player reaching for the chair, hand live or dead?

[Luca P.]

This is the scenario;
Dealer was dealing the cards, he dealt the last card to the button (seat 2), and after exactly 1 second from dealing the last one (camera checked), while he was taking the first 2 cards from a sit out player on seat 3 and attempted to reach cards on seat 5, the player on seat 5 was right behind the chair, and reached for the cards with his hands. All of this happened in 1 second
The dealer then declared the hand dead, but the player refused to give his cards, then I was called on the table.
The dealer did not touch seat 5 cards, he was just about to reach them.

What do you personally do?
I declared the hand live.

[Nick C]

Hello Luca,

  At the 2013 TDA Summit a rule was introduced that would have absolutely killed the hand... First Card Off...this however  was reversed in 2015. Players must still be at their seat, or at least close enough, so the dealer and other players know you are there. Can you imagine a full table standing around waiting for their cards to be dealt before they are seated? Not a good practice, for sure. What bothers me is the dealer announcing the hand dead, but the player still possessed the cards. I think a good warning for a first time offender would be sufficient. The dealer should have called the floor, explained the situation and allowed the floorperson to make the call.

Based on what you've explained, I would allow the player to retain his cards and continue play as normal.

[MikeB]

Hi Luca:
The language "tie goes to the player" was proposed (from memory) at either the 2011 or 2013 Summit. It's classic sports referee lingo. It conveys the idea that if you can't clearly determine the player was not at his seat, then the player gets the benefit of the doubt and retains his cards. Personally I think it's a good guideline to use... if you can't definitively say the guy was not at his seat when the last card was dealt, consider him at his seat and he remains dealt in. 

Thanks for the interesting case!

[chet]

Appears to me this boils down to the definition of "At your seat".  Personally, if he was close enough to be able to reach his cards, I would rule the hand live. 

We are NEVER going to reach consensus on the meaning of "At your seat", so I would recommend that you adopt a house rule.

Chet

During that consideration, what would you do if the player was prevented from reaching his seat because the damn security officer was changing the box or because a handicapped player was trying to get out of the table behind,  etc?

[Brian Vickers]

and after exactly 1 second from dealing the last one (camera checked)

Luca, before I get into the response i just wanted to address this line.  My hope is that you looked at the camera after this incident was resolved for your own education.  In poker tournaments, as a TD, we have to pretend the cameras don't exist.  We can't hold up a table for a floor call with the clock ticking, we can't pause the clock without holding up every table, and if we do then the tournament ends up running late.  Nothing good comes from holding up the action.  In a cash game you can always rack up the pot, call for review and award the pot after without other players being affected; tournaments do not allow for such an easy solution.  As TD you have to use all available information, including sometimes input from the other players at the table, but surveillance can't be one of them 99.9% of the time.

As to how I would have handled the call in your original example:
If my dealer tells me that he/she completed the deal and the player was not in arms length of his chair, it's a dead hand.  It doesn't matter that they grabbed the cards after; kill the hand and move on.  The player can be mad, or they can choose to accept responsibility for their own action.  We can't play nice, we are like referees in a sporting event, we gotta make the call and live with it.  On the other hand, if the dealer says "I think he wasn't back yet" or something that leads you to believe the player's proximity was in question, I'd favor the player but advise to not cut it so close returning to the table next time or he risks a dead hand again.  Like Mike said "tie goes to the player" when it's not clear if he was in range.

[Brian Vickers]

Appears to me this boils down to the definition of "At your seat".  Personally, if he was close enough to be able to reach his cards, I would rule the hand live. 

We are NEVER going to reach consensus on the meaning of "At your seat", so I would recommend that you adopt a house rule.

Chet

During that consideration, what would you do if the player was prevented from reaching his seat because the damn security officer was changing the box or because a handicapped player was trying to get out of the table behind,  etc?

Not that I'm in a habit of disagreeing with you Chet, but '"At your seat" does have a set definition, per the TDA:  “At your seat” means within reach of your chair.

[Dave Miller]

Seems to me that "within reach of your chair" means the player could actually be further away than "within reach of the cards." Since he was able to reach the cards, I'd rule the hand live.

You have to ask yourself if you're gonna treat this situation any different depending on the different type of tournament. I.E. The identical situation in a daily $65 tourney gets treated the same as the last day of the main event of your big yearly event, right?

Of course, if the rule were "first card off the deck" the cards would have been dealt directly into the muck, and this situation would have been avoided....

[Uniden32]

I'm a firm believer in giving the player the benefit of the doubt in any of these situations.