Was the ruling correct?

$1/2 table preflop raise to $12 there were 4 callers. After flop there was a $25 bet called by 2. Turn was a 10 lady bet $65. Original raiser folded leaving one left.
He looks back down at his hand and has his cards in a ready to fold position in his hand. He starts the forward folding motion and looks up to see the lady has already tabled her hand. He stops the motion (the cards never leave his hands never hit the table and his elbow never broke from a near 90 degree angle but the wrist and hand did have a forward motion). He says oh I have that beat and calls the $65.

The dealer calls the floor over and rules that his forward motion is considered a fold. The lady is a known local and tips the dealers $5-15 after any decent pot. Does that influence the floor's ruling too?

It's hard to say without being there and hearing the dealers and other players description of the motion. But based on what you have said in the OP, I would rule his hand live. A forward motion with cards has to be a legit forward motion such as sliding or tossing them forward. A slight hand motion should not count. The lady shouldn't have tabled her hand until he had acted. Based on the OP, I would say this is a poor ruling.

The dealer and floor said his intend was to fold which he did not argue. His argument was he didn't fold yet and it's the other player's responsibility to protect their hand. The real confusing thing is this casino also allows you to come forward with a whole stack in your hand and just call a bet without a verbal commitment.

If he didn't release cards, he did not fold.

The only thing I can think of is that the player is a known angler and the floor realized that he was taking advantage of a casual player.

I agree but he's never even signaled an attempt to do anything like that in the 2 hours prior and some of us actually thought she tabled her hand before he started to fold and sf worse it was simultaneously. She was drunk calling 50-70 blind hitting bottom two things like that. I think she was either needling the players by showing her semi bluff or trying to justify her bet by showing her hand

Well if there was no intent to angle, the "villan" is correct. He hasn't folded. Had he held his cards in the air and she didn't table and he changed his mind to a call we would allow it. The fact that she didn't protect her action and tabled shouldn't change that.

For a soft floor it is a ruling that takes some backbone though. In any circumstance, it's not easy to tell a player they are going to lose a pot because their opponent can call after their hand is tabled.

For the record, under "Dead Hands", RRoP says:

You throw your hand away in a forward motion causing another player to act behind you.

What do the posted rules in the room say about forward motion? That will enter the equation here as well...

There are no rules they have a 3 page general rules pamphlet.

Lady failed to protect her action. Seems pretty straightforward unless there is some sort of exceptional house rule that makes intent=action. If that were the case, I'd recommend playing elsewhere... nothing you described indicates a certain fold - if anything it looks like the hemming and hawing nonsense you see too much of in this game.

There's an outside chance that "villain" might have been angling to get the lady to show her hand out of turn. If he were a known angler and looked to be taking advantage, then I can see opening the door to making it a fold. But you've said this isn't the case, so there you go.

I have never seen a hand ruled dead for forward motion where it is never released from the players hand. I would say that ruling that hand dead is a pretty bad call.

The only place I would expect to see that kind of ruling is the sort of room with a "line of death" (which is objectionable in its own right).

This.
Any room can have its own rule, but normally you have to release your hand for forward motion to be considered a fold. Players often hold their hands facedown a few inches above the table, moving their wrist back and forth, or push their hand forward a few inches on the table, while retaining control of it. This has (generally) always been considered "still thinking", and not a fold.

He did not fold. Pretty horrid ruling.

To intend to do something to the point that it affects the floors ruling requires an actual action IMO. Just holding cards like you're going to fold doesn't mean you intend to fold or are going to be forced to fold.

I use the phrase "intended to fold" in a situation where he tosses his hand forward and the cards land on the edge funny and bounce back to him and now she tables her hand and he wants to call. Or he is pushing his cards forward face down as she tables her hand and then he says call.

No. Ruling wrong.

She shouldn't have tabled her hand at all.
Or waited till his hand was irretrievable to needle..
Too bad it didn't bite her in the ass.

Agree this is a bad ruling.

I've seen people make every indication they are folding, but when you least expect it they pull their cards back and toss in a call. Lady should have been taught an expensive lesson that she shouldn't expose her card until her opponent has actually folded.

Nothing verbal from the guy to back up a fold ruling I suppose. Looks like the lady did not protect her hand well, but ended up not suffering from it. Don't see this as a good ruling , but I am not at all shocked that it could happen from time to time. Everything else does.

My interpretation of the rules is that your hand is dead either when you verbally state "fold" or your hand is in the muck.

And there are exceptions to retrieving a dead hand from the muck but that's for another post.

I've seen a player who when facing a tough call on the river would sometimes pick up his cards and drop them even forward. I never saw him have his hand called dead although when he was close to the dealer he almost had his hand scooped a few times when he obviously didn't want it to yet.

Some might say he was angle shooting but I believe it was just a genuine part of his (perhaps reckless) thought process.

For the potential pot winner, the lesson here is you hang onto your cards until the chips are heading your way. Try to think of it as trading your cards for the pot whether they are face up or face down.

By the way, there are some players who in a multiway pot will hold their cards in a fold position before it is their turn to act. Some might call that angle shooting light and some just call it mining for information. But then again, there are many others who are actually signalling they are fold and they do.

It also sounds like the lady might have been angle-shooting a little. As in, she really wanted him to fold so quickly tabled her hand as soon as it looked like ehe might even be starting to fold.

I think you're confusing the rules for killing a hand at showdown with what constitutes a fold when facing a bet. These aren't the same.
When facing a bet, your hand certainly does not have to touch the muck to be folded and killed. Almost everywhere, simply pushing or throwing it forward facedown, and releasing it, is a fold. Your hand is dead and can't be retrieved, whether it's in the muck or not.
At showdown, rules vary, but it's most common for a discarded hand to need to either touch the muck, or be mixed into it, to be dead.
Note: FWIW, you can only "fold" when facing a bet. You cannot "fold" at showdown. But you can muck (= kill ) your hand at showdown.

I am interested if anyone knows or can find any casino or poker rule book that states a fold is deemed when any forward motion is made. Or something to that nature.

I would love to show the poker room boss the rulings.

RRoP:

No according to the player who was in seat 7 and the lady in seat 3, he did not see her tabled hand until he looked up as he simultaneously started his fold. From my view her hand was tabled before he started to fold. The question is "is there a check swing rule in poker?" Or does the breaking of his wrist mean nothing since the cards never left his hand?

I see tons of theatrics with people pretending to fold, or doing some sort of "oh I can't let this go" sort of nonsense. Sometimes it's even legitimate indecision that causes it, although I typically suspect it's just more Hollywooding. This is such a common and generally innocuous thing that I would only actually kill the hand of someone who was such a huge d-bag that I had no doubt whatsoever it was an angle.

And to be honest, if I knew a player was that level of an angle-shooting d-bag, he'd already have been 86d from my room. Having player intent supersede their actions is a very bad move for the floor, imo. Making rulings based on intent are difficult enough as it is... luckily they are also rare. Let's keep it that way.

Forward motion is for chips, not cards. Where the muck is on the table is important. Even if the player has released his hand but it has not touched the muck and a dealer has not taken the cards, he may retrieve them. BS floor ruling. What is new?

True at showdown (most places).
Not true when facing a bet: throwing your cards forward facedown and releasing them insta-kills your hand (historically, and most places today) when facing a bet. Irretrievable.
But merely waving them in the air is not a fold (or shouldn't be). (Agree that floor decision was BS.)