2 all ins on bubble, same stack size

I was just wondering what happens if two people with equal stack sizes go all in and get beat on the bubble.

Say there are 4 people left in a STT, 3 places pay, and 2 have the same stack sizes.

Player A has AA
Player B has KK

Both go all in PF

Player C has more chips than both A and B and calls with QQ

Flop comes QQ2 4 6

Player C wins.

Do player's A and B split 3rd place or does player A get 3rd because he had the better hand.

This didn't happen to me but I was wondering because I play a lot of home games and it could happen.

Very interesting, i would love to know the answer

pretty sure the general standard is this, although it may vary from place to place.

That's a question and half.

Same stack size? Hmmmm.

I'd be tempted to say that they would share the place, ie they would both finish 3rd - better hand or not - the fact of the matter is, both the AA and KK were redundant.

I think it comes down to stacksize, if player B had 200 more chips, but still got beat - then i think he would trump player A.

Still, i'm not 100%.

Black_Fox

Interesting. Does it matter when the money goes in? E.g. if everyone checks the Q-Q-x flop and the turn brings a K; everyone goes all-in and the queens of course take the pot with quads. Is it the person with the best preflop hand or the person with the best hand (of the two) when the money goes in?

umm, i don't really follow. it would be the person with the best hand after the river has been dealt as always, no?

Oh, er. That's what you meant when you said "best hand." I'm really dumb.

Ignore everything I've ever written.

... In this thread.

Yes.

BF

Revisiting after quickly thinking a little bit more, I think the scenario that was in my head was that somehow the two players with equal stacks had the same - but losing - hands after the river. I.e. QQ vs JJ on a board of

A-A-A-K-K

Where the third player has the case ace, but all the money went in on the turn.

Edit: This scenario doesn't work either. Dammit. You know what I mean though. I'm sure you can construct some straight or flush example to illustrate it!

then i can only assume they would chop third place money.

(your scenario does work btw unless i'm missing something)

I dont know the answer, but personally i'd be suprised if this was the case - there isn't a 2nd best and 3rd best loser unless there is a split pot - here one person has won, and the other 2 have lost.

I reckon it would either be a share of 3rd, or done in order of acting - i.e first player that went all-in was the first to have his cards shown, andtherefore was the first to be eliminated.

The post I'm about to make can safely be ignored by everyone. I'm merely explaining how strangely my mind decided to look at the situation earlier.

It works in regards to illustrate a situation where they would split the money, but not to show what I thought you meant originally. Like this:

Player A has AK, ace of hearts. He has B and C covered and they have identical stacks.
Player B has KK, no hearts.
Player C has QQ, no hearts.

Everyone slowplays like it's 1999, and the money, somehow, doesn't go in until the turn where it's

Q-5-4-3, all hearts.

The river is another heart. Clearly Player A takes the pot. My interpretation of what you said earlier ("who has the best hand") was - and I was clearly not thinking straight - that it mattered who had the best hand preflop. In this case, it was the QQ-guy who had the best hand before the river, but the KK guy who had the best preflop hand.

This is kinda like a donkament when everyone goes all in preflop first hand, and only one person wins the whole pot. If its a STT and the top 3 pay who would win 2nd and 3rd? Maybe we should try