I've been listening and reading about player reactions to the WSOP incident that I think was the impetus for the original post (see e.g.
http://www.pokernews.com/news/2012/07/2012-wsop-a-look-at-the-biggest-poker-hands-main-event-12929.htm), and it seems that many players -- especially pros -- have been very vocal (and angry) insisting that the mucker should have lost it all. The reaction is understandable (although I wonder if the tables were reversed... if it was one of the remaining women who claims to have made an innocent mistake, and the player in line to benefit from the error was not a fan favorite, would the reaction have been the same)? To be honest, it saddens me to see such a divide between the perception of these players, and those who considered the ruling to be fair (even though perhaps not ideal). It is also hard to educate these players because so many of them seem to see things as "black-and-white": the player made a mistake, he should be punished to the maximum, no exceptions.
But in reality, most of us know that there are so many factors that a competent TD could potentially consider: Was the bet actually called or not? Would the opponent have called or not? Did the dealer contribute to the error or not? Did the opponent contribute to the error (e.g. by hiding his cards) or not? Is there a possibility of chip dumping or not? Was it more likely an angle, or less likely to be so?
And to what extent should the punishment be different depending on the factors of the specific situation? I, for one, think that these scenarios are not black-and-white. We are talking about something that is very situational, and you'd think that poker players of all people could appreciate that. It is not as simple as "he made the mistake, he should lose it all", nor should it be.
For example, let's consider a situation like this:
Blinds are posted. The BB in seat 2 has 1000 chips behind.
The SB in seat 1 has 50000 chips behind, and is the second chip leader.
Action folds around to the SB, who looks at the BB's small stack, and announces all-in. The BB folds. The dealer is in the progress of pushing the pot towards the SB, who then throws his cards on the muck. At this point, the button in seat 10, who happens to be the chip leader interrupts "hey, I called". The dealer forgot that the button had called and the SB did not see that the button had cards or had put out a call, partially because his view was obstructed by the Dealer and because the dealer only announces raises, not calls or folds. So what would you rule?
I, for one, would have a very hard time here applying a hard-and-fast rule, to give the chip leader a windfall of the SB's entire stack because of the SB's error.
I know that this is a completely different situation from what happened at the WSOP, but that really is my point... every situation is different and the TD should take all relevant factors into account before deciding what ruling is "fair". Without being there, I certainly think the TD's ruling was justifiable, and simply saying that the player who made the mistake should "pay for his mistake with his whole stack" is not, without some other good reason, persuasive. I'm probably preaching to the choir here, but I had to get this off my chest. Thanks for listening.
