PokerTDA

POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Steven on August 07, 2012, 01:26:42 AM

Title: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Steven on August 07, 2012, 01:26:42 AM
Can a player retrieve a "folded" hand before it hits the muck?

Inthis case, the player tossed his hand into the felt face down after the opponent showed her hand.
He then realized that the board would play and retrieved them before the dealer grabbed them.

I seem to remember something similar in a thread a few months ago!

Do his cards play, resulting in a chopped pot since he uses the board too? (He did table his hand after retrieving his cards.)
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 07, 2012, 04:32:24 AM
Steven,

 The hand is live.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at showdown
Post by: MikeB on August 07, 2012, 09:03:21 AM
Steve: I agree with Nick that the cards should be live in the example you describe.

However, this leads to the larger question of whether there is such a thing as "fold" during a showdown. (hence the title clarification of this thread)

What you describe is a "mucking" gesture (throwing cards forward onto the felt). Before the showdown, when action is pending this would be a binding fold... however during showdown Nick and I agree that the cards are retrievable and can be tabled to compete in the showdown.  What if the player instead had said "I fold"... is this binding? Some folks think it should be... i.e. there is such a thing as "fold" at showdown... we need to clarify that IMO.  What if the player had said something less definitive such as "you win" or "your hand is good" or "take it"... is that binding?

IMO it would be a major step forward to clarify whether A) any utterances or gestures of capitulation are binding at showdown OR B) if cards are always live as long as they are 100% identifiable and thus gestures and declarations of capitulation have no meaning at showdown.

None of this is to question that a player in a non-all-in showdown may voluntarily discard his hand face down... and that the dealer should muck the cards... but rather 1) to clarify whether the player can change his mind as long as the cards are 100% identifiable and 2) to clarify whether a verbal declaration of "fold" or other capitulation utterance carries any additional binding significance.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 07, 2012, 09:50:34 AM
Nice posts.  Agreed with Mike B and Nick.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Stuart Murray on August 07, 2012, 10:55:22 AM
Agreed with all, the hand is live, there is no such thing as a fold once showdown has been reached.

Regards
Stuart
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Steven on August 07, 2012, 05:51:22 PM
Thanks for the excellent responses! And thanks to the EXCELLENT dealer who handled the situation correctly and allowed the chop! And thanks, Mike, for qualifying the subject title with Showdown!

Your responses triggered a few followups!

1-Thanks Stuart! (And thanks for your Olympics coverage!)  I think that I would qualify your answer by saying you CAN fold at showdown if it's not an all-in situation. In my case the player apparantly had not folded as the player had not declared fold, there was no action pending, and the cards had not hit the muck! However, I think the player is entitled to FOLD (if not all-in) because of the options allowed in Rules 12 and 14 below: (Note: the only verbage that may negate this thought is that Rule 14 specifies that the lass aggressive player MUST show first! - maybe implying that he cannot fold!, but why even have the rule separate from rule 10 if all players mus show! Maybe the rule could use some cleanup!)

12:   Showdown Order
In a non-all-in showdown, at the end of the last round of betting, the player who made the last aggressive action in that betting round must show first. If there was no bet in the last round, the player to the left of the button shows first and so on clockwise. In stud, the player with the high board must show first. In razz, the lowest board shows first.
14:   Asking to See a Hand. Except where house policy requires a hand to be shown or provides an express right to see a hand on request, asking to see a hand is a privilege granted at TDs discretion to protect the integrity of the game (suspicion of invalid hand, collusion, etc). This privilege is not to be abused. A player who mucks his hand face down at showdown without fully tabling it loses any rights he may have to ask t tto see any hand.

2) If the player does not retrieve the cards, I then presume the dealer should kill the hand.

3) If a player does not retrieve the hand and another player requests to see it before the dealer mucks it, and the TD obliges (Rule 14), is the hand still live?  By the way, this could be very relevant in a tournament jackpot situation!

4) In what situation can the dealer retrieve and open up a "mucked" hand (without the player physically turning it over)? I think I had one dealer tell me that he could never turn a player's cards over. I'm thinking he can of course turn it over upon player request when the TD obliges (Rule 14), also in an all-in situation, and maybe in the first situation that I described. However, I tempted to say that the dealer should kill the hand if the cards are face down, not in the muck, and no player asks to see them!

5) Mike mentioned that before the showdown, this would be a binding fold. I think I agree and want to make sure that you agree that the player then cannot retrieve his hand. I know however, that in some cases, players and dealers are lenient with players that fold facing a check, or if in the big blind with no raise, or if in the blind and don't know they're in the blind!


Thanks,
Steven
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 07, 2012, 08:23:35 PM
Steven,
 I like your response regarding some possible clean-up for rule #14. I think you can throw in rule #11 while you're at it.

 I'll stick my two cents in here and agree with your dealer when he said; "the dealer must never turn over a players down cards." I'd like to add; unless it is at the explicit request of the owner of the hand, or the floor." There is continued debate as to whether any player at the table should have the right to see a called hand in a showdown situation.

 If a good dealer is allowed to control the game, the correct order of showdown would be performed as follows: Last player to initiate the action (check, bet or raise) on the final betting round will show first. The process goes clockwise one at a time, until the winning hand is the last face-up on the table.

 I look at several scenario's that Mike mentioned and I wonder how much protection should we offer to a player who elects to muck at the showdown? There are many winning hands that are mucked unintentionally, if we insist they all be shown, that problem would disappear, along with chip dumping and other forms of collusion.

 Hey K-Lo, (here I go again) :D Why is it only when any player is all-in, all cards must be tabled?

 
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 08, 2012, 07:53:54 AM
Quote
Hey K-Lo, (here I go again) :D Why is it only when any player is all-in, all cards must be tabled?

Because you haven't yet persuaded everyone that the rule needs to be changed, and that rule will probably be left ultimately unchanged for some time.... since I predict people will be too tired to talk about it by the time we get through Accepted Action at the next Summit!!   ;D ;D
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 08, 2012, 04:42:54 PM
K-Lo,

 I promise, if they fix Accepted Action (by elimination) I'll refrain from complaining about any other rules for at least 100 posts! ;D
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: JasperToo on August 08, 2012, 06:44:09 PM
Lol, Nick! I've got a C-note says you could go for 200 posts!!

K-Lo, what you don't think we'll have the rule all hammered out by the next summit, ready to go??   :D :D
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: MikeB on August 08, 2012, 09:33:11 PM

Your responses triggered a few followups!

1-Thanks Stuart!...I would qualify your answer by saying you CAN fold at showdown if it's not an all-in situation. In my case the player apparantly had not folded as the player had not declared fold, (does a declaration of fold mean anything at a showdown?... i.e. is it a binding?)  there was no action pending, and the cards had not hit the muck! However, I think the player is entitled to FOLD (if not all-in) because of the options allowed in Rules 12 and 14 below: (Note: the only verbage that may negate this thought is that Rule 14 specifies that the lass aggressive player MUST show first! - maybe implying that he cannot fold!, but why even have the rule separate from rule 10 if all players mus show! Maybe the rule could use some cleanup!) TDA Rule 14 clearly acknowledges that a player may muck cards face down at showdown. The showdown order rule 12 is meant to be enforced if players are reluctant to spontaneously table their cards at showdown.

Steven: While a player in a non all-in showdown is entitled to discard his cards face down w/o tabling, the question that's not firmly answered is whether this is a binding "fold" (i.e. the cards are dead as they would be if he made the same discarding gesture with action pending)... or merely a gesture of capitulation that can be retracted if the player changes his mind while the cards are still 100% identifiable. The same question remains as to whether declaring "fold" verbally, or some equivalent is binding at showdown

14: Asking to See a Hand. Except where house policy requires a hand to be shown or provides an express right to see a hand on request, asking to see a hand is a privilege granted at TDs discretion to protect the integrity of the game (suspicion of invalid hand, collusion, etc). This privilege is not to be abused. A player who mucks his hand face down at showdown without fully tabling it loses any rights he may have to ask t tto see any hand.

2) If the player does not retrieve the cards, I then presume the dealer should kill the hand. Definitely. In a non all-in showdown if a player mucks face down, unless house rules provide an express right to see the hand, the muck should be respected and the hand killed. Again the question remains whether the TDA membership can come to a common agreement as to what constitutes a killed, irretrievable hand. Is it a) dead when the player tosses the cards forward; b) dead when the dealer performs a killing ritual such as tapping it to the muck; c) or dead only when it is bured in the muck and no longer identifiable?

3) If a player does not retrieve the hand and another player requests to see it before the dealer mucks it, and the TD obliges (Rule 14), is the hand still live?  While this doesn't formally appear in the TDA Rules, at the 2009 Summit there was general agreement that if the "winning" player to that point asks to see the hand it is live and can win. Another issue worth reviewing at the next Summit to see if some rule or procedural language should be adopted.

4) In what situation can the dealer retrieve and open up a "mucked" hand (without the player physically turning it over)? I think I had one dealer tell me that he could never turn a player's cards over. I'm thinking he can of course turn it over upon player request when the TD obliges (Rule 14), also in an all-in situation.  The TDA rule states that cards will be face up once a player is all in and all betting action is complete. The vastly preferred scenario is that the player table his own cards. But one way or the other they should be turned up prior to running out the remainder of any cards to be dealt and proceeding to reading of hands in the showdown.

5) Mike mentioned that before the showdown, this would be a binding fold. I think I agree and want to make sure that you agree that the player then cannot retrieve his hand. I know however, that in some cases, players and dealers are lenient with players that fold facing a check, or if in the big blind with no raise, or if in the blind and don't know they're in the blind!   This is addressed in TDA Rule 45 "Non Standard Folds". These should be binding folds.

Thanks for raising several important issues on the showdown topic!
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 09, 2012, 04:44:30 AM
Lol, Nick! I've got a C-note says you could go for 200 posts!!

K-Lo, what you don't think we'll have the rule all hammered out by the next summit, ready to go??   :D :D

Do I hear 300??  300 anyone?   :P
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Stuart Murray on August 09, 2012, 05:37:59 AM
Your responses triggered a few followups!


1-Thanks Stuart! (And thanks for your Olympics coverage!)  I think that I would qualify your answer by saying you CAN fold at showdown if it's not an all-in situation. In my case the player apparantly had not folded as the player had not declared fold, there was no action pending, and the cards had not hit the muck! However, I think the player is entitled to FOLD (if not all-in) because of the options allowed in Rules 12 and 14 below: (Note: the only verbage that may negate this thought is that Rule 14 specifies that the lass aggressive player MUST show first! - maybe implying that he cannot fold!, but why even have the rule separate from rule 10 if all players mus show! Maybe the rule could use some cleanup!)

Oh your welcome re London 2012 - just one word on the subject - c'mon team GB ;-))

Just to clarify the "folding at showdown" stance, as Mike has noted already, whilst most houses will allow players to elect to muck their hand at showdown, it is not a fold, players cannot fold or announce fold at showdown, as it is just that a showdown, and betting action has been completed.  Mucking ones cards is tantamount to surrendering claim to the pot, to cite RROP, "(a) You fold or announce that you are folding when facing a bet or a raise."

I have worked with mandatory showdowns on a few occasions and ability to muck, there are merits to both, but the important thing I have learned is announcing "I fold" has no relevance at showdown, all the hands that are still live that reach showdown are live irrelevant of a players announcement and the best hand should always win, once the cards are slid into the muck that is a different story however.

Regards
Stuart
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 09, 2012, 06:32:27 AM
Stuart:  If "I fold" has no relevance at showdown (I'm not disagreeing but just would like some clarification on your position): 

If Player A says "I fold" and then throws his cards down in front of him, and then Player B says "good fold" and throws his cards down towards the muck...  assume now that the dealer mucks B's hand but not A's for whatever reason, and A then picks up his cards and tables them, who do you award the pot to?  Does it matter that B acted in response to A's announcement of "fold"?
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Stuart Murray on August 09, 2012, 10:34:04 AM
I think it was Chet that said the best piece of advice - do not release your cards until the dealer awards the pot to you, the situation you describe is messy and a whole different discussion, but player A has thrown his hand forward which has caused a re-action from player B (he has relinquished his hand) therefore player A has already surrendered his claim to the pot and it can easily be awarded to player B in that circumstance.

To summarise throwing your hand forward face down at showdown is sufficient for me that a player has relinquished claim to the pot, as they are electing their right to muck their hand.

Regards
Stuart
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 09, 2012, 10:54:09 AM
K-Lo,
 I'll never understand that a player saying, "I'm out", or "I fold" can have no meaning at the showdown, don't even try to explain it. I'll tell you this, if I'm dealing, I'll protect the muck from any player attempting to ditch his hand, but will bury it in the muck if no one requests to see it.

 Verbal declarations as to the value of a hand are meaningless, (cards read), but (IMO) tossing your hand in the direction of the muck while saying "I'm out" or "I fold" or "take it" or "I surrender" or "I give up" or "you win" or "you son-of-a-b____, you got me again", will get your hand killed at my table every time.

 K-Lo, your scenario when the dealer kills Player B's hand before killing Player A's clearly defines the biggest problem; poor dealers. However, I would still have a tough time awarding the pot to Player A.

 While I was typing, Stuart added his post. If I'm understanding you correctly, we have both indicated that in this unique situation, going by the rule as written, would not be in the best interest of the game.

 The way I see it, this is what good old Rule #1 is for.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: MikeB on August 09, 2012, 02:50:09 PM

 Verbal declarations as to the value of a hand are meaningless, (cards read), but (IMO) tossing your hand in the direction of the muck while saying "I'm out" or "I fold" or "take it" or "I surrender" or "I give up" or "you win" or "you son-of-a-b____, you got me again", will get your hand killed at my table every time.

  Nick, so please clarify this... you say these declarations will "get your hand killed)... does this mean:

1) These declarations will lead to the dealer taking possession of the hand and burying it in the muck, therefore it's dead as a result of irretrievable mucking OR

2) Is the hand instantly dead (killed) b/c the player made the declaration (regardless of whether the cards are still identifiable) ?
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: JasperToo on August 09, 2012, 06:22:53 PM


1) These declarations will lead to the dealer taking possession of the hand and burying it in the muck, therefore it's dead as a result of irretrievable mucking OR



That's what I heard him saying and I would agree with that.  The cards a killed once the dealer follows through from the players muck.. the hand would be live if the player wanted to reach out after it or the opponent asks to see it.   (though our scenario where the first "folds" his cards and the second player "folds" as well, thinking he is the last man standing should be awarded the pot since he reacted to the second players actions, rule #1 if you need)....
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 09, 2012, 07:23:37 PM
Mike,

 Your question deserves the same answer that is given whenever we speak of each situation being different from the next. I am in no way trying to avoid a yes or no answer. I am always trying to instill a complete understanding of the game, for all student dealers. This is the only way to "control" the game.

 In your example #1. Yes, the dealer will muck the hand, if the player is acting in turn. If not, the dealer should warn the player that there is action behind him. A good dealer will kill a surrendered hand very quickly...so you'd better be real fast to save the hand. Your example #2 falls in this category, so the answer is: declaring the hand dead is not enough to kill the hand. It depends on the situation and can only be properly handled by a competent dealer.

 Once the hand is mucked, it's dead! There's no asking the player what two cards they had, or digging in the muck to retrieve the hand, it's gone. So, if you are the player that is about to muck, perhaps thinking you are in the hand alone, you'd better hope you have a good dealer in the box that can save your ass.

 
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: MikeB on August 09, 2012, 11:30:03 PM
Mike,

In your example #1. Yes, the dealer will muck the hand, if the player is acting in turn. If not, the dealer should warn the player that there is action behind him. There's no action remaining, we're at showdown

A good dealer will kill a surrendered hand very quickly...so you'd better be real fast to save the hand. Understood\

Your example #2 falls in this category, so the answer is: declaring the hand dead is not enough to kill the hand. It depends on the situation and can only be properly handled by a competent dealer.  So at showdown, you're in the camp that a mere "declaration" of fold (or anything alluding to "fold") will not in itself kill a hand, as it would if there was action pending.

Once the hand is mucked, it's dead! There's no asking the player what two cards they had, or digging in the muck to retrieve the hand, it's gone. So, if you are the player that is about to muck, perhaps thinking you are in the hand alone, you'd better hope you have a good dealer in the box that can save your ass. Understood... now, this raises the question of what constitutes "mucked"... is it:  a) merely discarded and now under the dealer's control or b) killed by a ritual such as tapping the muck?... or c) buried in the muck and therefore unidentifiable ... or d) something between b & c such as "released onto or into" the muck, perhaps still identifiable or not, but you're not going to authorize retrieval at that point...
 If we're going to have a completely comprehensive rule as to when cards are live (and can therefore still be tabled) and when they are dead at a showdown, (after all action is finished) then all of these elements have to be spelled out, IMO....
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: MikeB on August 10, 2012, 12:21:44 AM
Some excerpts from the old "Las Vegas Hilton's Book of Poker Rules" may be useful in discussing both the question of live/dead hands at showdown and what constitutes tabling. Not saying these are ideal rules, but they are useful for the discussion:

General Rules, A31, pg. 22

c.... undercalling of a hand's rank or a verbal concession is not binding. 'the cards speak for themselves'.

d....A hand that has been placed faceup on the table and properly identified is a live hand. The player who owns it is entitled to the pot, even if the dealer subsequently mucks the hand in error. 'Properly identified' means accurately identified to the satisfaction of the floorperson.... In all situations, a floorperson has discretion in deciding if any equity situation exists [i.e. if the hand is live].

f.... the floorperson has the power to reconstruct and rule live a hand thrown away as a result of an inaccurate identification of an opposing hand by the opponent or the dealer, even if it has touched the muck. However, if the mucked hand can no longer be satisfactorialy reconstructed, and has never been properly identified, the hand is dead... The house retains the right to make an equitable decision when the mucked hand was obviously the best hand.

g... A hand that has been thrown away but has not touched the muck may be retrieved and ruled a live hand, even if the dealer has touched it, provided the act of throwing it away has not induced another player to muck his hand. To have the hand considered live, turning it faceup may only be done by the owner of that hand, the dealer acting at the owner's request, or the oppoennet who would be winning the pot if the hand were ruled dead.

h.... The proper dealer procedure for a hand being shown down is to call attention to any card(s) that are still facedown sot he player may turn them up if he wishes. However, the turning up of one or more facedown cards by the dealer or another player in a hand that is partially faceup cannot deprive a player with the best hand from winning the pot.

j.... A hand discarded faceup is still a live hand, even though it has touched other cards, provided it is clearly identifiable.

l.... If the dealer mistakenly mucks a faceup hand that has never been properly identified, and the player has given overt approval to the action, the error must stand. If the player has not given overt approval, the hand is still eligible to win the pot if the floorperson can determine the contents to his satisfaction... A player who knowingly shows down the best hand cannot be deprived of the pot because the dealer mucked it in error.

o.... The dealer does not have the obligation to read a hand that has been thrown away facedown, even if that hand had been faceup at one time. A discarded hand that has been momentarily shown but not properly identified should be mucked by the dealer, unless the hand had been discarded because another hand was improperly identified.

A32. Order of Showdown.... The rule governing the order of showdown is to be used only in situations where players refuse to show their cards 'until the other guy does first'. The most practical way for the game to be played, which saves the most time, is for any player who thinks he has a possible contending hand to immediately put it faceup on the table at the showdown. The following rules [on order of showdown] are for players who discourteously insist on wasting time:.... [typical order of show rules here].
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 10, 2012, 05:00:47 AM
Mike,
 I've used the rules from the Las Vegas Hilton Rule Book for many years. The other reference book was Chuck Ferry's Rules for Poker. I agree with everything from that book.

 When you pointed out; that there was no action pending because showdown was reached, I was making reference to the player that was unaware of another player still in the hand.

 I agree with the LVH Rule Book: The cards are live until they are mucked.
                                               A properly identified winning hand can not be killed.
                                               Properly identified is "face up on the table."
                                               A discarded hand that has been momentarily shown but not properly identified should be mucked by the dealer....

   Mike, in response to your reply to my statement, you said:  " So at showdown, you're in the camp that a mere "declaration" of fold (or anything alluding to "fold") will not in itself kill a hand, as it would if there was action pending."    My answer is: What action is pending? We can not kill a hand on a verbal declaration alone...so when the action reaches a player, and he says "fold" and tosses his cards the dealer will muck the hand in such a manner that it is not retrievable. However, if the player is acting out of turn the action should be corrected to the proper bettor.

 Declaring "fold" in itself will not kill any hand but, is a clear indication of a players intent.

 When players are mislead by another player, or the dealer, special consideration must be given to protect their right to compete for the pot.

 I'm glad that you've posted this part of the Las Vegas Hilton Rule Book. The book is very extensive and thorough.

 This single post can cover many debated subjects that we've discussed about: order of showdown, what constitutes a tabled hand, who can turn over face down cards (and who should not), etc., etc.,...

 I hope that I've clarified how I feel about these situations.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Steven on August 10, 2012, 05:02:23 AM
I was talking to the dealer who dealt the hand that I originally described in this thread, and she reiterated what happened. Player A's hand was announced as playing the board and then the dealer saw that Player B had tossed his hand face down, but she then was reluctant to muck the hand (for the integrity of the game) since Player B's hand now could not be beaten (since Player A was using the board). Player B then turned his hand over and the chop resulted.

After hearing this, I think she did the right thing.

How do you all feel about this:  At showdown, the "next to show" cannot or should not be allowed to muck if the "current" winning hand is playing the board, since the "next to show" hand cannot lose to the current winner.

And thanks to you all for your great remarks. And thanks Stuart for clarifying the "fold" part at showdown. I hadn't thought about it that way, and it now makes perfect sense that the fold is in response to a bet or raise, but at showdown it's just a muck. As an aside, I guess according to Rule 45, a fold can also occur facing a check, but may be subject to penalty. Likewise for folding out of turn.

45:   Non-Standard Folds
Anytime before the end of the last betting round of a hand, folding in turn when facing a check or folding out of turn are both binding folds and may be subject to penalty.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 10, 2012, 08:25:57 AM
Steven,

 I don't know if you are quoting something from a book, or these are your own words:  At showdown, the "next to show" cannot or should not be allowed to muck if the "current" winning hand is playing the board, since the "next to show" hand cannot lose to the current winner.

 In tournament poker this would be true. The real issue IMO, is that the dealer can never kill a hand in this situation. I would say that your dealer handled it properly.

 Would it make a difference if the nut hand were on the board? Example: two players at showdown, board reads Ace high straight with no flush possible. Player A says he's playing the board and tables his hand while Player B has tossed his in the muck, (for whatever reason). Would you apply Rule #1 in this situation or would you strictly enforce TDA #13 that specifically states the player must show all hole cards?
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 10, 2012, 09:14:28 AM
How do you all feel about this:  At showdown, the "next to show" cannot or should not be allowed to muck if the "current" winning hand is playing the board, since the "next to show" hand cannot lose to the current winner.

With respect, I have to disagree that the hand cannot or should not be mucked.

My personal feeling is this:  In general, in tournament play, we do want to strive for the ideal that the best hand(s) at showdown should win the pot.  This is to protect all players in the tournament.  However, this does not relieve a player from having to recognize that he might have a hand that could win the portion of pot.  Now, if the player has any doubts as to whether his hand may be a winner, the rules do provide protection for him IF he "tables" his hand, since the contents of the hand can then be verified by the dealer and all players at the table, and the tabled hand cannot be killed.  This is the codified incentive that should encourage players to table their hands, and allow everyone to help ensure that the best hand wins the pot.

The bottom line for me is, if a player wants to benefit from the protection of the rule, he must, of his own will, clearly show his hand for all to see -- if he doesn't do this, then he should not be able to win the pot, and should be permitted to suffer the consequences of his incorrect evaluation (i.e. his hand was a loser when it was not).

However (and especially if another person is "playing the board" (assuming he has done nothing else to mislead the opponent by miscalling his hand or something like that), or if a board contains the "nuts"), when a player decides to muck his hand and chooses to do so without tabling his cards, I do not agree that the dealer should intervene by refusing to muck the cards -- the dealer would then be essentially playing in the player's place, assisting the player by reading the board.  With respect to the issue of game integrity, if the TD expects there to be a genuine possibility of chip dumping, an appropriate penalty can and should be given, no doubt. But this is a separate consideration, and in my view, would only trump the principle of one-player-to-a-hand when the threat of chip dumping is genuine (and lets face it, most often it is not).

In summary, being able to read the board is probably one of the most basic skills that a poker player is expected to master.  We should not be penalizing innocent opponents who happen to have superior board reading skills, by intervening.  However, the current rules do not go so far as to require players to "declare" their hands correctly, so allowing the dealer to assist in reading hands when they are tabled to me sounds like a more than fair compromise.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 10, 2012, 10:41:22 AM
K-Lo,

 I can only agree with you if this were a cash game. Everything you say goes against rules for tournament poker. The idea is to guarantee that the best hand wins at showdown. Why is the protection you speak of only offered when a player is all-in?  Your response only makes it more obvious that these rules are seriously flawed and need some clarification.

 I also do not consider the dealer speaking out, as a violation or consideration, in the one player to a hand ruling. I will have to agree with Steven on this one.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 10, 2012, 12:54:38 PM
Nick:

No, the protection that I speak of is not only offered when a player is all-in;  the player is protected from having his winning hand mucked if and when he tables his hand at any showdown, regardless of whether a player is all-in (Rule 15). 

"Everything you say goes against rules for tournament poker".  I disagree.  I see nothing in the tournament rules that requires the dealer to tell a player, "don't muck your hand, the board contains the nuts" or "don't muck your hand, if you have one card higher than the card X on the table, you will win because your opponent is playing the board".  I would not be in agreement with having a rule that the "next to show" hand cannot be mucked if the board contains the nuts, for example.  We might as well then have a rule that says "once the board shows the nuts after the river is dealt, the dealer shall declare the hand to be over, no betting actions will be permitted, and the pot will be split evenly amongst the remaining players".  This goes way too far, IMO.

Also, if you want to have a rule that requires the dealer to intervene and say "don't muck, the current hand is playing the board", or "don't muck, the board contains the nuts", you require the dealer to be competent enough to recognize those situations on the fly and to intervene accordingly and correctly.... and we know how critical of dealers you are already, why give them more opportunities to make mistakes?

I have seen the following situations occur:

1.  Three players at showdown, board is AAA77.  Player A shows KJ but Dealer (correctly) says "Aces full of 7s" and pushes the board cards upwards.  Player B mucks his cards face-down here, mumbling that his "Q-high" is no good, and C shows pocket sixes.  Are you saying that the dealer should intervene and stop the showdown at B, to explain why the (alleged) Queen isn't part of the best 5 card hand?  I say muck B's cards, and inform B of his error afterwards if you want, but no advising play during the hand.

2.  Board is AKQJT rainbow after the river is dealt, the Ace of hearts is showing.  Three players left in the hand.  Player A goes all-in, Player B calls.  Player C is last to act and asks, "if someone has the Ace of Spades, will that beat an Ace of hearts high straight?"  The dealer and TD decline to answer.  Player C folds, afraid of the Ace of spades-high straight.  Do you think the TD should have prevented C from folding here, and explain why suits do not matter in Holdem?  I say muck C's cards, and inform C of the error afterwards if you want, but no advising play during the hand.

I don't have any problem telling a player, "I can't advise you how to play, but I can only read your hand if you table it."  But whenever a player chooses not to table his hand, then he risks mucking a winning hand.  We want the best hand to win at showdown, yes, but players either need to table the hand so that we all know it is best, or the player needs to learn how to read a board.
 
We often say that if players want to avoid an adverse ruling because of an unclear betting action, we tell players to verbalize their intentions.  Similalarly, if players want to avoid potentially mucking a winning hand, we should tell players to table their hands at showdown.  In the infamous words of Nick C here on the TDA forum: "It's that simple."
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 10, 2012, 02:29:32 PM
K-Lo,

 Please don't take offense to what I wrote. It is not directed at you because you are one of the most knowledgeable people that I've ever encountered in many years in this game. Instead of taking each example that you've given, I want to single out just this one, You wrote:
 
I have seen the following situations occur:

1.  Three players at showdown, board is AAA77.  Player A shows KJ but Dealer (correctly) says "Aces full of 7s" and pushes the board cards upwards.  Player B mucks his cards face-down here, mumbling that his "Q-high" is no good, and C shows pocket sixes.  Are you saying that the dealer should intervene and stop the showdown at B, to explain why the (alleged) Queen isn't part of the best 5 card hand?  I say muck B's cards, and inform B of his error afterwards if you want, but no advising play during the hand.

My response:

The point that I am trying to make is: If any one of those 3 players were all-in; #1 There would be no chance of a player with a better hand losing, and if neither of the players had the board beat the hand would be divided 3 ways. #2 it would eliminate any possibility for collusion, or chip dumping. #3 You are allowing chips to be awarded to a single player as opposed to being divided the way they should.

 How are we protecting the integrity of the game if we allow the best hand to muck after calling all bets?

One other note. This is really funny (I think). You wrote: We might as well then have a rule that says "once the board shows the nuts after the river is dealt, the dealer shall declare the hand to be over, no betting actions will be permitted, and the pot will be split evenly amongst the remaining players".  This goes way too far, IMO.

My response: I actually like that idea for a number of reasons. In fact, I wrote about this exact situation on a TDA post last year ;D, and you guessed it! I liked the idea.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: diz475 on August 11, 2012, 07:17:45 AM
one player to a hand not one player and a dealer

player a tables hand, player b discards face down the dealer should muck it

if its a tourn. and player a is playing the board give b a pinalty for dumping chips

Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 11, 2012, 08:53:25 AM
diz475,

 I like the penalty but there are situations that can alter the outcome of the tournament. How would you like to be on-the-bubble against a player that was just awarded twice as many chips as he should have. I'm not looking to argue, or debate every situation presented for discussion. I feel that any attempt, by a dealer to correct a serious error is a much better option than allowing the incorrect distribution of chips.

 The end result is no different than pushing the pot to the wrong player.

 The way I see it, until a rule is passed that calls for all cards to be tabled at the showdown (in tournament poker), the problems we experience will never go away.
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: K-Lo on August 11, 2012, 12:41:27 PM
I feel that any attempt, by a dealer to correct a serious error is a much better option than allowing the incorrect distribution of chips.

For the examples we are discussing (i.e. first opponent to show is playing the board, the board contains a rainbow straight), the serious "error" is solely the player's error -- the player cannot read a board.  Perhaps the player is under the false impression that he must use one or two of his hole cards to make a hand... who knows.  But it is not the dealer's job to prevent this type of "error", namely stupid play.  If the player genuinely thinks his hand cannot win and surrenders his hand, then he should be permitted to do so.   

Don't get me wrong, I do see your point though -- the player would have been saved if it was an all-in situation -- and can sympathize with your desire to pass a new rule that says all cards are to be tabled at any showdown (all-in or not).  But until such a rule actually exists, for better or for worse, I don't think the current rules support the dealer forcing a player to table a hand that was bound for the muck, unless it is an all-in situation or someone is requesting to see the hand.  One day, this may be different, but until then, the dealer should be mucking those cards.   
Title: Re: Fold or Not! at Showdown
Post by: Nick C on August 11, 2012, 04:31:56 PM
K-Lo,

 You are correct. However I think we should change the title of the subject for this post...how about: "Chip Dumping The Easy Way"  ::)