Player Accidently Exposed Winning Card

An interesting situation came up last weekend at Foxwoods and I'm not sure how it should have been ruled. There were three players to an AQT flop. The BB checked and a player in EP bet. The button and BB both called. The Turn was a 9 and it checked around. The river was an 8 and again it checked around. The player in EP said, "I have AK". The button also showed AK. The BB said, "I just have a Jack" and mucked his hand but as he did so the cards bounced and the mucked Jack was unintentionally exposed. A player not involved in the hand said "Hey, you have a Straight. You win!". At this point the dealer exposed his other card which was a blank and awarded the pot to the mucked hand saying that the cards speak.

Neither of the other players disputed the pot but I'm not so sure they shouldn't have. Under normal conditions if you table your hand face up then the cards do in fact speak and any observant player can and should bring it to the attention of the table. In this case however, only one card was exposed and as you need to show two cards to win it is my understanding that his hand should have been declared dead. The dealer had no right pulling the other card out of the muck even if it was obvious which card belonged with the Jack. In addition, the player who spoke up should have kept silent.

Now this was a cash game and the pot was small so nobody asked the floor for a ruling, but imagine if this was in the late stages of a tournament. I'm not so sure I would have just let this go. How would you handle the situation if you lost the hand and how should this have been ruled?

Actually that is exactly what should have happened. Anyone at the table including the dealer and floor have the ethical obligation to speak up if a pot is going to be awarded incorrectly. And as far as the card being pulled out of the muck, your hand it's actually dead when it hits the muck as long as it is clearly identifiable it can be pulled out as it is in the best interest of the game. Someone should have said he had a straight when he told the table he had a jack.

Agree with RF.

Rules allow for certain "accidental folds" to be returned especially if not facing a bet.

Winning card exposed and tabled. Hard to dispute that and 2nd is recognizable.

Even if 2nd card is not recognizable rule #1 should come into play and award the pot to the correct player.

"Gotcha" poker is wrong and dirty. Wouldnt you want someone to help you if you made a mistake?

Ruling: J hand wins, and gets a warning.

I would agree except for the casino rule that states that you must show both cards to win a hand. My thought was that once that card hit the muck it should never have been pulled back. If I had been involved in the pot I think I might have politely asked the floor for a ruling just for clarification, but I certainly would not have made a stink about it were not in my favor. I still think most people would feel differently about this if the stakes had been higher, as in a tournament for big money.

detroitjunkie said:

Ruling: J hand wins, and gets a warning.

Click to expand...

No warning necessary. It was completely inadvertent.

Curious if the card was actually mucked or just folded. Find it curious as to how one card got put into the muck pile and the other did not.

Regardless, if 100% indentifiable it can be retrieved especially if dealer pulled card into muck it would have been in error since other card was tabled and the down card should not have been pulled in.

Warning is necessary based on show both to win rule being violated, but that violation should not result in a dead hand

Common sense should prevail here I think.
If one card shows that it is the winning hand, then the other card will not matter anymore.

It is different however, if it was on purpose, and the person didn't want the others to see the other card (he didn't want to show that he played a bad hand like J2o or something like that, and got lucky). But according to your explanation this doesn't seem to be the case at all.

If his other card was face down he shouldnt have won the pot.. Both cards need to be shown to win a hand. So he threw his hand in muck and its the same as he just wanted to show one card only

RidersFan said:

Actually that is exactly what should have happened. Anyone at the table including the dealer and floor have the ethical obligation to speak up if a pot is going to be awarded incorrectly. And as far as the card being pulled out of the muck, your hand it's actually dead when it hits the muck as long as it is clearly identifiable it can be pulled out as it is in the best interest of the game. Someone should have said he had a straight when he told the table he had a jack.

Click to expand...

^^^^^^^^^
This is correct.

I believe the dealer did the right thing. Cards do speak for themselves. Not sure about pulling the second card back out.

detroitjunkie said:

Curious if the card was actually mucked or just folded. Find it curious as to how one card got put into the muck pile and the other did not.

Regardless, if 100% indentifiable it can be retrieved especially if dealer pulled card into muck it would have been in error since other card was tabled and the down card should not have been pulled in.

Warning is necessary based on show both to win rule being violated, but that violation should not result in a dead hand

Click to expand...

Just a freak occurrence, the Jack just took a weird bounce. He fully intended to muck both cards. Like this.

Here's what I found in Roberts Rules of Poker

THE SHOWDOWN
1. To win any part of a pot, a player must show all of his cards face-up on the table, whether they were used in the final hand played or not.

That's ALL of his cards. In the situation I described the player showed only one card. The second card, while clearly identifiable was also clearly mucked.

And then there's this:

PROCEDURES
23. Looking through the discards or deck stub is not allowed.

That's exactly what the dealer did.

But then there's this:

DECISION-MAKING
1. Management reserves the right to make decisions in the spirit of fairness, even if a strict interpretation of the rules may indicate a different ruling.

and this:

DEAD HANDS
2. Cards thrown into the muck may be ruled dead. However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved and ruled live at management’s discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game. An extra effort should be made to rule a hand retrievable if it was folded as a result of incorrect information given to the player.

"The Spirit of Fairness" and the "Best interest of the game" are a matter of perspective but I do think it's applicable in the hand I described, especially since no deception was intended and neither of the losing hands protested. Although I probably would not have spoken up myself if I had been involved in the hand I don't think it was the place for anyone not involved in the hand to do so and I might have been a bit peeved if I had been on the losing end of it, and I definitely think that it should always be ruled dead in a tournament.

There are many situations where inexperienced players make seemingly innocent mistakes that work both in our favor and against. I'm sure most of us would call a string bet at the final table if it were to our benefit. I know it sounds unfair, but poker isn't a garden party, it's a competition. Experience and lack thereof are elements of the game and the house should be very careful when applying ill defined concepts such as "spirit of fairness" or "best interest of the game" (Are you reading this Roger Goodell?). I think back to a wsop hand a few years ago where a woman was all in preflop with AA and the dealer accidentally mucked her hand. "In the spirit of fairness" it was ruled just a Call but she was not allowed to retrieve her cards and forfeited any claim to any part of the pot. A raw deal for sure but to be fair, dealers work long exhausting shifts and she did not protect her cards.

Here's an interesting exception to the "show both cards" rule.

RULES
9. You must declare that you are playing the board before you throw your cards away. Otherwise, you relinquish all claim to the pot. (The rule for tournament play is you must retain your hand and show it if asked, in order to win part of the pot.)

I think what it's saying is that in a cash game you can muck your cards and still win (or split) the pot if you declare that you're playing the board. I never heard that before.

The RROP rule about playing the board is unique against most other rule sets and a lot of people dont like it. IMO you always show cards, even if a royal is boarded.

As far as "knowing the rules", I get that it is an advantage if you know rules and others dont...however do you want that advantage if it makes poker lose rec players? "Gotcha" poker is helping kill the game and is a major reason for poker losing "easy to beat" players and making the game more difficult to win regularly.

xposed card

well playing in a few tourneys here and canada the rules vary. To obtain a ruling you must verify with that particular Casino or Charity room as they have different rules and from state to state

*walks in late*

Yep as others have said above, with the action as described it looks like the dealer got this one right.

Even the player saying "I have a jack" as they're folding should have started heads scratching.

Actually that might be a more interesting question to my mind: if the player said "I have a jack" but then correctly folded their cards (ie: nobody actually saw the jack in their hand)... what do you do? Are players still obligated to speak up? Should the dealer act?

OzExorcist said:

*walks in late*

Yep as others have said above, with the action as described it looks like the dealer got this one right.

Even the player saying "I have a jack" as they're folding should have started heads scratching.

Actually that might be a more interesting question to my mind: if the player said "I have a jack" but then correctly folded their cards (ie: nobody actually saw the jack in their hand)... what do you do? Are players still obligated to speak up? Should the dealer act?

Click to expand...

If they are in the muck it's too late for sure in that case.
It is not verifiable anymore and he could have said that with any cards then or even just as a joke.
If they are still laying on the table, face down, I have no clue what should happen. You cannot oblige the other players to react, but maybe the dealer should say something.
However, I don't think he should turn his cards face up, but maybe ask the player himself to do so, in case it was just meant as a joke and he didn't want the others to see his cards.

This just happen to me live at the casino... tell me what you think about this... i was sitting down on sit 4 the individual on 3 he had the button he when all in i push my rack of chips and show my cards he saw my cards and said i have nothing and fold and then said i bet out of turn. the dealer was already counting the chips but he refuse to pay out so i didn't get the money about 95 dollars more this happen in a casino the Bicycle casino in the city of bell gardens ca.

alexandro said:

This just happen to me live at the casino... tell me what you think about this... i was sitting down on sit 4 the individual on 3 he had the button he when all in i push my rack of chips and show my cards he saw my cards and said i have nothing and fold and then said i bet out of turn. the dealer was already counting the chips but he refuse to pay out so i didn't get the money about 95 dollars more this happen in a casino the Bicycle casino in the city of bell gardens ca.

Click to expand...

Simple, he said he was all in, so he is all in. It doesn't matter if he pushed his stack to the middle or not, and usually people don't even push their stack to the middle when they are all in. The word is enough in this case, so you should have been paid out. The dealer should have ruled it like that too and should have given you the chips.

alexandro said:

This just happen to me live at the casino... tell me what you think about this... i was sitting down on sit 4 the individual on 3 he had the button he when all in i push my rack of chips and show my cards he saw my cards and said i have nothing and fold and then said i bet out of turn. the dealer was already counting the chips but he refuse to pay out so i didn't get the money about 95 dollars more this happen in a casino the Bicycle casino in the city of bell gardens ca.

Click to expand...

This is a tricky angle shot that may have paid off for your opponent.

You were first to act. He went All In before you acted...he was out of turn. Therefore by you pushing your chips forward (without first saying check) you change the action and his out of turn bet is no longer binding. Ive seen this a ton.

What you should have done is said "I check and then call his all in" and you would have beaten his angle.

Dealer should have stated he acted out of turn, but this was at the Bike so good luck getting a compitent dealer

Four Dogs said:

An interesting situation came up last weekend at Foxwoods and I'm not sure how it should have been ruled. There were three players to an AQT flop. The BB checked and a player in EP bet. The button and BB both called. The Turn was a 9 and it checked around. The river was an 8 and again it checked around. The player in EP said, "I have AK". The button also showed AK. The BB said, "I just have a Jack" and mucked his hand but as he did so the cards bounced and the mucked Jack was unintentionally exposed. A player not involved in the hand said "Hey, you have a Straight. You win!". At this point the dealer exposed his other card which was a blank and awarded the pot to the mucked hand saying that the cards speak.

Neither of the other players disputed the pot but I'm not so sure they shouldn't have. Under normal conditions if you table your hand face up then the cards do in fact speak and any observant player can and should bring it to the attention of the table. In this case however, only one card was exposed and as you need to show two cards to win it is my understanding that his hand should have been declared dead. The dealer had no right pulling the other card out of the muck even if it was obvious which card belonged with the Jack. In addition, the player who spoke up should have kept silent.

Now this was a cash game and the pot was small so nobody asked the floor for a ruling, but imagine if this was in the late stages of a tournament. I'm not so sure I would have just let this go. How would you handle the situation if you lost the hand and how should this have been ruled?

Click to expand...

Swill here everything is simple: if at least one card of the two "does not speak" and lies with a shirt up, it's an automatic reset and it does not matter either the wish of the dealer or the desire of the player-move would be made and the point! Recently, at a major event, I saw a situation when the player slipped the cards carelessly and one of them was seen by all the players at the table (he threw both cards face down), for which he was fined!

if he had completed a straight with his jack and his other card had no impact on that straight then I see no problem with the way they handled it.

If the player wants to throw away a winning hand, that's just fine.

don1980 said:

If the player wants to throw away a winning hand, that's just fine.

Click to expand...

Is it though?

If they're throwing away a winning hand because of a mistake that can be fixed, they deserve to be told. Just letting people throw winning hands away has consequences for things like soft play and chip dumping too.

exposed card

cards talk, bottom line. but one does wonder about the player who didn't realize he had a straight..................lol

don1980 said:

If the player wants to throw away a winning hand, that's just fine.

Click to expand...

OzExorcist said:

Is it though?

Click to expand...

No it is not, and can incur a penalty.
Because it 'could' be part of a collusion,
(in the form of chip dumping as OzExorcist went on to mention).

Something I have noticed about serious poker players is that they actually tend to have high ethical standards and prefer to correct honest mistakes made by other players or dealers even when detrimental to themselves.
In fact on at least two separate occasions I have heard professional poker players saying that the dealers can't be expected to get everything perfect and that it is only right for players to point things out when necessary.
(I have to admit I was quite surprised the first time I heard it, as I had previously thought it would be a cutthroat, angle shooting ruthless profession, so it was a pleasant surprise and inspiration to aspire to their standards).

Chemist said:

(I have to admit I was quite surprised the first time I heard it, as I had previously thought it would be a cutthroat, angle shooting ruthless profession, so it was a pleasant surprise and inspiration to aspire to their standards).

Click to expand...

I had the same ideas a long time ago.
I even thought that cheating was an integral part of the game!
I couldn't have been more wrong.