Question for Graveydavey or anyone can please answer:
Does anyone have the qualifications for which players get paid on a table when the bad beat hits, not what hands but what players, those with chips on the table but may be walking? Can they have missed a blind? I would like to see this in writing. Or PM me if you can direct me how to find it.
I am out of state but recall raeding it on a board when there once.

Must have chips on the table and no missed blind buttons. The pot must be 20 dollars including rake and bb drop so actually 17

I believe also that a player must be "called" not checked around. There are also many rules that may void a BBJ - like being on cellphone, talking about the possibility of a BBJ that might effect how a hand is played, etc.

I think you have to realize that his room has only been open for less than 9 MONTHS and at the current capacity for less than 3 MONTHS. They follow the poker room procedures and those procedures have been getting more relaxed over time. 3 months ago the dealer couldn't accept cash and you couldn't buy $100 chips at the cage. Players arguing over stupid things or not paying attention to the action slows things down way more than than casino floor procedures. Properly managed this poker room could easily be 40-50 tables and be the premier poker venue for everyone within 75 miles.

Guys, thanks for the answers on the bad beat; it was the no missed blinds that I was most curious about...

I too have seen many inconsistent rulings on this. Today another situation came up around exposed cards and because the "rules" seem to change from floorperson to floorperson a player requested to see the rulebook. It clearly states that a warning is to be given and at the floor's discretion the offending player can be asked to leave. Nowhere in the Sands rulebook does it say a player's hand can be declared dead because he has exposed it.

Let me clarify what villain did to me exactly. He did not flash his cards to me to get a reaction, he lifted them up off of table and showed two players that folded the flop bet both his cards. He then said something to them and then changed his mind from fold to call. It was legitimate and obvious as day what he did. I think the rule this would fall under is more as "one person per hand". I would love to know what villain said to seat 2 and 3, but it could of been anything. He showed both cards and then asked them something maybe like would you call?, or does he ever bluff?, or did either of you have a heart? I can assure you he did not say anything unrelated to the hand given he was quiet prior to this.

The problem with the long wait lists is due to the fact that the floor gives 5-10 minutes between when they call a player on the list to when the eventually give him his final notice and moves on to the next person. Each person should get 60 seconds maximum just like in AC. If you are not there waiting for your name to be called you should get passed by. Its not fair to the people who are eagerly waiting for their name to be called. Giving 10 minutes for each person on the list is absurd.

Is there anyone we can talk to to fix this problem? Those 50+ 1/2nl wait list will disappear very fast if they did and it wouldn't discourage people from not playing since they think they're going to have to wait 2 hours for a seat.

PASandsman,

Showing your neighbor (who's not in the hand) and showing an active player are apples and oranges. I have never seen a hand killed after it was shown to an inactive player...

I'm not arguing these points, but I'm just saying, if you expect them to grow to become a premier poker area like you were talking, then they still need some major advancements as far as the technology goes and keeping the games running smoothly as possible... nothing against the dealers, they are doing a pretty hard job at times and have to make a few critical decisions every now and then that will either win or cost someone some major money and won't always go over smoothly for one side of the people in the pot...

Given the table expansion I believe this problem only occurs on Saturdays now. Prior to the expansion, they would text you when your seat was available.

The problem isn't the showing its the discussion - should have been ruled dead.

i agree with this.

being told there are 14 on a list when there are 54 (and having it happen multiple times) would really piss me off too!

Here is the sequence of relevant events as told to us by PASANDMAN:

Seat 1 is facing a turn bet by Sandman, shows seats 2 and 3 his cards and says something that Sandman can not hear.

Seat 1 looks like he is going to fold to the bet but instead makes the call.

The river is dealt out and seat one makes his flush.

Now, after seeing he has been drawn out on but not before the river is dealt, Sandman demands that seat 1's hand be declared dead because he exposed his cards. Exposing your cards is not justification for killing a hand at Sands.

Sandman clarifies his account to say he wanted the hand killed because seat one said something to seats 2 and 3, but admits he does now know what seat 1 said. He supposes violations of one player to a hand. For all we know seat 1 may have said, "I feel lucky today." The point is that Sandman does now know what was said and from his account he here did not make that part of his argument to the floor. Per Sandman's account, there was no response from seats 2 or 3 and no conversation, just a comment made by seat 1. Whatever seat 1 said was probably heard by the dealer if it could be heard by seats 2 and 3. If Sandman wanted to have 1's hand killed for violation of one player to a hand he should have pursued this point then and learned what seat 1 said.

The facts that the floorperson have for consideration are that cards were exposed (which is not a reason to kill a hand) and seat 1 said something (we don't know what) before making the call. Sandman did not ask for a ruling when the call was made and he was ahead, he waited until after he was drawn out on. Considering all of this I do not see any reason for the pot not to be awarded to seat 1.

If the 2 players did not response in any way, then how did they "help" him?

I agree he prob shouldn't have done that, but I think he was going to call anyways considering the 2 players didn't say anything to change his mind.

Cockpit,

I did say to dealer on turn what is going on these guys are discussing the hand and he is showing them his cards. I did not call over floor until river, I did start debate over hand on turn though before I knew what he had or before I knew what river brought out. Just a little background on myself, I have played live poker for 15 years, played in Vegas several times, AC frequently, and Sands countless times. I have seen similar instances where hand was dead under the one player per hand rule. I stood up for Sands many times so I can assure you my goal is not to bash them. I respect and personally like the floor there, I just think this ruling was really wrong. I am sure there are people on here with even more experience/time in cardrooms than me so my goal was just to get my peers take on the situation. I do not plan on going to Sands anytime soon and it is 100% not about the money. If this pot was for 12 bucks I would still be angry over the ruling. I am just starting to feel uncomfortable with frequently seeing rules broken there with no repercussion. I am a huge fan of fair and honest poker and love the game, however, when I think rules are not being upheld it just angers me to the point of not enjoying myself anymore.

You need to understand Sandman that your beef is with the Sand's rulebook not the ruling. And those are the same rules you'll find in most poker rooms.

In most rooms the rules are that hands are not killed because cards have been exposed unless the player has done this repeatedly and has been previously warned.

If a player has shown his cards to another player no longer in the pot this becomes a show one-show all situation at the end of the hand. If a player is doing this repeatedly a warning can be issued and doing it again can lead to a hand being killed.

Talking while in a hand is not grounds for killing a hand unless the talk is in a foreign language or is actually discussing how to play the hand. I don't like it but in almost every room I see players showing cards to neighbors when they have a tough decision. Often they will say something like "I can't believe I have to lay this down" or "I think I'm good." As long as the neighbor says or does nothing to influence the guy making the decision the rules usually don't call for killing the hand.

Lets use an extreme example. I do not know what villain said to seat 1 and 2. I do know he said something while holding cards up in front of both of them with them both clearly being able to see them and then called after putting on show that he was gonna fold. Lets say he said to them would you fold this? Or did either of you have a heart in your hand?, or does this guy ever bluff? All are short things that could of been said and looked or listened for a response from one or both players. My problem is with him breaking the one player per hand rule, not so much as him flashing his cards. I feel like I am beating a dead horse on this matter now. My point is his hand should of been dead once he purposely showed two people his hand and then talked about something. Why would he show hand and then say something like "did you see the game last night"? I hope you can see where I am coming from on this. He broke the one player per hand rule, that is my point.

Did seat 2 or 3 actually SAY anything during this situation with seat 1? If so, then yes, the hand should have been killed, and most (if not all) the rooms I have played/dealt would rule it this way. If seat 2 or 3 did NOT say anything, then the hand should not be killed unless seat 1 was given clear warning prior to this happening.

Yes, it is against the rules to show your hand to another player while the hand is still active, but in this case (assuming seat 2 or 3 did not say anything..) the violation isn't OPTAH, it's SOSA. Since the hand was shown anyway at showdown, the only thing the floor can really do in this instance is give a warning. If they do it again, then yes, progressive discipline will be given (hand killed, kicked out of room, etc..) This is pretty much anywhere I have played/dealt..

From your post earlier, it sounds like seat 1 was showing them the cards and probably saying something like "Oh man, look at this.. gotta hit my draw if I call.." How did he "act like he was going to fold?" Did the other 2 players show any facial expressions that may have influenced him or nod their heads? Sorry, just trying to figure out the situation...

The other two players did have a change of expression when they saw villain's hand. I am not sure if either of them said anything to him or not. It was almost like a bad dream that I have been through twice before there. I do not remember every detail anymore. Have not been at Sands since.

What's the comp rate for 2-5?

Comp rate for 2/5 NL is .70 an hour. The comp rate for all games on the floor is .70 an hour even if you play 5/10 NLHE or 3/6 LHE.

Yeah I think it's kinda unfair, the 1/2 games are raked to death as it is, let alone the 2/5 and higher tables. For how much poker players get raked there, they're definitely not compensating them enough... but maybe that's just me and not used to playing in casinos..

anyone know if there has been any 10/20 LHE games being played lately?

VERY VERY rarely.