Why did I come in 3rd?

#1 28-01-2008, 5:09 PM

Shouldn't this have been a split pot? If not, shouldn't the HAND determine 2/3, not the chip stack, since 1st took BOTH of our stacks?

PokerStars Game #14884813376: Tournament #75441904, $3.00+$0.40 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2008/01/28 - 11:01:03 (ET)
Table '75441904 1' 10-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: elschy (9930 in chips)
Seat 3: franni22 (2809 in chips)
Seat 5: 09kKahneFan (2261 in chips)
elschy: posts the ante 50
franni22: posts the ante 50
09kKahneFan: posts the ante 50
franni22: posts small blind 400
09kKahneFan: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to 09kKahneFan [6d 6s]
elschy: raises 2400 to 3200
franni22: calls 2359 and is all-in
09kKahneFan: calls 1411 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [Qd Qs 5c]
*** TURN *** [Qd Qs 5c] 9♥
*** RIVER *** [Qd Qs 5c 9h] 4♣
*** SHOW DOWN ***
franni22: shows [Ad Kc] (a pair of Queens)
elschy: shows [Jd Jh] (two pair, Queens and Jacks)
elschy collected 1096 from side pot
09kKahneFan: shows [6d 6s] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
elschy collected 6783 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 7879 Main pot 6783. Side pot 1096. | Rake 0
Board [Qd Qs 5c 9h 4c]
Seat 1: elschy (button) showed [Jd Jh] and won (7879) with two pair, Queens and Jacks
Seat 3: franni22 (small blind) showed [Ad Kc] and lost with a pair of Queens
Seat 5: 09kKahneFan (big blind) showed [6d 6s] and lost with two pair, Queens and Sixes

#2 28-01-2008, 5:13 PM

Hmmm no the JJ is clearly the winner here. No split pot possible.

The AK guy has more chips than you, thus making him 2nd and you 3rd when the 1st place guy knocked you both you.

Anything else?

and i would have folded that 66 hehe - more money for 2nd

#3 28-01-2008, 5:14 PM

PokerStars Tournament #75441904, No Limit Hold'em
Buy-In: $3.00/$0.40
10 players
Total Prize Pool: $30.00
Tournament started - 2008/01/28 - 10:14:52 (ET)

Dear 09kKahneFan,

You finished the tournament in 3rd place.
A $6.00 award has been credited to your Real Money account.

Congratulations!
Thank you for participating.

#4 28-01-2008, 5:15 PM

The hand did determine that you lost. Between second and third is determined by hand starting stack size. There is no second place in a hand, just won-lost.

#5 28-01-2008, 5:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

Shouldn't this have been a split pot? If not, shouldn't the HAND determine 2/3, not the chip stack, since 1st took BOTH of our stacks?

PokerStars Game #14884813376: Tournament #75441904, $3.00+$0.40 Hold'em No Limit - Level X (400/800) - 2008/01/28 - 11:01:03 (ET)
Table '75441904 1' 10-max Seat #1 is the button
Seat 1: elschy (9930 in chips)
Seat 3: franni22 (2809 in chips)
Seat 5: 09kKahneFan (2261 in chips)
elschy: posts the ante 50
franni22: posts the ante 50
09kKahneFan: posts the ante 50
franni22: posts small blind 400
09kKahneFan: posts big blind 800
*** HOLE CARDS ***
Dealt to 09kKahneFan [6d 6s]
elschy: raises 2400 to 3200
franni22: calls 2359 and is all-in
09kKahneFan: calls 1411 and is all-in
*** FLOP *** [Qd Qs 5c]
*** TURN *** [Qd Qs 5c] 9♥
*** RIVER *** [Qd Qs 5c 9h] 4♣
*** SHOW DOWN ***
franni22: shows [Ad Kc] (a pair of Queens)
elschy: shows [Jd Jh] (two pair, Queens and Jacks)
elschy collected 1096 from side pot
09kKahneFan: shows [6d 6s] (two pair, Queens and Sixes)
elschy collected 6783 from main pot
*** SUMMARY ***
Total pot 7879 Main pot 6783. Side pot 1096. | Rake 0
Board [Qd Qs 5c 9h 4c]
Seat 1: elschy (button) showed [Jd Jh] and won (7879) with two pair, Queens and Jacks
Seat 3: franni22 (small blind) showed [Ad Kc] and lost with a pair of Queens
Seat 5: 09kKahneFan (big blind) showed [6d 6s] and lost with two pair, Queens and Sixes

1. Queens and Jacks beats Queens and Sixes. The QQ tie but the JJ beat 66's

2. When two people go out at the same time, the person with the more chips get the higher position. You had the short stack so you would place below Franni.

I hope that helps you out.

#6 28-01-2008, 5:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monoxide

Hmmm no the JJ is clearly the winner here. No split pot possible.

The AK guy has more chips than you, thus making him 2nd and you 3rd when the 1st place guy knocked you both you.

Anything else?

Yes, since 1st took BOTH of our stack, we no longer had chips, so wouldn't it be determined by who has the best hand... or a split pot? Why would you base the results on chips that neither of us had anymore? It would make more sense to base it on who has the best cards. OR, to have us split second place.

BTW, I know why I didn't beat the 1st place winner

#7 28-01-2008, 5:18 PM

I kinda of see what you mean.

But because the 1st place guy powerful hand won overall, there is no question as to what cards either of you or 2nd place guy had, it renders them completely useless.

So then, you look to chip count, who had more chips? 2nd place guy did.

#8 28-01-2008, 5:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steveg1976

1. Queens and Jacks beats Queens and Sixes. The QQ tie but the JJ beat 66's - I understand this, I didn't miss that part

2. When two people go out at the same time, the person with the more chips get the higher position. You had the short stack so you would place below Franni. - Why would you base it on chips that neither of you have? Since a normal win is based on best hand, why wouldn't/shouldn't this be based on best hand? Poker is about best hand, not chip stack.

I hope that helps you out.

Am I making sense in my question?

#9 28-01-2008, 5:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monoxide

I kinda of see what you mean.

But because the 1st place guy powerful hand won overall, there is no question as to what cards either of you or 2nd place guy had, it renders them useless.

So then, you look to chip count, who had more chips? 2nd place guy did.

Why would you look at chip count? Neither of us had chips... but we had cards

#10 28-01-2008, 5:22 PM

Starting chip count, before you were delt cards. The more chips you are holding, the more money you will win if multiple knockouts occur. I.E this exact scenario

#11 28-01-2008, 5:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

Am I making sense in my question?

You asked me how it is decided and in this example since you both lost at the same time the fact that you had a better losing hand than him is irrelavant, Franni had more chips to start the hand with and in this case gets the higher placement. I am not saying it is fair but that is the way is ruled.

#12 28-01-2008, 5:25 PM

I say again, there are two outcomes of a hand - Won and Lost. There is no second and third place. Winners split the pot. The tie-breaker for losers is chip stack size.

#13 28-01-2008, 5:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Monoxide

Starting chip count, before you were delt cards. The more chips you are holding, the more money you will win if multiple knockouts occur.

I understand that, but AFTER the cards were dealt NEITHER of us had any left.

"Here we are, day 1 of the main event and we're going to declair player X the winner because he has the chip lead."

Winners are/should not be declared based on stack size. Poker is about the cards you hold.

If nothing else, why didn't we split 2nd/3rd?

Keep in mind, we're talking about $3 between 2nd and 3rd, so I'm just trying to understand why.

I know this is a losing battle, but do you see where I'm coming from?

#14 28-01-2008, 5:26 PM

There was a discussion earlier about this, forget where. The point is though, in poker there is no such thing as a 2nd place hand. The only thing that matters is whether or not you have the best hand.

But the short answer is just because those are the rules:

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.pokerstars.com/poker/tournaments/rules/

If two or more players are eliminated on the same hand, the player with more chips at the beginning of the hand is placed higher. If players started the hands with an identical amount of chips, both players tie for that rank, and any prizes due to those players will be equally distributed between them. During hand-for-hand play (as described in rule #20 below), two players eliminated during a single "synchronized" hand are treated as having been eliminated on the same hand, even if they are at different tables.

#15 28-01-2008, 5:27 PM

Steve/Pigpen, I understand that it's "the rules", but why would a chip stack, which is no longer there, determine the winner and not the cards which determine the winner in every other way?

#16 28-01-2008, 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

There was a discussion earlier about this, forget where. The point is though, in poker there is no such thing as a 2nd place hand. The only thing that matters is whether or not you have the best hand.

But the short answer is just because those are the rules:

I emailed Stars, I'm sure I'll get this back... but I still don't understand why you look at starting chip count when the ending chip count is 0. It should be the cards.

#17 28-01-2008, 5:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

I understand that, but AFTER the cards were dealt NEITHER of us had any left.

"Here we are, day 1 of the main event and we're going to declair player X the winner because he has the chip lead."

Winners are/should not be declared based on stack size. Poker is about the cards you hold.

If nothing else, why didn't we split 2nd/3rd?

Keep in mind, we're talking about $3 between 2nd and 3rd, so I'm just trying to understand why.

I know this is a losing battle, but do you see where I'm coming from?

Perhaps yes, but it is a valid rule.

You example is true, the guy with the most chips at the end of day 1 is, in a sense, the winner.

If the tournament suddenly had to shut down, I dont know how it works live but online tournaments would pay to the chip count, the guy with the most chips get the most money.

Your argument is just, so ill give an example.

#18 28-01-2008, 5:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

I understand that, but AFTER the cards were dealt NEITHER of us had any left.

"Here we are, day 1 of the main event and we're going to declair player X the winner because he has the chip lead."

Winners are/should not be declared based on stack size. Poker is about the cards you hold.

If nothing else, why didn't we split 2nd/3rd?

Keep in mind, we're talking about $3 between 2nd and 3rd, so I'm just trying to understand why.

I know this is a losing battle, but do you see where I'm coming from?

I see where you are coming from, but it's similar to me saying "well I had 6 in a row, so since everything else is identical, and there are more cards, shouldn't I win because my 6-card straight should beat his 5-card straight?" Obviously the answer is no because poker is a 5-card game. Poker also only cares about the best hand. If there is a player in the hand who has more chips than you that has you beat, your cards are now irrelevant.

But take this example:

Person A: 5 million chips
person B: 4,999,999 chips
person C: 1 chip

all-in preflop

A: JJ
B: AK
C: 25

board reads 2779Q.

Would you honestly think it would be right that person C wins 2nd place here?

#19 28-01-2008, 5:32 PM

I would guess it is because you had a lower/higher ranking at the time you were elliminated. If you were in 3rd place and the other was is 5th place and both lose all your chips in the same hand. It makes sense to give the person who started the hand in a higher position a higher place to finish. I don't know if that is the reason it just seems to make sense to. I don't actually KNOW the rationale for the rule being the way that it is.

#20 28-01-2008, 5:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

But take this example:

Person A: 5 million chips
person B: 4,999,999 chips
person C: 1 chip

all-in preflop

A: JJ
B: AK
C: 25

board reads 2779Q.

Would you honestly think it would be right that person C wins 2nd place here?

Oooooooooo.. Good example! I see it more clearly now myself.

#21 28-01-2008, 5:33 PM

Imagine if you were playing hand-for-hand on multiple tables and two people got knocked out on the same hand. Would it make more sense to (a) base their finishing positions on the stack they started the hand with, or (b) base their finishing positions on the hands they held at showdown, given that they're on two totally different tables.

Now, let's assume you're sensible and you answered (a) above. For the sake of consistency, should the same situation occur but between two players at the same table, how should finishing position be decided?

More than one way to skin a cat, etc.

Edit: lol @ zach's example.

#22 28-01-2008, 5:35 PM

Heres another example............

Guy1: AA - 15000 chips ALL IN 1st
Guy2: JK - 12000 chips ALL IN 2nd
Guy3: 36 - 6000 chips. ALL IN 3rd

Flop AK10 6 3

Now guy1 has the win, no matter what, he gets all 18k chips.

Guy 2 has a good hand, more chips even, but claims the 2nd place prize with 1 pair K.

Guy 3 has 2 pair, but still loses to trip A's - beating guy2 but still finishing 3rd with 3'd and 6's.

Your cards do not matter in any way shape or form, unless they are the overall winner. And there can only be 1 of those.

zach already did this example, didnt see ahaha

#23 28-01-2008, 5:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

Would you honestly think it would be right that person C wins 2nd place here?

Yes. They had better CARDS than B. Since A took B & C's chips, you now should look at how you determine a winner every other time... with the cards.

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

"well I had 6 in a row, so since everything else is identical, and there are more cards, shouldn't I win because my 6-card straight should beat his 5-card straight?"

I'm in no way speaking outside the 5 card rule. I'm still looking at my 5 cards vs the other person's 5 cards. I don't understand this example. However, if franni happened to go all-in with 66, it should be a split pot since we both had the same hand.

As you say "poker is a 5-card game. Poker also only cares about the best hand." And, I had the best hand (between me and franni).

#24 28-01-2008, 5:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

Yes. They had better CARDS than B. Since A took B & C's chips, you now should look at how you determine a winner every other time... with the cards.

rofl awesome

#25 28-01-2008, 5:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

Yes. They had better CARDS than B. Since A took B & C's chips, you now should look at how you determine a winner every other time... with the cards.

I'm in no way speaking outside the 5 card rule. I'm still looking at my 5 cards vs the other person's 5 cards. I don't understand this example. However, if franni happened to go all-in with 66, it should be a split pot since we both had the same hand.

As you say "poker is a 5-card game. Poker also only cares about the best hand." And, I had the best hand (between me and franni).

But you did not have the best hand.

The big stack did, remember its not 2 people in the pot its 3 people.

#26 28-01-2008, 5:39 PM

Here is how I think of it, he knocked both of you guys out in one hand. Since you both lost lets think of it this way. He win so he will take both your chips at the same time. Now if we did it one chip at a time (stupid i know but just follow) then you would get eliminated first then the other stack would get eliminated. Thats why u got 3rd and he got 2nd lol

#27 28-01-2008, 5:40 PM

Simplified.

-There is only ONE WINNER PER HAND except when absolutely dupicate hands exist.
-There is no such thing as 2nd best hand Unless there is an all-in chip discrepancy as evidenced buy a side pot.

-In the case where multiple players bust out during the same hand, finishing order will be determined by chips stacks as they existed before that hand.

#28 28-01-2008, 5:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

rofl awesome

Instead of laughing at me, explain why cards would not declare the winner of a 5 card game?

BTW, again, I understand that "this is the way it is", I'm just asking why.

Y'all are saying "starting chip count matters"... does it really? 1st place just took BOTH stacks, now you have 0. If B & C were heads up, how would you determine the winner... by the 5 best cards.

In zachvac's example, let's suppose C sat out that hand... looks like they just placed 2nd... but wait, that's not fair, they only had $1.

#29 28-01-2008, 5:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

If B & C were heads up, how would you determine the winner... by the 5 best cards.

I'm pretty sure if B and C were HU C wouldn't be able to bust B in one hand with a 4,999,999-1 chip disadvantage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

In zachvac's example, let's suppose C sat out that hand... looks like they just placed 2nd... but wait, that's not fair, they only had $1.

Well if C sat out and B shoved or called a shove here then B is pretty much the biggest idiot in the universe, so I'd say he deserves it.

#30 28-01-2008, 5:46 PM

Only if he won like 15 times in a row

#31 28-01-2008, 5:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

In zachvac's example, let's suppose C sat out that hand... looks like they just placed 2nd... but wait, that's not fair, they only had $1.

its totally fair.....he sat out, didnt play and in the end of it all HE HAD CHIPS! If there is 4 people all in and the winner only wins the main pot (because he had the least amount of chips) why shouldnt he be able to get the side pot as well since he had the best hand? Its the same exact thing you are trying to say here. Everything goes by chip count in tournament play.

#32 28-01-2008, 5:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

Yes. They had better CARDS than B. Since A took B & C's chips, you now should look at how you determine a winner every other time... with the cards.

Here's the thing, you keep talking about it as if it happens in this order. We could go the other way too. He shows the best hand, both you and the other guy who's busting this hand muck. Now all that's left is chips. Why should the cards matter when you both mucked your hands (because neither of you won)? The chips and cards don't stay/go in any specific order.

Quote:

Originally Posted by K_Kahne_Fan

As you say "poker is a 5-card game. Poker also only cares about the best hand." And, I had the best hand (between me and franni).

Because of the bold you did NOT have the best hand. When you are drawing in poker, how often do you say "well although I'm probably drawing dead against person A, I probably have about 15 outs against person B, so hopefully I can pick up the 2nd best hand". The winner of each pot is the best hand. The cards do not matter unless you have the best hand out of all people in a given pot.

ACTUALLY now that I think about it, let's make it even simpler.

There were actually 2 pots. One with all 3 of you and one with just the other 2. Showdown to see who wins the main pot. Chip leader wins it, you're eliminated, have no chips, and go out in 3rd. Side pot evaluated, chip leader won it, other guy eliminated, 2nd place.

#33 28-01-2008, 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dorkus Malorkus

I'm pretty sure if B and C were HU C wouldn't be able to bust B in one hand with a 4,999,999-1 chip disadvantage.

You're not getting the part where B & C no longer have ANY chips.

Let's look at it in a step by step...

Player A takes player B & C's chips stacks

Palyers B & C now have ZERO chips

Let's determine the winner in the way you would any other time... with the cards.

Do y'all see where I'm coming from? It's a 5 card game, why is a chip stack which has been removed declaring the winners?

#34 28-01-2008, 5:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zachvac

There were actually 2 pots. One with all 3 of you and one with just the other 2. Showdown to see who wins the main pot. Chip leader wins it, you're eliminated, have no chips, and go out in 3rd. Side pot evaluated, chip leader won it, other guy eliminated, 2nd place.

Nicely put.


PokerStars is one of the best sites to play online poker. They accept US players & using PokerStars marketing code CARDSCHAT you get a $75 bonus.	Absolute Poker Referral Code CCHAT will get you a 100% upto $500 bonus at AbsolutePoker.com.