Poker BN, the poker room manager for Parx, Ari, frequently answers questions in the Parx thread. You might want to bring this to his attention for an explanation and ask him to post it in here so we can all see it. I would also point out the floor said nothing while the clock was counted down. (imo, he should at least give some time intervals like 30 seconds, 10, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 as well state the penalty before starting the countdown.) Ari is good at listening to the players and making changes if necessary.

What do you think is the angle (and I disagree with your definition of an angle but even by your definition what advantage is gained by not acting while the clock is called on you?)

Has to be some kind of silly, worthless angle being tried. I have never seen anybody let the clock run out without doing some action voluntarally. Hell maybe he was narcoleptic and was actully ZZZZZ, OK that's a reach.

Totally disrespectful of others time. I'm glad his hand was mucked and its def the right ruling. Someone needs to remind these types of players that they're not on tv or on stage and that nobody wants to sit around watching them think for 3 minutes every hand

Going to post this in the Parx thread thanks everyone for the discussion.

I like the ruling. If you're not facing a bet, then just check. Sheesh. Best interests of the game not to let people stall like that for no reason. Enough Hollywood nonsense.

It should be a check, but I have never seen a that situation. Of course if someone let's the clock run out to check, the next time he needs a clock it will be much shorter.

I once saw a player trying to stall in a tournament fold by refusing to act until someone called a clock and let his time run out.

I don't see how it can be a check... The floor cannot play a hand for a player and the player was obviously not in his seat (at least mentally) so the hand should be dead.

Besides, what's best for the game overall... A player who refuses to play his hand and tries to force the floor to play it for him tying up a seat, or that player leaving and giving his seat to someone who will actually play? I'd definitely argue it's the player who refuses to play the cards he's been dealt leaving.

He refused to play his hand.
No one else can play it for him.
Dead Hand.

I think this player can't have a live hand.
If he has to make a decision within a time frame there has to be a penalty (which was likely announced) for not making it in that time frame.

In this case the penalty is killing the hand (reasonable and almost 100% stated before the countdown).

If the player did not bet or check when the timer ran out then he did not act. If he did not act on his hand no one else is allowed to, and the penalty for not acting, which was stated in advance, was killing the hand.

Hand is mucked and only player with a live hand wins.

Maybe you didn't see the part where Floor didn't specify what would happen after the clock ran out.

OP:

Mistake #1: Dealer not making floor fully aware of the situation.

Mistake #2: Floor not telling player that his hand will be killed when time is up.

Mistake #3: Player not asking what will happen if action not declared before time is up.

Mistake #4: Player declaring no action.

The guy could have grabbed his cards and argued for a check.
Instead of letting the dealer take his cards and push the pot.

Looks like a check to me, but I have never seen this occur.

Where's the rule that says if time is called on you and you refuse to act prior to time expiring it's an implicit check? I can't find it...

The closest explicit rule I've seen is it's a dead hand.