Posted by Jessica Vecchione on Saturday, 20 September 1997, at 6:04 p.m., in response to Re: Question of Poker Ethics, posted by Harold Fritsche on Saturday, 20 September 1997, at 3:08 p.m.
I agree completely with Harold, you did nothing wrong. I also wanted to bring up a situation from my session last night which I did not react openly to, but seethed about in my chair for about 20 minutes. I'm not sure it's about ethics, but I'd like to hear what some of you would have done, if anything. I flopped a set against top pair with three straight cards on board. On the turn, another straight card fell, I was fairly confident my set was good, and that I was up against top pair, or maybe two pair...it wasn't likely I was against a straight, and the player's mannerisms seemed to confirm this to me. The last card completed the straight on the board. The player (who was first to act) checked to me and I bet. He reluctantly called. I quickly turned over my cards to reveal my set. He held his cards for his neighbor to see, nodding his head in disgust, obviously about to muck, when his neighbor (they were not friends) yelled out, "There's a straight on board." The player confusedly turned up his cards on the table, and the dealer proceeded to split up the chips. I was fumming, but didn't say anything, partly because I hate controversy at the table, and partly because I'm a wimp! What would you have done? The player who ripped $70 or so out of my pocket was fairly inexperienced. He wasn't trying to be malicious. The dealer, by the way, was completely indifferent to the whole situation.
When I told a friend about this later in the evening, he said he would have gone ballistic. He also believed it was the dealer's place to say something to the player who announced the board.
(( Jessica perhaps takes bad beat and seethes/fumes for
20 minutes. Postmortem advice was to "go ballistic" ))
Let me offer a different opinion:
I had something like that happen to me as well Thursday.
I hope I don't start a pseudo-bad-beat thread, but there IS a moral to my little story:
Shorthanded 15-30, mostly heads up pot the whole way, ~$250. Heads up at the river, I showed down top pair (or so..) with a 4-flush on board. Opp says "thats good" and pitches his hand without showing it. Opp's neighbor has seen his cards and says, "You had a flush." Dealer pauses for a microsecond without mucking the cards, enough time for the player to say "gimme back my hand," and turnover a random holding that happened to make a flush. Floorman! After making a final decision and then changing his mind twice (I guess they're final unless someone doesn't like them), pot goes to the flush. Sometime between decisions two and three, the floorman called for time to consult chiprunners, cocktail waitresses etc. During the intermission I offered a chop to the opponent who declined (at that time the possession arrow was pointing to me). Finally, the pot goes to opp who promptly offers me half!
I decline.
At the time I was stuck over a grand, but in a good game. The most important thing when in that situation is to maintain the right attitude. While the whole contretemps was unfolding, I was resolving to myself that no matter what the ruling, I would still be on my best game by the very next hand. If anything, the interlude was quite therapeutic. Both opp and kibbitzer had lots of chips, but were destined to lose them if they just played long enough. (Don't quote me GTOT, their long run wasn't too long!) When the ruling finally came, I was so zenned on the objective, I declined his offer without even the slightest thought. After the ruling I shed nothing but good vibes to keep a happy gamblin game afloat. The kibbitzer was quite apologetic but I wouldn't hear anything of the sort. I bent over backwards to let opp know that I harbored him no ill will. I did slander the floorman for jerkin my chain, but I didn't mean it, and it helped build us-against-them table unity. While every table in the joint broke as the sun came up, our little short-handed game kept going and going and going..
Fast forward 14 hours later:
Opp and kibbitzer lose over a grand each;
JG books substantial winner.
No EV in fuming.
Note: If you work for the IRS, the above story may well have been apocryphal.
Which elicited this followup:
Posted by Tom Haley on Sunday, 21 September 1997, at 10:23 a.m., in response to John Finn wouldn't fume, posted by Jim Geary on Saturday, 20 September 1997, at 8:54 p.m.
Wow ! A truly excellent post. Definitely behaivior that we should all strive for.
Last Modified 2/9/00