Author Topic: When does a folded hand become dead?  (Read 16623 times)

DCJ001

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 191
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2011, 10:20:57 PM »
TDA rules do not allow the dealer to count the amount of a bet, only make the chips visible and easy for the player to count on their own. I don't like it, that's part of the new TDA rule this year #41 Accepted Action.

You should read rule 41 a few times, as it is written. It does not say that dealers are not allowed to count the amounts of bets.

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2011, 10:39:54 PM »
TDA rules do not allow the dealer to count the amount of a bet, only make the chips visible and easy for the player to count on their own. I don't like it, that's part of the new TDA rule this year #41 Accepted Action.

You should read rule 41 a few times, as it is written. It does not say that dealers are not allowed to count the amounts of bets.
You're right. It merely states don't rely on the information. I think that is the point of the arguement. We've talked about this before haven't we? About when it is and is not appropriate to be having the dealer counting stacks for players? TDA rule 21 states:
21: Chip Stacks Kept Visible & Countable
Players are entitled to a reasonable estimation of an opponent's chip count; thus chips should be kept in countable stacks. The TDA recommends clean stacks in multiples of 20 as a standard. Players must keep their higher denomination chips visible and identifiable at all times. Tournament directors will control the number & denomination of chips in play and may color up at their discretion. Discretionary color ups are to be announced.
Perhaps thats where the obligation of the dealer lies?
We are off topic here as well. This thread is about binding folds.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #17 on: December 09, 2011, 04:28:48 AM »
This is from ROBERTS RULES
1. Your hand is declared dead if:

(a) You fold or announce that you are folding when facing a bet or a raise.

(b) You throw your hand away in a forward motion causing another player to act behind you (even if not facing a bet).

2. Cards thrown into the muck may be ruled dead. However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved and ruled live at management’s discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game. An extra effort should be made to rule a hand retrievable if it was folded as a result of incorrect information given to the player

I would say, based on #2, a hand that has not hit the muck, is still live. that's why a surrendered hand should be mucked instantly. The muck is never to be kept in a specific order because the cards should be mixed in such a way that they can not be retrieved.
« Last Edit: December 09, 2011, 04:32:36 AM by Nick C »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #18 on: December 09, 2011, 06:33:11 AM »
Spence and DCJ001,
If you want to move this, we can. I am going to address this issue here because it is discussed on this link.

Back to TDA #41
 I guess you guys are right again...or am I the only person that looks at the rule as flawed?

You can ask the dealer and the player how much the bet is, but if you get the wrong information, you're screwed! That's what I see. Wagers should not be deceptive or questionable, that is why the chips should not be hidden and the larger denomination clearly visible. And now, the TDA would like your chips stacked in increments of 20.

There should be a shared responsibility between the bettor and the caller, and there must be a trust that the dealer can count the damn chips!
TDA Rule # 36... The last line: it is the players responsibility to make his intentions clear.    It's even underlined!

So which is it? Or is this just another way for us to toss out the good old Rule #1, and put the blame on whoever you want.

ROBERTS RULES……NO-LIMIT…..BIG BET
12. Because the amount of a wager at big-bet poker has such a wide range, a player who has taken action based on a gross misunderstanding of the amount wagered may receive some protection by the decision-maker. A "call" or “raise” may be ruled not binding if it is obvious that the player grossly misunderstood the amount wagered, provided no damage has been caused by that action. Example: Player A bets $300, player B reraises to $1200, and Player C puts $300 into the pot and says, “call.” It is obvious that player C believes the bet to be only $300 and he should be allowed to withdraw his $300 and reconsider his wager. A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot
 
Not only does RR not force a player to call a bet (when the bet was not understood), it allows the player to retrack his bet. I'm not a big fan of the percentage, but it's used in limit poker, and all other games when an incorrect amount is put in the pot. 80% is what Bob came up with.

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #19 on: December 09, 2011, 09:15:56 AM »
I wonder whether we are actually all on the same side, but debating these issues for debating's sake.  LOL.   ;) 

Anyways... First, when talking about when the dealer is obliged to count out chips that have been bet, let's not get distracted by Rule 21.  I followed the history of how Rule 21 came to be, and I believe it is clear that Rule 21 deals with chips that have NOT yet been bet.  In other words, the "countable stacks" relate to stacks of chips still "behind" a player.  This is consistent with the philosophy that chips already committed to the pot belong to the pot, and potential callers are entitled to know the amount to call.  However, if a potential caller asks the dealer "how much does that bettor have left behind", the dealer should NOT reach behind and give a count -- those chips have not been bet, and as long as the stacks behind are countable, it's up to the potential caller to assess how much a player has "behind" based on visual inspection of the stacks.

I'll stick to my guns here and maintain that as a matter of procedure, if a dealer is asked by a person who's turn it is to act to count a wager (i.e. actually bet) made in that particular round, that person should be entitled to a count without exception.  (And yes, according to Rule #41, he is screwed if the count given is incorrect).

Back to the question of when folded hands become dead:

However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved and ruled live at management’s discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game. An extra effort should be made to rule a hand retrievable if it was folded as a result of incorrect information given to the player.

I would say, based on #2, a hand that has not hit the muck, is still live.
(my emphasis)

In my view, it is telling that the Rule says "at management's discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game".   The rule would suggest a different intent if it had said "a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved and is live".  The fact that someone can retrieve a hand and rule it live at the management's discretion suggests to me that ruling the hand live represents the exception, not the Rule.  In the situation originally brought up by Spence and in my example, as TD I would NOT exercise that discretion in those cases, and rule the hand thrown forward towards the muck as dead, and I think I would be entitled to do so under the Rule. 

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #20 on: December 09, 2011, 04:16:21 PM »
K-lo,
 I have agreed with the hand surrendered in a forward motion should be killed but the rules say if it can be retrieved it is live. Therefore, if the hand were properly mucked, there would be no issue...dead hand. I am against any player, dealer or floor person, trying to dig any cards from the muck. Rule or not. The only exception would be if a player were tossing his hand away thinking that he won and then it was realized that another player was still in the hand. That's one for another post. Every time I mention the intent of the player, people think I'm soft. I've had experience with the best angle-shooters in the country and Canada, too. Players that make deliberate moves can expect more punishment and a stronger use of rule #1, especially repeat offenders with a history for "making moves."
 The rules of poker are to offer some protection to players, not just to punish someone that makes a mistake.

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #21 on: December 09, 2011, 05:58:43 PM »
Anyways... First, when talking about when the dealer is obliged to count out chips that have been bet, let's not get distracted by Rule 21.  I followed the history of how Rule 21 came to be, and I believe it is clear that Rule 21 deals with chips that have NOT yet been bet.  In other words, the "countable stacks" relate to stacks of chips still "behind" a player.  This is consistent with the philosophy that chips already committed to the pot belong to the pot, and potential callers are entitled to know the amount to call.  However, if a potential caller asks the dealer "how much does that bettor have left behind", the dealer should NOT reach behind and give a count -- those chips have not been bet, and as long as the stacks behind are countable, it's up to the potential caller to assess how much a player has "behind" based on visual inspection of the stacks.
For me the issue is about the all-in. I understand if there could be a mistake in the count but when a massive stack goes all-in, the lower one knows that he is covered. There is no reason here to force a count from the dealer. In other circumstances perhaps, but not in the example used earlier.
Nick, I AM a fan of Gross misunderstanding and NOT a fan of Rule 41. I brought this up before by saying that any rule we have that needs to allude to rule #1 enforcement is just asking for trouble.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2011, 09:07:50 PM by Spence »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2011, 10:30:40 PM »
Spence,
 I am glad to have you on the growing list of those that oppose Accepted Action. Your posts are always interesting and very informative. We need to instill others to voice their opinions, that is what the Forum is for.

Spence

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 355
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #23 on: December 16, 2011, 07:34:15 PM »
Thanks Nick. I agree that full culpability cannot rest on the shoulders of the player. When wrong information is being shared by the dealer there needs to be some protection. I find it a little strange that the TDA would vote in such a poor rule as accepted action. This seems to me to be against what the mission is about. Aren't we trying to create some standardization so that we can create a safer place for people to play. As well aren't we trying to foster effective rules to allow for new players to join in the wonderful and facinating world of poker? Accepted Action is the direct opposite of what we should stand for. Gross Misunderstanding is what we need implemented to at least counteract the rule we have in place. If anyone is not familiar with Gross Misunderstanding it is from RROP
SECTION 14 - NO LIMIT AND POT-LIMIT
12.Because the amount of a wager at big-bet poker has such a wide range, a player who has taken action based on a gross misunderstanding of the amount wagered may receive some protection by the decision-maker. A "call" or “raise” may be ruled not binding if it is obvious that the player grossly misunderstood the amount wagered, provided no damage has been caused by that action. Example: Player A bets $300, player B reraises to $1200, and Player C puts $300 into the pot and says, “call.” It is obvious that player C believes the bet to be only $300 and he should be allowed to withdraw his $300 and reconsider his wager. A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot.

The rule for me is a little long and goes into some detail that I don't fully agree with but as a concept is very well thought out. We need to get on board with this kind of thinking. I hope to see some of you argue with me  ;D

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #24 on: December 16, 2011, 10:07:39 PM »
I was a bit surprised when I saw that rule come out.  I would have much rather seen that the player asking for the count is entitled to rely on the dealer's count, and put the onus on the player making the bet (he is the person at the table most likely to know how many chips are being wagered) to correct the dealer if the count is wrong, then to have the player asking for the count solely responsible for the dealer's error.  I don't mind applying the rule if the player relies on erroneous information given by the bettor or some other player at the table (players will understand when you tell them that they should know better than to trust their opponents), but I don't agree that the outcome should be the same if the misinformation came from the dealer.

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3310
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: When does a folded hand become dead?
« Reply #25 on: December 17, 2011, 07:41:01 AM »
K-Lo,
 That makes three of us that agree. I think it's time for Mike Bishop to move this post away from " When does a folded hand become dead?" to the proper section so we can get more feedback.