PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: WSOPMcGee on February 12, 2011, 02:25:29 AM
-
Please watch the accompanying Video from EPT Barcelona 2009 (http://www.youtube.com/embed/Mr2agX80ZyE) and then vote.
I'm not sure if this was ever posted about here before but would love to hear feedback on what you see in the video and what ruling you would make and why.
-
I would say definately dead he even put his hand in the muck! the TD made the correct decision in my opinion, what Roland did what a deliberate exposure and should be issued a penalty for exposing 1 or both cards before the river round was complete.
-
We've saw it and discussed it, I support the decision made by Thomas' that day. Roland failed to show both his hole cards before electing to muck them. The dealer did compound things though and I am not best pleased at TR's angling in this hand.
Regards
Stuart
-
Thomas,
Like Stuart says, this has been covered quite extensively on the Forum. I will pass along one of my earlier comments on the subject.
You bring up a very interesting topic regarding the incident in Barcelona. Why did the dealer turn over the cards after they were in the muck? The more I watch that, the more interesting it becomes. I thought that the dealer did everthing right up to that point. He asked the initial bettor to expose his hand and when he only turned over the king of clubs, he prompted the player to show the other card (which he mucked instead). If the dealer would have mucked the hand and pushed the pot to the winner, the ultimate decision of the floor would have been a lot easier. I still like the call.
-
I agree with Stuart, the fact Roland did not show both his cards in showdown means he relinqushes all claim to the pot.
-
Anybody remember the link or subject title for the previous discussion?
I put this up because of the differences in opinion of the TD's that were questioned by the Hendon Mob "You're the Tournament Director" series.
Of which, both opinions of the two American TD's (Matt and Jack) on the panel disagree with the decision and would have awarded the pot Roland.
I watched the Video extensively for about 30 minutes just looping it back and forth, trying to catch the dialogue between the two players.
Roland after being called tell Tobias that he has a King and shows 1 card. Obviously not enough to make it a tabled hand. After the flashing the King, Roland makes a move that looks like he's going to fold but holds onto his cards and Tobias asks to see both cards, to which the dealer says the same. Then Roland repeats, "I have a King."
Tobias then says to Roland, "I have one too" and that's when Roland tries to stuff his cards into the muck, only to have the dealer stop him. Then the dealer proceeds to turn his hand up as Tobias simultaneously slams down his Q6 exclaiming that Roland mucked. Then Roland claims he never did any such thing, which of course he did in fact muck.
Now given that we all have the benefit of video, I'm not questioning any decision that was made. I more interested in discussing the answers that were posted by Matt and Jack. They both stated that Roland would've been awarded the pot had they been the person called to the table on the basis that, if a called hand gets tabled by anyone, including the dealer, that the best hand should get the pot.
Now while I agree that if Tobias is asking to see both cards, then they should be live and the dealer did the right thing by stopping Roland from burying them. But he should have called a Floor person over before tabling the hand.
There's so many things wrong with this hand. Tobias's angle shooting by telling Roland that he had a King too. Roland Flashing only one card and attempting to muck. The dealer turning over both cards that were in the muck, albeit temporarily. Roland saying that he never mucked after seeing Tobias's Q high. What a mess.
And we all want to be TD's. :)
-
IF, and it's a BIG IF TR did announce he had a King Too, then RDW folded his hand as a result of misinformation and I would make an effort to retrieve his hand, but on the video, TR certainly doesn't look to say that, from what I Saw he let RDW bury the cards without influence, only if the dealer or players around heard TR saying 'I have one too' would it likely go the other way, otherwise the original decision of TK stands for me as a sound decision
I am very much of the school that a dealer should not be tabling a players hand at any time, unless that player has a special disability which precludes their ability to turn over cards.
Regards
Stuart
-
I'm with Stuart, Roland was embarrassed to show his weak kicker and he knew (incorrectly) that he had a loser. If he thought that his hand was good, don't you think he would have uncovered both cards with confidence? We would still be talking about that hand, but it would be because Roland played brilliantly. Wow, how did he know his king was good?
IMO, this is another reason why; what a player says should mean nothing. The dealer screwed-up the showdown, by turning over the mucked card. We just went round and round on another thread about having a complete hand in order to win.
A novice player in the same situation would have revealed both of his cards and won the hand without incident.
here they are
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=159.0
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=163.0
-
I agree with the ruling but, wow, what a mess. I don't understand why the dealer turned the hand up. Its s easy if he doesn't do that. The TD doesn't have the video that we get to see to make his decision so he can only rely on what the dealer and players can tell him. From what I saw and how I would have explained it to the floor he made the right call (in my mind).
Is this a tda rule?
[/quote]If a called hand gets tabled by anyone, including the dealer, that the best hand should get the pot.)
I don't see it anywhere. If that is a rule I change my answer.
-
Pineforest,
Your describing the situation a mess is appropriate. TDA Rule #9 is as close as it gets, you can also refer to Rules #40 and #41 where one-player-to-a-hand is listed. In a tournament all cards should be "tabled" when the betting is complete. The issue with the Barcelona incident was the dealer turning over the mucked hand. If Roland turned over both of his cards, he would have won the pot. End of story, no problem. Any player, turning over another players hole cards is a violation of the one-player-to-a-hand rule, and the dealer can not turn over a players "live" hand so...the responsibility to table a hand lies with the owner of the hand. Period.
Stuart brings up another interesting point. The fact that some of the audio is not clear,or you might be watching a video and hear someone speak, yet you are not certain who said it. When I mentioned that the dealer should never turn over a players face down live hand, I did not mention the exception to the rule; unless it is at the explicid request of the owner of the hand. An example would be; a player with a coffee in one hand and a donut in the other, asking the dealer to please turn over my cards at the showdown. Sometimes seeing is not always enough.
-
Just to play devil's advocate for a second, if Roland had shown BOTH cards then mucked, as he tried to do would that change anyones ruling?
-
Spence,
If Roland had properly tabled both cards, he would have won the pot! The dealer can not kill a winning hand that was properly tabled, even if it were mucked by mistake.
-
Ditto Nick's response, if RDW had tabled (even briefly) both hole cards then the pot would of been awarded to him.
Regards
Stu
-
After watching the video again I would rule with De Wolfe. Initially I felt that Reinkemeier should win simply beacuase De Wolfe willingly mucked his cards. Upon further examination though Reinkemeier asks to see De Wolfe's kicker. Is this enough to be asking to see both cards? Especially since his King was already shown? In that case isn't it the dealers responsibility to open the hand. Now we all know once the hand hits the muck it is dead. But don't we also have a rule that if the calling player in the hand asks to see the cards, they are live? And. one other thing... How the heck is Reinkemeier calling 80,000 on the river with Queen high? The board came
Ah 10c 7c 9h 4h
What could he have possibly put him on? I can't see any possible busted straight draw that would be reasonable. Food for thought while making a ruling. I doubt there was collusion involved with the outburst at the end, but really? Queen high?
-
Spence: The rule is that if the player to whom the pot is going to be awarded, asks to see the losing players cards, the losing players cards are then live. It doesn't make any difference if it is the calling player or the betting player, it is the action of the apparent winner that determines the status of the apparent losing hand.
-
I do not recall that either player requested to see the others hand. I know that If De Wolfe had turned his cards over he would have won. Why didn't he? He was embarrassed, that's why. Chet you are correct about the winning player asking to see the opponents hand but, any player has a right to see a called hand. If Spence is correct about Reinkemeier asking to see the hand, then that changes everything. I never knew that.
-
Nick: You are correct in that any player can ask to see a called hand.
HOWEVER, the ONLY TIME a folded/mucked hand becomes live is in the example I gave (where the apparent winner asks to see the folded/mucked hand of the apparent loser). The apparent losers hand becomes live and if it is the better hand MUST be declared the winner and receive the pot.
In ALL other cases, the dealer MUST kill the hand, then display it. The hand is dead and CANNOT WIN any part of the pot, even if it is a better hand.
Chet
-
Chet,
You are correct. So any time I read about a hand being retrieved from the muck I cringe. The only exception is if the hand were properly tabled and the dealer mucks it by mistake. Therefore, De Wolfe had no chance to win the hand unless Reinkemeier asked to see it. Which leads to one of myl questions from an earlier post; as to whether the final two players MUST table their cards in a tournament, and according to all I've read, the answer is NO, unless one of the two players is all-in.
-
Show one show all, applies in this circumstance, however I am unlikely to honour a players request to see a mucked hand, poker is an individual sport and players have the right to muck a hand as they see fit. Applying the show one show all also requires that if a hand cannot be displayed (because it is in the muck) that the player AT LEAST in good faith disclose the contents of ones hand, again even when a player (heads up) has bet the river, been called and then immediately mucked when showdown was reached, the hand is over, and the other player gets the pot without showing also as he has the last live hand at the table, again the player who called the river bet can ask to see the mucked the hand - but it's unlikely I'm letting them see their opponents hand. That's the way I see it under current TDA rules.
Regards
Stuart
-
Spence: The rule is that if the player to whom the pot is going to be awarded, asks to see the losing players cards, the losing players cards are then live. It doesn't make any difference if it is the calling player or the betting player, it is the action of the apparent winner that determines the status of the apparent losing hand.
I think Chet clears up the language very well here. Specifically though the rule from RRoP is stated as such:
Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that was eligible to participate in the showdown, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.
Show one show all, applies in this circumstance, however I am unlikely to honour a players request to see a mucked hand, poker is an individual sport and players have the right to muck a hand as they see fit. Applying the show one show all also requires that if a hand cannot be displayed (because it is in the muck) that the player AT LEAST in good faith disclose the contents of ones hand, again even when a player (heads up) has bet the river, been called and then immediately mucked when showdown was reached, the hand is over, and the other player gets the pot without showing also as he has the last live hand at the table, again the player who called the river bet can ask to see the mucked the hand - but it's unlikely I'm letting them see their opponents hand. That's the way I see it under current TDA rules.
Regards
Stuart
One of the issues we have here is that this event did not abide by TDA rules. Stu's point indicates that we DO need more standardization in our rules. This is one of the most interesting hand that a TD could come by and I for one would like something to fall back on.