Poker on 4 with Hartigan.

1267

A guy tripple barrels Liv Boeree,  she calls the river.

He says you got it, and mucks his hand.

She scoops the pot and the hand ends without her turning her cards over, 

isn't this just an easy way for players to collude .?

The_Don90

When i was at UKIPT i was tripple barreled and was told i had to show to claim the pot the guy also insta mucked his hand, i had to show my Ace high that i hero called with.

I want to see clarification here. Both tournys run by same people, and i have to show and Liv doesnt. Sigh

rancid

mmmmmm you have to show to claim but if oppo mucks and doesn't show then the pot is yours by default

scotty77

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

When i was at UKIPT i was tripple barreled and was told i had to show to claim the pot the guy also insta mucked his hand, i had to show my Ace high that i hero called with. I want to see clarification here. Both tournys run by same people, and i have to show and Liv doesnt. Sigh
Posted by The_Don90

thats strange because at the same UKIPT tournie I called someone down who then insta mucked and I didn't ahve to show my hand

Dazler

surley if your the caller then its exactly that! you are calling to see there hand and they must show!

just watched it and yes collusion could be possible here. Was very strange, or was it because she was all in and he was the shover that he didnt have to show because she couldnt reraise him at that point? if she had chips left would it be a different story?

rancid

boree called to see his cards, he mucked
if u call and they fold/muck then it's the same thing - you don't have to show

Dazler

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:
[QUOTE]boree called to see his cards, he mucked if u call and they fold/muck then it's the same thing - you don't have to show
Posted by rancid

but players used to use the term 'ill see you'. Did this term stop and just 'call' used because of the reason above.

how can it be the same thing.

AMYBR

You have to love Hartigan and Stapelton as commentators.

JockBMW

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

You have to love Hartigan and Stapelton as commentators.
Posted by AMYBR

ive dropped many hints to James, that i think Mr Stapleton is looking tired.  I think he should be replaced by an amusing , good looking Scotsman, with a keen intellect and great understanding of the nuances of Poker.

I'm expecting my ticket to the bahamas to arrive any day now ;o)

aussie09

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan. : ive dropped many hints to James, that i think Mr Stapleton is looking tired.  I think he should be replaced by an amusing , good looking Scotsman, with a keen intellect and great understanding of the nuances of Poker. I'm expecting my ticket to the bahamas to arrive any day now ;o)
Posted by JockBMW

thanks pete

J-Hartigan

From the GPTL rules (which apply to all EPT and UKIPT tournaments):

51. Winning hand - A player must show all of their cards to collect the pot. This includes playing the board. If there is only one player remaining with cards, they do not have to show a winning hand to collect the pot. For example, player B bets the river and player A calls. Player B then mucks leaving player A as the only player remaining in the pot with cards. Player A then collects the pot without having to show his or her hand.

AMYBR

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan. : ive dropped many hints to James, that i think Mr Stapleton is looking tired.  I think he should be replaced by an amusing , good looking Scotsman, with a keen intellect and great understanding of the nuances of Poker. I'm expecting my ticket to the bahamas to arrive any day now ;o)
Posted by JockBMW

Lol yeah he does look a bit like Matt Cardle performing in front of millions these days

Genuinely think I enjoy the banter more than the show lately.  Poker on the radio ftw

Def the A team

aussie09

i am sure james won't be reading these posts (professional modesty and with far better things to do with his time) but, yes, he and jon are superb and make a poker programme that can be watched twice.

my favourite line was from last year....

james, "it must be nice to have your brother come and rail you."
jon, "my brother's an idiot."



 

AMYBR

lol there are so many tbf.

Never liked victor Ramdin anyway.  Suspect was a bit of a hero call from Boree too.

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan. : thats strange because at the same UKIPT tournie I called someone down who then insta mucked and I didn't ahve to show my hand
Posted by scotty77

One thing i noticed was dealer inconsistancy at this tourny, may account for it. Tbh i wasnt arguing that late into the night.

Situation of dealer consistancy invovles the no mobile phones at the table. As you probably know No mobile phones. fair enough. Im a regular tweeter when playing live. However i found that to most dealers if your not in the hand dont bother and are fine with it. However late in the day between hands we got a new dealer first hand he goes to deal im posting a small tweet. Although i am also big blind. I had a quick tweet to post and was quickly doing this over the dealer change over. First card dealt before i even have one card im told to put my phone away. I do and just assume its because id now have a card. However 2 hands later theres a raise and 3bet from EP i fold my BTN and start finnishing my tweet. I get another warning. Confused about it i just didnt tweet in this dealers spell. When the next dealer came i asked for clarification he said if your not in a hand no worries. Same as it had been all day.

Although this is talking about the same tourny again where the board reads 22227 and opponent shows 88 and i show K7 and had to call floor to win the pot.

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

surley if your the caller then its exactly that! you are calling to see there hand and they must show! just watched it and yes collusion could be possible here. Was very strange, or was it because she was all in and he was the shover that he didnt have to show because she couldnt reraise him at that point? if she had chips left would it be a different story?
Posted by Dazler

One thing i did notice at the UKIPT regards to this makes sense. One guy bet river the other guy called i cant mind who mucked but the other guy said "i want to see his cards" dealer said upon calling you have to declare you want to see the cards.

Obviously this meant later on there was alot of "i want to see what you have" before saying the word "call" and people including myself even started using that line to get live tells on certain players.

J-Hartigan

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan. : One thing i noticed was dealer inconsistancy at this tourny, may account for it. Tbh i wasnt arguing that late into the night. Situation of dealer consistancy invovles the no mobile phones at the table. As you probably know No mobile phones. fair enough. Im a regular tweeter when playing live. However i found that to most dealers if your not in the hand dont bother and are fine with it. However late in the day between hands we got a new dealer first hand he goes to deal im posting a small tweet. Although i am also big blind. I had a quick tweet to post and was quickly doing this over the dealer change over. First card dealt before i even have one card im told to put my phone away. I do and just assume its because id now have a card. However 2 hands later theres a raise and 3bet from EP i fold my BTN and start finnishing my tweet. I get another warning. Confused about it i just didnt tweet in this dealers spell. When the next dealer came i asked for clarification he said if your not in a hand no worries. Same as it had been all day. Although this is talking about the same tourny again where the board reads 22227 and opponent shows 88 and i show K7 and had to call floor to win the pot.
Posted by The_Don90

DTD obviously has its own tournament rules, which the dealing staff are used to following.

When staging a UKIPT, suddenly the dealers are expected to enforce the GPTL regulations (which contain a fair few quirks and unique rules), so it's understandable there would be some "mistakes" and inconsistencies.

Lambert180

Yeah I watched this aswell, and as James has already posted, they did say straight after the hand that it's ruling that applies to EPTs that she didn't need to show her hand because he'd mucked.

AMYBR

I think its a pretty good habit to "attempt" to scoop a pot when oppo mucks in anycase.

If staff call for a ruling its just an aside.

The_Don90

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan. : DTD obviously has its own tournament rules, which the dealing staff are used to following. When staging a UKIPT, suddenly the dealers are expected to enforce the GPTL regulations (which contain a fair few quirks and unique rules), so it's understandable there would be some "mistakes" and inconsistencies.
Posted by J-Hartigan

Yeah James i have no complaints i love the UKIPT events and i also loved the DTD venue. I hope my posts arent comming across that i dislike them because thats certainly not the case. And obviously human error can come into play aswell as people interpet things differently.

One rule can mean two things to two different people when worded the exact same. And for that reason we love so many different aspects of so many different games.

Tikay10

In Response to Re: Poker on 4 with Hartigan.:
[QUOTE]I think its a pretty good habit to "attempt" to scoop a pot when oppo mucks in anycase. If staff call for a ruling its just an aside.
Posted by AMYBR

It's also a habit that would get you a time-penalty or worse in any well-run Venue......

Dealers award us the pot, we never take it until they do, for fear our hands will be, quite rightly, chopped off.
 
I was in a Tourney once where Lord Numpty scooped in the Pot before it was awarded to him - wrongly. There had been THREE all-ins involved, & the Tourney had to be suspended for 45 minutes while the pot was re-constructed to everyone's satisfaction. Not an easy ask,. given that in these spots, all three players exaggarated their claimed chip stack pre-hand......

The kid got a 1 hour pernalty though, to everyone's great satisfaction. Short of total disqualification, that's the longest time-penalty at the Table I have ever seen. Quite right too. I'd have had him taken outside and shot. I think he thought he was playing pub poker, where, of course, it is the default.