Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / 5
« Last post by BillM16 on Today at 02:41:26 PM »
Hi Stu: This situation is covered by Rule 65 Accidentally Killed / Fouled / Exposed Hands. The rule clearly states that an uncalled bet will be returned to the player who's hand is fouled. Also, the situation is not identical, but has trappings of Koroknai - Baumann at WSOP where Koroknai made a large bet then mucked his hand, not realizing that Baumann still had cards. Ultimately the ruling was that Baumann would not receive the bet she had not yet called at the time K's cards were irretrievably mucked.
Thanks for the very interesting case!

As I read the OP, the significant difference is that Player 4 acted by declaring call and by tabling what was most likely the winning hand.  Stu didn't say what Player 1 mucked, but he did say that Player 4 tabled a set of Queens. If there were no Kings, Aces, or a pair on the board, then Player 1 mucked the losing hand.


The OP says that it's unclear how Player 4 acted. Two participants thought he folded, two thought he called. There's no precedent for saying when in doubt it's a call, especially when the dealer hears "fold".

We're on the flop, there's no way of knowing who has the winning hand.

Mike,

The OP said that player 4 made an annoucement, asked player 1 why he folded his all-in, and then tabled his cards - a set of queens.  There is no precedent for saying that its a fold if two people heard the call and the loser is complaining.  There is precedent for realizing that it was a call when the player tables what appears to be the winning hand.  I didn't say that the set of queens ultimately won on 5th street.  I did say that it was winning post flop.  That means it was much the favorite to win.  As such, it is extremely rare (perhaps never) folded here.

Now, if player 4 had his hole cards hidden from view, nobody heard him say call, and he tabled an unsuited four-gapper that missed the flop completely.  OK, then I might give player 1 a refund because #65 allows a return of the uncalled portion of the bet.

Weak players and weak dealers are likely to say anything to cover their mistakes. 
2
Hi Stu: This situation is covered by Rule 65 Accidentally Killed / Fouled / Exposed Hands. The rule clearly states that an uncalled bet will be returned to the player who's hand is fouled. Also, the situation is not identical, but has trappings of Koroknai - Baumann at WSOP where Koroknai made a large bet then mucked his hand, not realizing that Baumann still had cards. Ultimately the ruling was that Baumann would not receive the bet she had not yet called at the time K's cards were irretrievably mucked.
Thanks for the very interesting case!

As I read the OP, the significant difference is that Player 4 acted by declaring call and by tabling what was most likely the winning hand.  Stu didn't say what Player 1 mucked, but he did say that Player 4 tabled a set of Queens. If there were no Kings, Aces, or a pair on the board, then Player 1 mucked the losing hand.


The OP says that it's unclear how Player 4 acted. Two participants thought he folded, two thought he called. There's no precedent for saying when in doubt it's a call, especially when the dealer hears "fold".

We're on the flop, there's no way of knowing who has the winning hand.
3

Mike, with all, due respect for your comparing this situation with Bauman and Koroknai ...In my opinion that was one of the worst rulings in the history of poker tournaments.


So you would prefer to have shipped all of Koroknai's chips to Baumann without her ever calling, and with him not having a hand?
4
First of all...I'd like to say hello to Stuart Murray. Nice to know you're still out there.

 I hate to refer to dealers in these situations but...how does the dealer allow a player with a live hand, to muck his hand before the player he believed to have folded? Proper dealer procedure would never allow the believed winner to muck before all opponents hands are surrendered. Problem solved. Seat 1 Player and Dealer both believe the opposing Player in seat 4 said fold...if he folded the dealer should have asked for his cards and the Player in the 1 seat should have held his hand until the other player surrendered his cards. It's a simple procedure that needs to be followed.

Mike, with all, due respect for your comparing this situation with Bauman and Koroknai ...In my opinion that was one of the worst rulings in the history of poker tournaments.

The winning hand must always be the last cards to hit the muck...always.
5
Hi Stu: This situation is covered by Rule 65 Accidentally Killed / Fouled / Exposed Hands. The rule clearly states that an uncalled bet will be returned to the player who's hand is fouled. Also, the situation is not identical, but has trappings of Koroknai - Baumann at WSOP where Koroknai made a large bet then mucked his hand, not realizing that Baumann still had cards. Ultimately the ruling was that Baumann would not receive the bet she had not yet called at the time K's cards were irretrievably mucked.
Thanks for the very interesting case!

As I read the OP, the significant difference is that Player 4 acted by declaring call and by tabling what was most likely the winning hand.  Stu didn't say what Player 1 mucked, but he did say that Player 4 tabled a set of Queens. If there were no Kings, Aces, or a pair on the board, then Player 1 mucked the losing hand.

Player 1 didn't complain at all until: 1) player 4 asked why he mucked his all-in hand - which he is obligated to reveal, and 2) the dealer said "I thought your folded."  3) Only after being encouraged by the dealer, did player 1 chime in

Player 4 clearly tabled the winning hand and there is no doubt that player 1 bet all-in. Other players at the table heard the call announced. There is no way he's getting a refund in my room.  Otherwise, every shyster will be mucking all-in bluffs.

In the Baumann case, if I recall, she had not as yet acted and only claimed to have declared a call after she first admitted to the floor that she didn't act before Koroknai mucked his hand.  Rule #65 applies in a situation of an uncalled bet, but does not apply in Stu's case.  I cannot take sides with the dealer, who didn't do his job well, or player 1, who was about to go broke with a losing hand.
6

I explain the situation as above and he then rules the following:
"Players 1 hand is dead because it has made contact with other cards, because the dealer and player 1 heard fold I will return the all-in wager to player 1 but award the pre-flop pot to player 4."

Regards
Stuart

Hi Stu: This situation is covered by Rule 65 Accidentally Killed / Fouled / Exposed Hands. The rule clearly states that an uncalled bet will be returned to the player who's hand is fouled. Also, the situation is not identical, but has trappings of Koroknai - Baumann at WSOP where Koroknai made a large bet then mucked his hand, not realizing that Baumann still had cards. Ultimately the ruling was that Baumann would not receive the bet she had not yet called at the time K's cards were irretrievably mucked.
Thanks for the very interesting case!
7
My point is this situation is that Player A is facing action with all options available and seeking information for other players options. He is indirectly asking for advice to know how many chips the street could cost to him. This is why the dealer should not respond with a straight answer.

If player A asks if D's raise is a dead raise, can an answer be given? What if player A asks whether B can re-raise?

Boris,

I understood your OP as saying that player A was asking whether D's bet was enough to allow B to raise again. Assuming that is correct, then my answer stands.  Player A can ask that question and the dealer can provide an answer.  No where in your OP do I see where player A was asking for advice.
 


Dictionary:
ad∑vice
/ədˈvīs/
noun
1.  guidance or recommendations offered with regard to prudent future action.
8
Boris, please see Rule #53:

53:  Accepted Action
Poker is a game of alert, continuous observation. It is the callerís responsibility to determine the correct amount of an opponentís bet before calling, regardless of what is stated by others. If a caller requests a count but receives incorrect information from a dealer or player, then pushes out that amount, the caller has accepted the full correct action & is subject to the correct wager or all-in amount. As with all situations, Rule 1 may apply at TDís discretion.


Clearly, it is acceptable for a dealer to provide the information.  Of course, it's the player's responsibility to ensure that the information received was indeed correct.  If incorrect, Rule #1 may be involved in a fair ruling. The important point here is that the player is not only entitled but is responsible for determining the correct amount and requesting that information from a dealer is allowed.  If a dealer refuses to clarify whether or not the bet was a full raise, the player ought to call the floor before making a decision.

My point is this situation is that Player A is facing action with all options available and seeking information for other players options. He is indirectly asking for advice to know how many chips the street could cost to him. This is why the dealer should not respond with a straight answer.

Rule 1 should be only for extreme cases which conflict several rules and/or the results of the interpretation of multiple rules may differ. Plus, it has nothing to do with dealers behaviour. Dealers should never give any information of this kind on their own since they could lose their neutrality. It is way better to let the floor make the decision to give the information or not.
9
I agree. Players must protect their hand. Full pot goes to player 4.
10
I've faced this situation several times.  I find it better to simply address what the player asking can do and what the OOT can do also, most occasions it is an honest question as they are unsure if their action will change the OOT abilities.  Even experienced players get confused on occasion by rules and need clarification of who what when where and why, it's rarely to try and shoot angles, but even if it is, the player OOT must carry culpability and accept so for their actions - it's not the other player fault.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10