muck one card, lose pot?

[mooredog]

Player A bets on river and is called. He shows 2 pair (one pair is on the board). Player B (somewhat inexperienced) shows a matching card to the board pair for trips but then tosses his other card face down into the muck. The pot is awarded to A because B only had shown one card. B goes ballistic. Right ruling?

[DCJ001]

By mucking one card, a player is mucking his hand. Tabling a hand is tabling all hole cards.

Even if a player wants to play the board, at which point his hole cards do not improve his hand, all hole cards must be tabled.

TDA rule # 14. Playing the Board
A player must show both cards when playing the board in order to get part of the pot.

[Nick C]

I can agree with DCJ001, that all cards should be exposed. The fact that there was mention of the player being new and inexperienced might raise the question of why the dealer didn't offer a little assistance by stopping the player from mucking his other card. I would also like to add a very important reason for the ruling....we need to be certain that the player only has two cards.  I will assume that the incident occured in a tournament and not a cash game.

[Stuart Murray]

because player has tabled his hand and contests the showdown by doing so, player B must table both cards in order to be awarded the pot. A gets the pot, a player must show all his whole cards in order to be awarded a pot or part of a pot.

Had player A simply mucked his hand when player B had shown his first hole card without player a tabling player B would of got it.  IT his own fault for not holding on to his hole cards.  I tell players hold on to the hole cards until you have the pot swept to you.

Regards
Stuart

[Nick C]

Stuart,
 I would have to say that I think you are being a little too "technical," in the situation described above. Mooredog mentioned that the player that displayed one card (showing three of a kind), was a new player. I don't blame him for going balistic. I think a warning would have been more appropriate, for a first offence. The dealer should have intercepted the card before it hit the muck. I think we need to recognize when a player is making an honest mistake, and when something is suspect.
 I guess, if a seasoned player were to "show one" card only, then your strict rull enforcement could be considered. I really believe the rule is for players that show one card, and then show the other if there is a need.
 You run a "tight ship" and I know that's probably the right way to operate. I do, however, lean toward protecting new players from having the "pot" taken from them when they have the best hand.

[Stuart Murray]

Thanks for the input Nick,

I'm not going to waiver just because he is a new player, had the dealer intervened and stopped the second card being mucked he would of got the pot but because it's in the muck his hand is dead, it's realistically the only way a new live player is going to learn the lesson to safeguard his hand.

I always expect dealers and players to look after 'newbies' at the table but if things go wrong I am not going to use my discretion to circumnavigate a perfectly good rule.

Stu

[Nick C]

Stuart,
 I respect your opinion. There will be no argument from me. I wonder how many "name players" would be penalized with you on the floor? That's probably what they need.

[Stuart Murray]

lol at that one Nick,

I tell my floors to always penalize, even if it's a slap on the wrist with a single missed hand penalty it usually gets the message across easier than warnings.

Cheers
Stu