th 2 options are that the next card is dealt or the one used in Vegas, which I think better, is that the card is returned to the deck, the deck reshuffled and then the top card dealt
Poker ethics question
- Thread starter Rotty
- Start date
th 2 options are that the next card is dealt or the one used in Vegas, which I think better, is that the card is returned to the deck, the deck reshuffled and then the top card dealt
maybe i should have said 'common to us when we play for cash' we find its a good rule to use if a dealer messes up or a card flips over.
Playing for the money is fair enough, its the fact he knows what card is coming and his oppenent didnt when he made his choice that is in question.
Playing for the money is fair enough, its the fact he knows what card is coming and his oppenent didnt when he made his choice that is in question.
If you're going to own up, I'd say return the chips and deal the hand again, even if you put the card back in the deck, shuffle and re-deal, the odds are changed ever so slightly as you now know what card the opposing players don't have. Yeah it sucks but it's the fairest way IMHO.
In a friendly game I'd own up and do the above..that's just one of those things that happens.
In a casino or a tournament with people I didn't know I'd keep schtum and take the hand
In a friendly game I'd own up and do the above..that's just one of those things that happens.
In a casino or a tournament with people I didn't know I'd keep schtum and take the hand
not if you knew the card coming up wasnt going to help though... and thats the problem lol...
Right, but he was going to call and it was going to help. If he was going to call anyway without knowing it doesn't matter...
I agree. But as Rotty says, what would he have done if he saw the card was of no help?
Would he have still called?
I think we are going in circles here, as your the origanal Poker Champ, i shall bow to your knowledge and stop being argumentative.
<ColiN>
Would he have still called?
I think we are going in circles here, as your the origanal Poker Champ, i shall bow to your knowledge and stop being argumentative.
<ColiN>
I too would have scrapped the hand rather than burned the card for this reason, also, depending on who i was playing with as regards to keeping quiet, if it was friends then i'd have owned up, if i didn't know the other players then i would keep quiet.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
if you hadnt hit the flush would the other guy have won? or? i.e if the card had not been the suite that it was.
well i play it too, mainly for cash games though, and im pretty sure they used it on high stakes poker or one of those tv poker shows
back to the OP,
If i was playing with friends, would have owned up, and just split the pot or something so nobody loses out....if i didnt know the poeple though, like in a random tournament, then deffo would have kept quiet
Punishing the opposition rather than the dealer?
opposition should have asked to have the card burnt tbh.
Wait what did you do and did you win?
I didn't feel guilty as I was going to call anyway, I suppose a more interesting question is what I would have done had it been a bad card
As long as you were genuinely going to call before you saw the card then its not an ethical problem in my eyes as long as, like you've hinted above, you would have called even if it was a bad card for you.
unfortunately that is not an option within the rules
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 37,804
- Location
- block 16, cell 12
lol opponent didnt know.
IMO its one of those, if given the play again, would he still have gone all in given the chance of that particular winning card coming down, most of the time they would because they dont know they are already on the way out of the tournament.
Maybe buy said mate a drink sometime,