all in player leaves table

[mooredog]

Four handed final table the UTG player shoves all in then gets up and walks off to the water cooler. The other players mucked their hands but what if one of them called? Do you muck the hand of the player that left and pay off the caller? What if the caller has the original bettor covered? I'm glad the other players folded quickly and tossed their cards into the muck so I didn't have to rule on it but I did warn the player who left and told him I probably would have ruled his hand dead had someone called.

[Nick C]

mooredog,
 I like your ruling. However, it is not in compliance with TDA or tournament rules. This has been discussed a great deal on other posts, and the consensus was inconclusive. I guess it depends on which rule you want to enforce. TDA Rule # 11 Face up for all-ins...#26 At your seat...#27 Action Pending?

[chet]

My  2 cents worth:  Turn the hand face up, if the player is not "at the table" by the time the river is exposed and the winning hand determined, I would rule the hand dead and award the pot to the player present with the best hand.  That may mean the all in player gets some chips back if the calling player (to whom the pot was awarded, given the all in player being absent) had less chips than the all in player.

I have zero tolerance for players that deliberately flaunt the rules, good or bad.

Chet

[K-Lo]

I like your decision mooredog and your warning to the player.  I think that is fair.  

If I see a player leaving the table with the player still having a live hand,, I would warn the player not to leave his seat and the dealer should as well.

In general, i believe the "at your seat" rules generally take precedent over the others.  The player abandoned his hand.  I wouldn't actually know if he intends to come back.  So I would turn over the hands because of the all in situation, (to determine if any additional penalties are warranted) but award the pot immediately to the remaining player, and return any excess uncalled portion to the utg stack if utg had the caller covered.   I can accept Chet's suggestion, but if you give such a "grace period" by waiting until the river is dealt to declare the hand dead, you are essentially saying that you can revive an already abandoned hand (the hand was abandoned when he left the table) which I personally think is problematic.

[Nick C]

K-Lo and Chet,
 You both say that you would turn over the absent player's hand. Who turns it over? I like Chet's idea for killing the hand at the showdown if the player has not returned. The hand could be killed (touched to the muck) and exposed after the pot was awarded to the best hand of the seated player! Why should an all-in player be protected from making a mistake, that they could otherwise make if they were not all-in? Also, any player that leaves the table, would be a clear indication to me, that they have no interest in competing for the pot.

[Spence]

To get right to the root of the problem, why does this rule exist? Do we really have an epidemic of players abandoning their hands when all-in or have called all bets?

• This most often happens with players "folding" out of turn by just leaving the table. (Penalty)
• If a player does not understand where the action is or what is going on then the dealer should politely inform them that they must remain at the table to collect the pot or else they may have their hand called dead. (That should be bad enough for a player who is truly trying to compete)
• Or we have someone who doesn't want the other players getting a read from him so he takes off assuming that the dealer will take care of the rest and he can just return to his chips. (This is probably what we are really trying to prevent)

The best way to rule in my eyes is conditional to the circumstances but being firm on players having to stay at the table to win the pot seems the best rule, and most fair.

[Nick C]

Spence,
 TDA rule #27 should solve the problem...but it doesn't. This is the current rule: Action Pending - A player must remain at the table if he has a live hand.

 I would like to add to the current rule by letting the player's know that abandoning their hand is a clear indication that they have no interest in the pot and their hand will be killed by the dealer. The hand will also be tabled after the pot has been awarded to the winner.

[Spence]

Spence,
 TDA rule #27 should solve the problem...but it doesn't. This is the current rule: Action Pending - A player must remain at the table if he has a live hand.

 I would like to add to the current rule by letting the player's know that abandoning their hand is a clear indication that they have no interest in the pot and their hand will be killed by the dealer. The hand will also be tabled after the pot has been awarded to the winner.

Nick I can definitely agree with the amendment to rule #27. An addition that states the hand will be declared dead (within reason) it would solve this issue. "Within reason" being at your seat and such