A very interesting case was e-mailed to the TDA recently. The following 6 paragraphs are the recollection of the hand from Player A. The explanation of the ruling from the cardroom manager is the last paragraph. This situation is very interesting because it contains a number of issues that may or may not be relevant to the ruling: showdown management, all-in betting, when are cards dead and irretrievable at a showdown, is a capitulation binding at showdown, betting lines vs. no lines etc. How would you rule in this case?
******************************
Game is NLHE. Player A was in Seat 1 and Player B in seat 8. Post-flop, Player B goes all-in and Player A calls, having B covered. The dealer told both players to turn their downcards up. Player A tabled both his cards face up near the flop. Player B did not immediately table his cards. Instead, he read Player A's hand, flashed his cards to Player C (not in the hand) and in an exasperated move (not unintentional), threw his cards both face down over the betting line, as though he was caught in a bluff [NOTE: this cardroom uses betting lines, but from the information provided it's not clear if these are also used as "folding" lines]. Player C (who has previously folded and is not involved in the hand) then said to Player B "...wait, you've still got a chance."
At that point Player B "conceded" he had lost the hand. Player A said to Player C "He threw them in over the line, those cards are dead."
The dealer called the floor for a ruling. At that point Player C again said, "You've still got a chance," to Player B and to the dealer Player C says, " ....He didn't mean to throw those in." Player B again conceded the hand saying, "No, that's all right" and gets out of his chair to walk away. The floor person arrives, and Player B again indicates he is conceding the hand.
The floor person then asks the dealer to re-count the action. As part of the re-count the dealer states, "Player B didn't mean to throw the cards in." In fact only Player C has made this assertion and Player B has repeatedly declared or gestured that he has "conceded" the showdown. The floor person then instructs the dealer to retrieve Player B's cards and table them. Player B's cards had touched the flopped board cards but had not touched the muck although Player B had tossed them face down in that direction.
Player A then says, "Wait, he threw those cards in face down over the betting line, they are dead." The floor person declares that he has flexibility to rule in this case and instructs the dealer to run out the turn and river cards.
Player A has tabled KQ and the flop paired the Q. Player B's tabled cards are A10. The turn comes K giving Player A kings up. Player B has a straight draw and again gestures to the effect that he has lost and rises from his seat. Player C interjects "Wait!, you've got a straight if the J comes." The river brings a Jack, the pot is awarded to Player B and Player A is left with one chip and busts 2 hands later.
The Cardroom manager explained the ruling as follows: "[There was an all-in bet and a call]. One player showed his hand and the other player, while attempting to show his cards, had his cards end up across the betting line face down. In all poker tournaments, when an all-in bet is called by one other player and no more action is able to occur, both hands must show. Furthermore, these hands will both be live and the best hand shall be awarded the pot. A player cannot inadvertently have a hand killed by crossing the betting line, as there would be no way in that instance to prevent collusion and soft play amongst the tournament players if a hand could be killed in this situation."
*************************
Thanks to both the Players and tournament management for submitting this interesting case!
