling the hand = checking and tabling... or that it's even an accepted etiquette.

Just seems like fundamentally different things; your case is someone checking by showing cards (is that even legal?), 'our' case is betting rounds are over and we're in the showdown - someone takes initiative to show "out of turn".

PS: I personally verbally check behind to close betting and if the player in front of me is hesitating and I feel like it I just show my hand. I don't care if they muck it if I show first. If two other people do this and both are hesitating then of course the rest of us who pay attention push for the first to act to show first, or the aggressor to show first.
I think you missed the point. Player B thought they were in showdown (he said 'I'm callin'') and Player A was hesitating to show, so he acted out of turn and showed. And Player A thought they were still in the betting stage (thought Player B had said "I'm all-in"), and was trying to get a tell on whether or not he should call or fold. Nobody else was apparently paying attention, or somebody would have told somebody to act already. Regardless, it's now a mess that easily could have been avoided, simply by following the rules. It's not that hard.

Point is, the confusion never happens if Player B doesn't act out of turn. And that's just one example, but certainly not the only one. There's no good reason to act out of turn - ever - but plenty of good reasons not to.
 

Highli99

Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Jul 6, 2018
Messages
1,236
Reaction score
1,474
Location
Maryland
I had a funny event at the last tournament I was in. Didn't tilt me but only because of how it played out.

A couple levels in it is my deal and as I follow the action I see a player who for some reason has placed his hand on the rail. I'm new at the game so I say to the man, "Sir, I hate to be that guy but would you mind putting your cards on the table so everyone knows you are in the hand". He politely complies. I then notice he has no chips in front of him. I say "Sir, do you have any chips?". He responds, "Yes, they are on my lap". Maintaining my composure, I then respond, "Sir, would you mind putting your chips on the table so all of us can see them?" He picks a rack up off his lap and puts it on the table. I then say, "I know you probably hate me by now, but do you mind taking the chips out of the rack while you are playing? This is customary". He complies but at this point I know he hates me forever. Keep in mind HE IS STILL IN THE HAND. In the midst of this, he ends up all in and busts. IN THE SAME HAND.

As the story was retold later in the night, it went down "Sir, can you put you cards on the table? Sir, can you put your chips on the table? Sir, can you leave the table?"
 

1A25R

Two Pair
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
295
Reaction score
286
Location
Montreux - Switzerland
I noticed in my last tournament, the gap that exist between 2 generation of players, let's say the 60+ and 40 and bellow.
I will not say that there is a lack of "etiquette" but rather a different "poker etiquette"
Most of the 50+ had their chips in the racks and in general they play with a mindset "face value" and not in BB or Pot Size.
(this hands worth $$$ vs. I will raise xBB) usually they are busted because they over estimated their hand like KQ on a A Q 7 board. And as @Highli99 tells in his post, I saw most of the 50+ hide their card behind their stacks which are behind their hands, or cards under their hands over the rail.

And no matter how many time do you ask "please show that you are in the game" ; they have the eyes lost in the board and mechanically they fall back in the old habits 2 hands later.

I've discussed with my stepfather about it, and the best answer that he could provide me it's that in the 70's and 80's there was a lot of gambling at the rear of pubs, mostly dices and 5 Card Draw. And part of the hype back them was to "fool the adversary" (I think that today it's clearly angle shooting). They could have $1500 on the table and another $1000 in the poker and those $$$ was also in play and no-one complained about it.
Then poker disappeared until late 2000 and the same old guys, looking for some fun play as they were used to because they do not know that poker evolved with TDA rules and Robert Rules and House rules. They do not use internet and the last poker TV show disappeared with Poker After dark.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
I noticed in my last tournament, the gap that exist between 2 generation of players, let's say the 60+ and 40 and bellow.
I will not say that there is a lack of "etiquette" but rather a different "poker etiquette"
Most of the 50+ had their chips in the racks and in general they play with a mindset "face value" and not in BB or Pot Size.
(this hands worth $$$ vs. I will raise xBB) usually they are busted because they over estimated their hand like KQ on a A Q 7 board. And as @Highli99 tells in his post, I saw most of the 50+ hide their card behind their stacks which are behind their hands, or cards under their hands over the rail.

And no matter how many time do you ask "please show that you are in the game" ; they have the eyes lost in the board and mechanically they fall back in the old habits 2 hands later.

I've discussed with my stepfather about it, and the best answer that he could provide me it's that in the 70's and 80's there was a lot of gambling at the rear of pubs, mostly dices and 5 Card Draw. And part of the hype back them was to "fool the adversary" (I think that today it's clearly angle shooting). They could have $1500 on the table and another $1000 in the poker and those $$$ was also in play and no-one complained about it.
Then poker disappeared until late 2000 and the same old guys, looking for some fun play as they were used to because they do not know that poker evolved with TDA rules and Robert Rules and House rules. They do not use internet and the last poker TV show disappeared with Poker After dark.
Glad you guys keep all that crazy old-man behavior in Europe. Bit more civilized here in the USA.
 

1A25R

Two Pair
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
295
Reaction score
286
Location
Montreux - Switzerland
Yep, sometimes it's even mistical...
Unlincenced gambling room ran by Turks:
90% of players are from the balkans and plays quite large loose passive. My friend plays tight premium hands and value bet collecting big pots.
At one time one of the guys ask if he can touch him (my friend) so he can also have a bit of luck. My friend say "of course" , thinking that was a joke. The guy touch my friend's hands and then rub his head to "bring some luck to him "
......
:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
 

Schmendr1ck

Flush
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,882
Location
Orlando, FL
Thread title: "What tilts you?"

Answer: Players who don't act when it's their turn to act. And that includes players at showdown who refuse to either fold or show when action is on them.

If I'm not the aggressor (or first to act in rotation order, if applicable), I'm not showing jack-shit until the correct player acts. Waiting until it's my turn is never against the rules, and it will never inadvertently cause some kind of issue (if a player didn't think the betting had actually ended, or mis-heard an "ALL-in" vs "cALL", etc.). It's never wrong to wait until action is on you to show, but it can potentially create a huge mess to show prematurely.

That's a good enough reason for me to follow the rules, every single time, regardless of cash game or tournament. Make the time-wasting asshat either show his hand or fold; I"m not the one at fault here (but could be the one at risk).
Fair enough, and I'll admit that showing out of order does have some potential to create a problem, though I probably think the likelihood of such a problem occurring is a lot lower than you do. I accept that risk, though, for the reward of faster showdowns and not forcing my opponents to show failed bluffs.

And to stay on-topic, I get a little tilted when you and PZ equate showing in order with "following the rules." ;) You and PZ have a ton of well-deserved respect here when it comes to poker rules, and I'm only pressing this issue because I want it to be clear that showing out of order does not violate any rules (at least not in RRoP or TDA). If it did, or even if it was legal but angle-y, I wouldn't be doing it.

That's all, I'm ready to move on to complaining about something else. :sneaky:
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
And to stay on-topic, I get a little tilted when you and PZ equate showing in order with "following the rules." ;)

I want it to be clear that showing out of order does not violate any rules (at least not in RRoP or TDA). If it did, or even if it was legal but angle-y, I wouldn't be doing it.
Technically correct. Only REFUSING to show cards in proper order is against the rules. But showing out of order, while not a punishable offense, certainly goes against the intent of the rule regarding showdown order.

Showing your hand out of order only makes you an enabler, not a violator. :sneaky:

You are effectively allowing him to break a rule (that he doesn't want to follow for selfish personal reasons).

And allowing rules to be selectively broken (vs consistently enforced) for any reason is a slippery slope. I've even seen you preach that aspect. :D
 

Schmendr1ck

Flush
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,882
Location
Orlando, FL
Technically correct. Only REFUSING to show cards in proper order is against the rules. But showing out of order, while not a punishable offense, certainly goes against the intent of the rule regarding showdown order.

Showing your hand out of order only makes you an enabler, not a violator. :sneaky:

You are effectively allowing him to break a rule (that he doesn't want to follow for selfish personal reasons).

And allowing rules to be selectively broken (vs consistently enforced) for any reason is a slippery slope. I've even seen you preach that aspect. :D
Oh yeah, I'm a huge advocate of consistent rules enforcement, and that hasn't changed. I think the crux of the problem is that we disagree on whether showdown order is actually a rule.

I read 17A (TDA 2017) as: "Players should spontaneously table or discard at showdown. If they don't, here is a specific tabling order that the TD may choose to enforce." (That's off the top of my head but pretty damned close to the actual wording.) The word spontaneously indicates, to me, that players at showdown can table or discard at any time and in any order they choose.

I think you interpret this rule as: "This is the order in which hands must always be shown down, and the TD will enforce it if necessary." Is that right?
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
Also without looking up the specific wording.....

Rules state a predetermined order (based on parameters) in which players are expected to act -- and is applicable to both betting actions and showing of hands. Violating that order is not a wise idea, for any reason.

The TD shouldn't have to get involved, but if he does, a player willingly acting against the rules (or intent of the rules) doesn't have much in their arsenal to back up their action(s).

The only times that I'm showing a hand out of proper order is if instructed to do so by the dealer (or staff), or if I have the nuts (also referenced in the rules as 'probable winner').
 

1A25R

Two Pair
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
295
Reaction score
286
Location
Montreux - Switzerland
17: Non All-In Showdowns & Showdown Order

A: In a non all-in showdown, if cards are not spontaneously tabled or discarded, the TD may enforce an order of show. The last aggressive player on the final betting round (final street) must table first. If there was no final round bet, the player who would act first in a final betting round must table first (i.e. first seat left of the button in flop games, high hand showing in stud, low hand in razz, etc.).

B: A non all-in showdown is uncontested if all but one player mucks face down without tabling. The last player with live cards wins and is not required to table the cards.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
17,078
Reaction score
19,206
Location
Atlanta
^^ And rule 17B is improperly worded. It should read:

"...all but one player discards or folds face down..."

Only dealers muck cards, not players.
 

Poker Zombie

Straight Flush
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
8,434
Reaction score
11,829
Location
Nashville-ish, TN
Oh yeah, I'm a huge advocate of consistent rules enforcement, and that hasn't changed. I think the crux of the problem is that we disagree on whether showdown order is actually a rule.

I read 17A (TDA 2017) as: "Players should spontaneously table or discard at showdown. If they don't, here is a specific tabling order that the TD may choose to enforce." (That's off the top of my head but pretty damned close to the actual wording.) The word spontaneously indicates, to me, that players at showdown can table or discard at any time and in any order they choose.

I think you interpret this rule as: "This is the order in which hands must always be shown down, and the TD will enforce it if necessary." Is that right?
That is how I read it. Must = must. The period after the "TD may enforce" clause ends that thought, and a new section of ruling follows.

However, this is for the lawyers to battle through.

I do think that showing out of order allows for angle shooting (you yourself said you table out of sequence to gain an advantage), and the possibility to chip dump. Is it egregious? No. But in my games, if I see someone that continually refuses to show, I will enforce the order of show, including tabling the delayer's cards face up before mucking them.
 

MattyMatt

Pair
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
133
Reaction score
69
Location
New York
B: A non all-in showdown is uncontested if all but one player mucks face down without tabling. The last player with live cards wins and is not required to table the cards.
This is specific to tournaments, correct?

If it's a cash game then a non-all-in showdown where there has been betting which has subsequently concluded requires the winner to table the cards. If there's betting on the final round, all-in or not, the one receiving the pot needs to table the cards (in at least cash games).
 

Schmendr1ck

Flush
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,882
Location
Orlando, FL
Robert's Rules of Poker v11 - The Showdown:
8. If everyone checks (or is all-in) on the final betting round, the player who acted first is the first to show the hand. If there is wagering on the final betting round, the last player to take aggressive action by a bet or raise is the first to show the hand. In order to speed up the game, a player holding a probable winner is encouraged to show the hand without delay. If there are one or more side pots (because someone is all-in), players are asked to aid in determining the pot winner by not showing their cards until a pot they are in is being settled. A player may opt to throw his hand away after all the betting for the deal is over, rather than compete to win the pot. However, the other players do not lose the right to request the hand be shown if he does so.
 

MattyMatt

Pair
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
133
Reaction score
69
Location
New York
I think you missed the point. Player B thought they were in showdown (he said 'I'm callin'') and Player A was hesitating to show, so he acted out of turn and showed. And Player A thought they were still in the betting stage (thought Player B had said "I'm all-in"), and was trying to get a tell on whether or not he should call or fold.
I'm not following what you're saying here.

A bets
B calls and says "callin" and tables
A thinks B is "all in" and... then what?...

Nothing changes here.

Actually, come to think of it, why would B go all-in and show his cards to A before A responds? Is that even allowed? And did B never move his chips (call) out in front of his stack?

I'm just not seeing where the confusion is that stems from tabling the cards, just from A not listening.

Regardless, it's now a mess that easily could have been avoided, simply by following the rules. It's not that hard.

Point is, the confusion never happens if Player B doesn't act out of turn. And that's just one example, but certainly not the only one. There's no good reason to act out of turn - ever - but plenty of good reasons not to.
Well, I think there are a couple of things to say about that; first, that people appear to disagree with you on this issue. I and others think that it's ok to sometimes show 'early' to just be done with it and get to the next hand sooner. So disregarding the rules for the purpose of talking about any "good reason" people seem to disagree.

Secondly, I think you're being a bit wishy-washy with your reasoning here; either we're following the rules which appear to clearly allow for showing 'out of sequence' or we follow the intent - but - how do you determine the intent of the rules in the first place?

"Also without looking up the specific wording..... Rules state a predetermined order (based on parameters) in which players are expected to act"

You can't have it both ways here. The rules do make statements, and they appear to include that people are expected and allowed to show whenever, and they further state that if people aren't showing there's a set sequence to be enforced. But that latter case (your preference) follows that people are not showing spontaneously in any order. Spontaneous first, sequence secondly.

The problem is that you see the second as the intent of the rule, but you can't get to that point without actually looking up the specific wording, and when you do it really doesn't look like it supports your preference. There is nothing in the wording that says it.

By the way: I'm more than happy to conform to any house-rules applied on this issue, I really don't care that much about it.
 

1A25R

Two Pair
Joined
Nov 30, 2018
Messages
295
Reaction score
286
Location
Montreux - Switzerland
This is specific to tournaments, correct?
Yup, But only for the tournament that uses the TDA rules.


For the "cash rules" you must reefer to the rules of the Casino, Poker Room, whatever place you are playing.
There could be some differences between casinos as there is no a only one unique set of rules applied to cash game.
IE; I noticed some differences between MGM Resorts and Caesars owned casinos (but the same rules applied among all the casinos within the same holding)
 

Schmendr1ck

Flush
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,882
Location
Orlando, FL
I do think that showing out of order allows for angle shooting (you yourself said you table out of sequence to gain an advantage), and the possibility to chip dump.
I do a lot of perfectly legal things (that aren't angle-shooting) to give myself an advantage in poker. That's the point of the game, no?

And if I'm going to chip dump, I'm not going to showdown and risking that someone may ask to see my cards. I'm folding to turn or river bets.

But in my games, if I see someone that continually refuses to show, I will enforce the order of show, including tabling the delayer's cards face up before mucking them.
100% agreed as stated earlier. If someone is intentionally abusing the situation, it's different from "I think I have the best hand so I'm going to show first."
 

Schmendr1ck

Flush
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
1,372
Reaction score
1,882
Location
Orlando, FL
For the record, there is some equally contentious discussion about this topic on the TDA forums. Based on what I read there, it sounds to me like the rules allow out-of-order tabling of hands, but some people are of the opinion that it's a bad idea and choose not to do it.

I won't try to change anyone's opinion that it's unwise or against "the intent of the rules," but I remain convinced that it is perfectly legal.
 

Poker Zombie

Straight Flush
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
8,434
Reaction score
11,829
Location
Nashville-ish, TN
And if I'm going to chip dump, I'm not going to showdown and risking that someone may ask to see my cards. I'm folding to turn or river bets.
To be the recipient of the chips in a chip-dump, you show, then the possibly better hand can still fold. If the game is Limit, then going to the river is the best option.

Note: I am not accusing you of doing anything illegal. I'm just trying to point out that it could be used by someone to angle-shoot or to collude. If that door is open I'd prefer to close it, by requiring the correct order of play.
 
Top Bottom