Controversial Floor Ruling - Do you agree?

P

Phosphorous

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Total posts
8
Chips
0
In a casino tournament, the following happened...

Background: ~190 person tournament, down to final 3 tables. Casino has a rule that cards must be shown for All-In showdowns.

Player A is cheap leader, Player B has a stack about 2/3 that size.

After the river, Player B goes All-In, Player A says 'call.' Player B shows a flush, Player A tosses his cards face down onto the middle of the table in front of him (seat position 1), not close to any other cards or chips. Dealer (asian) picks up cards, turns them toward the player such that others could see the pocket pair, and asks, "did you muck?" (or similar), Player A answers yes. Player A does not realize that he made a full house (think he only had trips). Dealer starts to count out chips for the payoff, and Player A realizes he had a full house and asks for a call from the floor.

The floor rules Player A's hand dead when it hit "the muck" and Player B was awarded the pot.

Do you agree with the call?

Points of discussion:
1. Player should not be allowed to muck. The purpose of the "show your cards on an all-in" rule is to prevent collusion and an unfair or pre-arranged chip transfer. Allowing a player to muck his cards rather than show avoids the intent of the rule and would essentially allow a chip transfer to occur if players were indeed colluding.

2. The dealer probably should have enforced the "show your cards" rule and the whole thing would have been avoided - or - the dealer should NOT have had his cards exposed. It seems to me that the dealer really screwed player A because neither did she enforce the "show" rule nor did the player actually get the "benefit" of mucking his cards which is to keep them from being revealed to the table.
 
Last edited:
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
Before I answer the actual question, I have to know - what possible relevance does the dealer's ethnicity have to anything?!?
 
Dorkus Malorkus

Dorkus Malorkus

HELLO INTERNET
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 12, 2005
Total posts
12,422
Chips
0
Umm, player A screwed player A. Yes there are a lot of silly things about the story like the dealer being incompetent (player A has mucked, why is the dealer asking hiim if he's mucked?) and the cards must be shown rule being stupid, but player A (a) mucked and then (b) actually said he mucked, so, umm, he mucked and his hand is dead.

The word 'mucked' has now lost all meaning after re-reading this post.
 
FLyby

FLyby

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 31, 2010
Total posts
198
Chips
0
Very good question. Would there be a difference if say the dealer was white or Canadian, or how about Hispanic?????
 
P

Phosphorous

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Total posts
8
Chips
0
Before I answer the actual question, I have to know - what possible relevance does the dealer's ethnicity have to anything?!?

Probably not that relevant except it explains why the question to the Player A wasn't structured correctly. I probably shouldn't have mentioned it.
 
bonflizubi

bonflizubi

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 7, 2008
Total posts
575
Chips
0
proper ruling, one error

A) idiot player clearly attempted to muck his hand which he couldn't read.
B) Confirmed that with the dealer.
c) Error by the dealer IMO. Dealer should have confirmed the muck before turning the hand up - dealer basically gave the player a second chance to read his hand.
D) as soon as dealer confirms them mucked (or judged them mucked as the case may be, if the house rule says you need to show then I see no problem with flipping over the guy's cards and showing the table.
 
CoddBrunson

CoddBrunson

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 11, 2010
Total posts
106
Chips
0
The rules in poker is, once a hand hits the muck, the hand is mucked. Even if the dealer accidentally takes your cards and mucks them, thinking you had folded. It's a players own responsibility to protect their cards at all times.

It's crummy he folded a full house, but c'mon, thats like beginning beginning beginner poker stuff.
 
Last edited:
robert_wrath

robert_wrath

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 22, 2007
Total posts
419
Chips
0
proper ruling, one error

A) idiot player clearly attempted to muck his hand which he couldn't read.
B) Confirmed that with the dealer.
c) Error by the dealer IMO. Dealer should have confirmed the muck before turning the hand up - dealer basically gave the player a second chance to read his hand.
D) as soon as dealer confirms them mucked (or judged them mucked as the case may be, if the house rule says you need to show then I see no problem with flipping over the guy's cards and showing the table.

The rules in poker is, once a hand hits the muck, the hand is mucked. Even if the dealer accidentally takes your cards and mucks them, thinking you had folded. It's a players own responsibility to protect their cards at all times.

It's crummy he folded a full house, but c'mon, thats like beginning beginning beginner poker stuff.

Agree entirely. The dealers hand is an extension of the muck. Player A concurred when dealer asked about the action.
 
Double-A

Double-A

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Total posts
787
Chips
0
I think it was an Asian gang or something... There was this guy, he looked Asian... and he was speaking another language, I'm pretty sure it was... Asian.
 
C

cAPSLOCK

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jul 22, 2008
Total posts
2,550
Chips
0
What does it matter that the OP mentioned the dealer was asian? It's a detail. To read racism into this is just begging the question. I know of no stereotypes about asian card dealers that OP could be implying. People are way too touchy about race IMHO.

As to the question... Floor is right. Dealer did a strange thing. Player A is likely pissed off. Cards that hit the muck are dead cards. It is a fairly universal rule that make great sense.
 
TheKAAHK

TheKAAHK

CardsChat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Total posts
5,266
Awards
8
CA
Chips
832
Player A's hand was mucked (twice, apparently). Player B wins the pot. Next hand.

As for players not being allowed to muck, I believe they can muck their hand at any time. I may be wrong on this as I have not played live for some time now, but still, once a hand is in the muck it is dead. Dead hands cannot be awarded the pot.
 
R

ruffcut68

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Total posts
424
Awards
1
Chips
11
House Rules

Now the HOUSE rules where ever you play. If you don't know learn them first.
 
Atticus22

Atticus22

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 5, 2011
Total posts
128
Chips
0
race doesnt matter

know the rules

mucked means mucked....he's f____ked!
 
R

RamdeeBen

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Total posts
7,745
Chips
0
Player A sounds a tosser and im glad he had the winning hand but lost. First of he "calls" n all-in then realises he lost so he mucks. Then he realises he won, so calls over management?

I'd of taken all this guys chips of him the cheating bastard.

People who muck their hands and can't work out if they are beat shouldn't be playing. Or accept the fact it was their mistake no one elses and realise they messed up.
 
OzExorcist

OzExorcist

Broomcorn's uncle
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 6, 2007
Total posts
8,586
Awards
1
Chips
1
A few things went wrong in this case. The dealer half-arsed the solution - either turn the hand face up for all to see and then award the pot accordingly because that's what the house rules require (the preferred action) or muck the hand without another word because the player has made their intention clear. You just don't second guess on whether the player has made a mistake or not because you end up putting yourself in idiotic situations like this one.

Also, once other players have seen the cards they have an obligation to point out that a mistake is being made. That's a rule by the way, not just some vague matter of principle (Roberts Rules Section 3 - General Poker Rules, The Showdown, Rule 3)

The rules in poker is, once a hand hits the muck, the hand is mucked. Even if the dealer accidentally takes your cards and mucks them, thinking you had folded. It's a players own responsibility to protect their cards at all times.

It's crummy he folded a full house, but c'mon, thats like beginning beginning beginner poker stuff.

...except what everyone chooses to ignore is that pretty much every version of the rules of poker you care to look at gives tournament directors and floor managers latitude to bend the technical rules in cases where it's in the interest of the game. Robert's Rules (General Poker Rules, Dead Hands, Rule 2) specifically allows for a hand to be retrieved from the muck if the cards are identifiable and it's in the interests of the game so the whole "mucked is mucked and that's the end of it" argument doesn't provide a complete solution.

The question in this case is whether it's really in "the best interest of the game" to retrieve this hand. I'd say the floor got this one right since the player is the victim of nothing other than their own stupidity. They had all the relevant information available to them as well as the option of just turning their hand over and letting the dealer read the cards. 100% aviodable and 100% their fault - the dealer and other players just compounded the error after it was made.
 
serendipity

serendipity

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 25, 2009
Total posts
435
Chips
0
An interesting case, brought about by the interesting house rule regarding showing your cards in an all-in showdown.

Since showing the cards is mandatory, it could be argued that mucking is not allowed in this case. The dealer should have returned the cards and said, "I'm sorry sir, but according to house rules you cannot muck in this situation."

And even though it could be argued that way, I still tend to agree with the ruling.
 
P

Phosphorous

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Total posts
8
Chips
0
OK, I agree with most of the commentary here. Obviously most of the blame belongs to the player.

However, why have the "show your cards" rule if a player can still muck his cards?
 
dj11

dj11

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Total posts
23,189
Awards
9
Chips
0
Most of us have seen a situation where one play mentions he is gonna raise, then decides different before his money got in the pot. Just saying 'raise' might get an excited opponent to flip over his rockets and say 'All-In' before the 'raisers' money goes in. Floor decisions are that he must raise regardless. So the raiser must raise (usually a min raise) before he can fold to the shove.

Point being the verbal confirmation of the question dealer posed is binding.
 
E

edgie212

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 16, 2010
Total posts
174
Chips
0
More than once I've seen a situation where someone has misread their hand and mucked it (I can recall one situation where I certainly did), but unlike something like football where a referee can 'blow a call,' it's the player's responsibility to read his hand correctly, protect his cards, and show when necessary. One thing that is a constant - if your cards hit the muck, they are dead. I've definitely seen a certain 'unspoken' rule about how this sort of thing differs in cash vs. tournament games. It's a lot more likely for a dealer to be lenient at showdown in a cash game as opposed to a tournament game. However, at a recent cash game at Harrah's, a woman requested to see every mucked showdown hand, even if she wasnt in the hand, and the dealer acquiesced every time. Sometimes I don't think it is dependent on the casino - dealers sometimes play by their own rules and unfortunately it can be really arbitrary.

For example, some dealers rigidly enforce the 'last aggressor' rule when showing at showdown, and some don't. I once sat at a table for several hours and heard three different rules uttered by three different dealers about who should show - last aggressor, first aggressor, earliest position...it ran the gamut. It would certainly be helpful for casinos get together and just solidify the rules, but we all know that won't happen - so, to coin a metaphor, if you come for a football game with a pigskin and everyone else is playing soccer, drop your ball and adapt!
 
shinedown.45

shinedown.45

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 18, 2006
Total posts
5,389
Chips
0
Very good question. Would there be a difference if say the dealer was white or Canadian, or how about Hispanic?????
Funny how you put Candians in a class of their own.
I guess Candians are a seperate ethnic group.
 
pdias666

pdias666

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Total posts
54
Chips
0
Both player A and dealer made mistakes.

So, player A loses pot for being stupid for mucking, and dealer gets punished for ignoring house rules, allowing (asking!) the muck.

As Simple as that.
 
P

Phosphorous

Rising Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Total posts
8
Chips
0
But still, why not get rid of the "show your cards" rule? Why have it?
 
B

bigpick76

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Total posts
235
Chips
0
yes the hand should hav been ruled dead when the dealer touched the hand....as far as i know every live tournament ive ever played in ruled the hands dead when A) the hand touches any other cards on the table wether it be community cards or another players hand B) if the dealer touches the hand when it is kicked into the muck C) if another player touches the hand so yes the correct rule as far as i know would to have been to rule the mucked hand dead and honestly the dealer actually flipping the hand up should have never even happened especially after the guy said himself he mucked
 
B

bigpick76

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Total posts
235
Chips
0
and as far as the show your cards rule ....the only time i have ever heard of a hand having to be shown was when there was an all in and a call with cards to still come on the board in that case yes the cards have to be tabled but in a situation such as an all in after the river if the caller sees hes beat he doesnt HAVE to table his hand
 
Top