Playing a $150 deep stack tournament, with three regular tournament players. River put out a calico broadway straight- 10, j, q, k, a. Utg checks, mid bets 1k, CO shoves, Utg studies and shoves his chips, Mid calls. CO is smaller stack, Mid is big stack. The players pull back stacks, newbie dealer divides pot three way and distributes main pot.

Here is the confusion: After chips distributed, CO then asks the dealer if she is done, dealer confused asks why and dealer is told to do what you need to do. She then pulls Utg's untabled and released cards into the muck. (He was in 5 seat, directly across from dealer and pushed his cards to her) CO and Mid had tabled their cards. CO then asks for the floor. UTG claimed he tabled cards but surveillance (and other players) confirmed he never exposed or tabled cards?

Proper ruling from the floor?

All on requires all hands be tabled in TDA rules. Dealer should table the hand if it wasn't already tabled. Chop pot 3 ways.

Tell the dealer to deal the next hand.

The hand should have been shown. Since it is now in the muck we can't show them but there is no reason to not chop the pot three ways. The purpose of the rule that the cards must be exposed is to prevent a player from giving up a pot to help another player .... since we know the player would be playing the board .... not giving them their share of the pot would actually be counter to the purpose of the rules of the game.

If their is a concern about a fouled deck the deck can be checked (yes it is possible their was a fouled hand without a fouled deck but I would rather risk that then the chip dumping issue).

I may give the player a penalty for not exposing their hand.... and the dealer needs to be addressed

Shouldn't the dealer make sure all 3 all-in hands are tabled before starting to work on the pot?

CO is a scumbag if he calls for the floor to have a ruling against UTG.

I think the dealer needs some retraining about proper procedures in tournament all-in situations.

Dealer mistake, it happens. Chop it 3 ways. Floor can pull deck and check it while the next hand is played if they want.

Did they actually verify it with surveillance before the next hand started or did they come back later to tell you what was found? Most places I've been wouldn't hold up the game for something like that.

Dealer pulled cards into muck after chopping pot but she is a brand new dealer. UTG a regular player, for an unknown reason, never turned over cards. Tournament held up for 10 minutes, floor initially ruled the main pot should be split two ways, after confirming UTG never turned over cards, then reversed decision after being told all players were all in.

It took the floor 10 minutes to find out that all players were all-in? Sounds like the dealer isn't the only person in need of some retraining.

10 minutes were to go to surveillance cameras to confirm Utgs cards were not tabled as he argued he exposed them but turned them back over when dealer was splitting the pot. Surveillance also told floor the pot size not understanding the all in action but those chips were all pulled back.

Psand, while i understand your logic, how is this any different from a player showing one card for a straight and mucking the other facedown and awarding the pot to the remaining player w 2 cards and a lower str8 (also happened in tournament w a new player, same night)?

Ridiculous. Hope you weren't CO.

The difference is that with the all in situation BY RULE THE CARDS MUST HAVE BEEN EXPOSED.

I understand your point is that the player is still being allowed to dump chips (but there remains the honest possibility that the player did not realize he had a chop and was intending to muck because he thought he lost). I would certainly favor a penalty of some sort (including the possibly disqualification) if I believed the intention was to dump chips.


(And quite honestly in my opinion in tournament play all cards at showdown should always have to be shown... but that just isn't the rule and will probably never be accepted as a rule in live poker)

Unfortunately, it sounds like that. At least he's trying to argue UTG should have been screwed out of his share of the pot.
It's an all-in situation in a tournament. By rule, all hands have to be tabled. If the player doesn't do it himself, the dealer has to flip up UTGs hand instead of putting the cards into the muck pile.

Now you can argue that UTG should be warned or penalized for not tabling his hand. But don't try to screw him out of this pot.

The difference is that by rule, a non-all-in player is allowed to forfeit his hand and not show his card(s). But, again by rule, an all-in player cannot choose to forfeit his cards.

In a normal showdown, a dealer cannot and should not direct a player to table their hand if it isn't an all-in. They can with an all-in, as there are no options within the rules that allow a player to not show their hand. So they cannot legally kill their own hand once they have called an all-in

Verifying the deck, penalizing the non-showing the player, and chopping three ways sounds right.

There is no way this was a chip dump situation. Nor a misread. All players declared board, Utg just did not table cards. I do think the floor was initially influenced by Utg lying about tabling his cards

Is it the "fairness in the spirit of the game" clause that you would use to award a mucked hand the pot because the holding was immaterial overriding the mucked irretrievable card rule?

It's more about reconciling this with the rule that the cards were required to be shown. It's about dealing with multiple rules that are all implicated here and trying to find the most fair way to get to what should have happened if the rules and procedures had been followed.

Sent from my PH-1 using Tapatalk

It is the totality of circumstance:

1. The hand should have been tabled, by rule.
2. All players were playing the board.
3. The player who did not table his hand took his river bet back, indicating he knew he was entitled to at least part of the split pot by playing the board.

In a cash game, the above might make me include the player in the chopped pot as well (with a warning), using rule 1 if necessary. In a tournament it is a no brainer because of the special tournament rule above.

I see your point. The one card muck was not an all in hand and a normal showdown.

I appreciate everyone's input.

Only thing I have to add: hoping for more 3 Stooges GIFs.

They should snap chop it two ways since UTG lied about it.

CO is a prick.

Newbie dealer did exactly what she was supposed to do except she also should have turned the players cards face up. The floor should have told them to chop it 3 ways and move on (why on earth he went to the cameras is beyond me. Did he not know it was 3-way all in?). This was not UTGs fault, it was the dealer's fault for not making sure the all in hand was turned up.

This.

That's a pretty stiff penalty for someone who may have just forgot he didn't show.

I'm guessing their is a good chance he did not know there was a three way all-in. The players had taken back there last bets ....

the only way the floor would know it was all in would be if he was told it was all-in.....

(certainly with the nuts on the board it should end up with everyone all in .... if they recognize it as the nuts but its understandable that the floor may miss that when presented the other issue)