Re: [ba-poker] Bay 101 "I'm playing the board"

[Michael Hunter <michael.hunter1(deleted the rest)>]

[...]
> Discussed it with Steve later. Steve says there has
> been a good bit of discussion about that rule and
> the dealer was essentially correct.  If things were
> a bit more complicated he would make a subjective
> ruling based on the circumstances -- something like
> if the dealer was already in possession of the hand
> or had already mucked it, etc.
> 
> My thoughts were:
> 1) Rather ill defined rule and seemingly contradictory.
> 2) What happened to showing hands to verify they are
>    legitimate and not the result of a bad deck or misdeal?
>    Like finding two 4 of spades in the deck or finding
>    three cards in your hand?
> 
> Steve's closing comment was that he didn't necessarily
> think it was a good rule or completely agree with it.
> 
> thoughts?
> 

I've seen a limit O/8 game where you only have to show the cards you are 
playing.  But I think thats the only game I've seen where you didn't have to 
show a complete hand to win (I guess I've also seen Bob C. comment that 
unintentionally fouled hands [unnoticed missing card in stud] shouldn't kill 
and otherwise winning hand).

Was there any indication what value Bay 101 felt they got from this change in 
rules?  I've allowed a chop pot when all of the other players hand wasn't  
shown for social reasons but that doesn't seem like an aspect of the game the 
house should become involve in!?

                mph