In a tournament, seat 1 was facing a large bet from seat 3 and tanked. Someone from the other end of the table asked for the clock. I am not sure which seat called for it as I was in seat 4 and not looking at that end of the table. I, as well as other players never heard the clock called. The dealer did not call the floor nor notify seat 1 that the clock was called. He never knew that a clock was called.

The dealer then proceeded to count down from 1 minute using her watch. After the minute was up, she reached for the cards of player 1 still having never said anything. He had a chip on his cards as well as his fingers on them propped up like a tent. She began pulling the cards from his hands. By the time he realized what was going on she had the cards pulled out from all fingers except his pinkie. He started to clamp down with that finger and reach over with his left hand to secure his cards. Before he could secure his cards, the dealer pulled one of the cards completely out and irretrievably mucked it. The floor was called.

Seat 1 wanted at least his remaining card to remain live as it was the only one he needed to make his decision. The floor ruled his hand dead. The final board read 2,6,7,8,9 no flush. As he mucked he turned his remaining card over and it was a 5...claiming he had pocket 5's.

Thoughts on what you think is a fair ruling?

1) Rule the hand dead
2) Let him play with one card
3) Let seat 3 take back his river bet and they chop the pot
4) Something else

If this is one of those rooms where a dealer handles the clock themselves (unusual and bad practice) I rule the hand dead. If not as a floor I would have allowed the player to make a decision with their one card. And that dealer is going to be having a conversation with the management soon.

It's been over a minute since someone asked for the clock.
The dealer is reaching for his cards... And suddenly it's like "Hey what's going on ?"??

WAKE UP.


I'm LMAO picturing the dealer wrenching the cards from the guy. Assault charges for the dealer?

What psand said

Yeah, what psandman said...but with a caveat.

Was that in a licensed card room?

I was always under the impression that not getting physical with a player was one of the basic rules for dealers?

FWIW, I remember a situation where the floor told a player he couldn’t take the cards away from him but security would get involved if he wouldn’t comply immediately.

I was somewhat skeptical of the assertion that nothing had been said. OP admits his attention was elsewhere. The player was in the one seat, so the dealer could have spoken directly to the player at a low volume. OP did not hear the player who called for the clock either ...

OP says the dealer counted down 1 minute from her watch which tells me that there was visual cue and if he knows it was one minute likely there was an audio cue to that fact. If there wasn't then I would be hesitant to kill the hand .... Ideally I would want to hear a version from the dealer.

Well I have pulled cards away from a player but wouldn't call that getting physical with the player. If I can get them without touching you I feel that that doesn't rise to the level of saying I was being physical with you.

(No I never pulled cards away to kill the hand... I have pulled cards from a player who reached in to grab cards that he was not entitled to see.).

This is not a room where the dealer handles the clock themselves. She admitted afterward that she did not announce that a clock was called on seat 1. She also did not give a count down at the end of the minute. She quietly watched her watch and grabbed the cards when the minute was up.

She seemed genuinely embarrassed by the whole situation.

Well then I'm letting him play with card if that's what he wants to do.

I certainly wouldn’t make a big deal out of it and hope nobody else would, but if the situation goes down like described in OP with the player using his hands to try to protect his cards, the dealers actions at least technically are considered as getting physical.

Not that the situations are even remotely comparable, but imagine the old lady trying to hold onto her purse while a robber pulls it away from her.

This dealer needs a rude awakening. That is just terrible. As the floor, I let him play his one card and apologize like a cheating husband.

I don't mean no situation. I mean sitting at a card table pulling cards .... From another person's hands.

Did this happen at a licensed casino? Player gets to play his one card. At minimum, the dealer should be sent home and suspended. I would lean towards firing the dealer.

The floor hears the whole story and is like, "Well the rules say it's a dead hand"??

Yes. He seemed pretty disinterested by it all. Seat 1 struck me as a laid back and quiet guy who didn’t want to make a big fuss. I personally think he was leaning towards folding anyway and was relieved the decision was made for him.

This is awful. Either the hand should be allowed to play with one card, or the pot should be chopped. How on earth can you allow this to be a dead hand when the dealer failed to follow protocol about 3 times (didn't announce clock, didn't call for floor, didn't give a countdown).

Player didn't hear the clock called. Dealer did not follow anything resembling normal procedure for a clock. Player protected his hand. if you allow this hand to be dead, you are basically saying a dealer can kill a hand with no justification.

As soon as the player resisted surrendering the cards, dealer should have stopped and called floor.

One caveat-if the player heard the call for a clock, and was still tanking just to be an a$$, I lose any sympathy

Fire the dealer. Not kidding. A dealer who is willing to forcibly muck a protected hand is probably willing to do all sorts of crazy **** that's going to be nightmare for the floor to fix. Not worth it.

Yeah I'm leaning the same way. I'm confused about why she was embarrassed, as if they pulled her from another game and she didn't know not to do what she did. Fire the floor too while you're at it.

"Fire the dealer!"

"Fire the floor, too!"

I'm delighted to see we have so many folks ITT who have never made a mistake in their lives.

... but saddened that so many do not care, at all, that these folks you see as so disposable probably have families to support.

It is okay to fire people who are bad at their jobs. This should not be a controversial opinion, but here we are.

Or maybe they have been fired for messing up big time in a job.

I don’t think a dealer should be fired for something like that if it’s the first time. But the harsh reality is that if you don’t want to be fired easily, you should either make sure you’re not messing up like that or get a job where you aren’t that easily replaceable. Poker dealers make pretty decent money for working a job that doesn’t even require a high school diploma and where they can get hired after a couple of days of training. Being really bad in a low skill job usually is a bad combination.

Should you judge whether a person is bad at their job based on a single instance?

Couple days of training, huh?

Whether you should depends on the details of that instance, but you certainly can.