[bigfatbastard]

"Bearing in mind that although there is a responsibility to the player to recognise his hand there is also a rule of "cards speak"."Why have two contradictory rules - you either have cards speak - if the cards are tabled then he gets the pot, or you don't have cards speak.Danny,I don't think our friend Mr. boomstix said that there was a "rule" to recognise his own hand, just a responsibility. That the cards speak for themselves should have priority (rule or not), and in a self-dealt game as this was, it is also the responsibility of other players to speak up about the exposed cards - which, it seems, they did - eventually!Without knowing the character of the players involved it is impossible to make any assumption, but there must be some level of suspicion (though perhaps not quite accusation) directed towards the player/dealer who himself has the same responsibility to speak up, but instead took the pot and pushed the cards to the next player (or is he a ba-na-na too?).Ultimately the muppet with the straight flush gets the pot, or as ant0s put it: "cards were exposed.. maybe the clown does get the pot." Unfortunately, this person's stupidity/ ignorance is no reason to dishonour the game.So - what happened?BFBOf course there remains the clarification questions of:-Who mucked the cards, the player or the dealer? -Were the cards actually exposed and opened up, or just seen by a couple of people beside him?-How quickly did the dealer shove everything to the next person, and should anything be inferred by his actions? (ie: did he always move things along this fast or just this time?)-How long afterwards did the other players speak up?-Was there any independent observer to assist?-Was is too late or impossible to 'reconstruct' the hands?-Did Pazz say "Ya Mum" and Andre say "giggidy" and if so, what do think was meant by those statments and do they have any bearing on the subsequent events?-Who's on first?