By Tommy Angelo
The rule of the IWTSTH does not catch or not deter cheaters.
A good team of collusion can dodge the IWTSTH by lying down all but one player, before the showdown.
A good team of collusion can dodge the IWTSTH by lying down all but one player, before the showdown.
The rule of the IWTSTH does not catch or not deter cheaters.
A good team of collusion can dodge the IWTSTH by lying down all but one player, before the showdown. For example, on the turn, player A has the nuts. He does know one of its partners, player C. Player C has no pair or draw. Player B, the victim, has a good hand. Player A and C then punish player B restarting at the turn. On the River, the player has bet. What will do, player C has no importance. Player C goes to bed. No one can see the hand of player C, even using the IWTSTH rule, no matter how great will be your doubts to the effect that the players A and C cheat. It is a typical collusion scenario and this isn't the IWTSTH which will protect you. The rule of the IWTSTH fails to mandate only.
Some claim that the IWTSTH rule will deter the cheats in the same way that speed tickets discourage the drivers of the speeding. But laws do not deter criminals just because they exist. Drivers who are speeding may be taken and the reason for which such law exists. But the rule of the IWTSTH is not effective to avoid or eliminate collusion.
A variation indicates that something is wrong
The variation is that only the players in the hand can ask to see a hand at the showdown. This rule defeated the IWTSTH reason preventing us from see the hand of those who have folded quickly. So why this variation exist? Because it reduces considerably the IWTSTH and therefore, reduced use abuse. The only reason for this variation is to reduce abuse of the IWTSTH.
The most ridiculous variation: If the period begins face-to-face on the river and the hand winner asks to see his opponent cards, the hand of the loser remains active if he has the best hand. Can you suspect one any collusion here? Non. This is another attempt by odd around the IWTSTH.
The existence of these variations shows us that the poker community is aware of this problem and that it is starting to correct the IWTSTH. But this is not enough. We are trying to stop the gangrene with some Band Aids. A brave effort, but alas, vain because amputation is the only valid remedy.
In summary
Several discussions are oriented on the evolution of the poker, on the fact and make more attractive the poker in the eyes of new players on how make a pleasant and amusing poker table. The IWTSTH encourages the bad etiquette and especially to play in a tougher manner. It is bad for the present and the future of poker.
Laws that protect the mass exceptions have something disturbing. A good example of this is the security in airports. We tolerate this harassment because you want to have peace of mind. With the rule of IWTSTH, we are also forced to tolerate the inconvenience, but we get nothing in return. Imagine this: move you in the mountains and you pay $5000 per year in insurance to protect you from flooding. You ask your neighbors why they waste their money and they respond that they have always had such insurance and this is so. With the rule of the IWTSTH, we are also stubborn residents facilities. We continue to pay a big price hostility over violation of privacy for a font that fails its mandate, i.e. to catch cheaters. We are so stupid?
Laws are made to be changed. Limits of speed to the dress code, or even rules on tobacco. Nothing is frozen in concrete. Praise God that such flexibility is to improve our living conditions. We have the freedom to test the novelty and variations, accepting what works and dismissing what does not work.
The reason for the IWTSTH is to protect us from the collusion, but this rule failed. In addition, it is often used, but for good reasons rarely. This rule is ineffective and abusive. What should we make of it now? Push it to the back of the hand!
A good team of collusion can dodge the IWTSTH by lying down all but one player, before the showdown. For example, on the turn, player A has the nuts. He does know one of its partners, player C. Player C has no pair or draw. Player B, the victim, has a good hand. Player A and C then punish player B restarting at the turn. On the River, the player has bet. What will do, player C has no importance. Player C goes to bed. No one can see the hand of player C, even using the IWTSTH rule, no matter how great will be your doubts to the effect that the players A and C cheat. It is a typical collusion scenario and this isn't the IWTSTH which will protect you. The rule of the IWTSTH fails to mandate only.
Some claim that the IWTSTH rule will deter the cheats in the same way that speed tickets discourage the drivers of the speeding. But laws do not deter criminals just because they exist. Drivers who are speeding may be taken and the reason for which such law exists. But the rule of the IWTSTH is not effective to avoid or eliminate collusion.
A variation indicates that something is wrong
The variation is that only the players in the hand can ask to see a hand at the showdown. This rule defeated the IWTSTH reason preventing us from see the hand of those who have folded quickly. So why this variation exist? Because it reduces considerably the IWTSTH and therefore, reduced use abuse. The only reason for this variation is to reduce abuse of the IWTSTH.
The most ridiculous variation: If the period begins face-to-face on the river and the hand winner asks to see his opponent cards, the hand of the loser remains active if he has the best hand. Can you suspect one any collusion here? Non. This is another attempt by odd around the IWTSTH.
The existence of these variations shows us that the poker community is aware of this problem and that it is starting to correct the IWTSTH. But this is not enough. We are trying to stop the gangrene with some Band Aids. A brave effort, but alas, vain because amputation is the only valid remedy.
In summary
Several discussions are oriented on the evolution of the poker, on the fact and make more attractive the poker in the eyes of new players on how make a pleasant and amusing poker table. The IWTSTH encourages the bad etiquette and especially to play in a tougher manner. It is bad for the present and the future of poker.
Laws that protect the mass exceptions have something disturbing. A good example of this is the security in airports. We tolerate this harassment because you want to have peace of mind. With the rule of IWTSTH, we are also forced to tolerate the inconvenience, but we get nothing in return. Imagine this: move you in the mountains and you pay $5000 per year in insurance to protect you from flooding. You ask your neighbors why they waste their money and they respond that they have always had such insurance and this is so. With the rule of the IWTSTH, we are also stubborn residents facilities. We continue to pay a big price hostility over violation of privacy for a font that fails its mandate, i.e. to catch cheaters. We are so stupid?
Laws are made to be changed. Limits of speed to the dress code, or even rules on tobacco. Nothing is frozen in concrete. Praise God that such flexibility is to improve our living conditions. We have the freedom to test the novelty and variations, accepting what works and dismissing what does not work.
The reason for the IWTSTH is to protect us from the collusion, but this rule failed. In addition, it is often used, but for good reasons rarely. This rule is ineffective and abusive. What should we make of it now? Push it to the back of the hand!
