Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration

05-14-2016 , 12:42 PM
£1/£2 cash game in casino
Player in seat 10 limps and says to the dealer "I'll call anything he bets" indicating a drunk guy in seat 3, immediately followed by "That's not binding by the way"
Dealer quietly tells player that is is binding and they are still discussing this in a light-hearted manner as the other players call/fold
When the action is back on the player in seat 10 he tosses his card forward face down and says "fold" Dealer explains he has to call and pushes the cards back to him, at which he shrugs and pushes out the chips for a call.
One of the players still in the hand insists that he has mucked and his hand is dead, demanding that his cards be mucked but the bet remain.
The dealer states that the cards weren't mucked, that he intended to fold but was held to his original verbal declaration so his hand was live.
In the end the player folded on the turn and the player complaining won the pot.
There was some subsequent discussion with no concensus reached over whether the verbal declaration should have been binding and whether his hand was dead
Would be interested if anyone has a definitive answer to this
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-14-2016 , 12:50 PM
£
The British should stick to cricket. And maybe take Florida off our hands.

a) Declaration should not be binding
b) If the casino insists that it is, the hand should not be dead
c) The "complainer" should get a KITN
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-14-2016 , 01:49 PM
LOL TY
If we have to take Florida we want California as well
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-14-2016 , 01:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcar
There was some subsequent discussion with no concensus reached over whether the verbal declaration should have been binding and whether his hand was dead.
Would be interested if anyone has a definitive answer to this
Britannia waives the rules.....
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-15-2016 , 12:35 AM
Room rules vary. If that's the rule in that room, then you have your answer.

Personally, I think each OOT action should be simply disregarded. Players have all legal options at each point. RRoP and most card rooms disagree.
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-15-2016 , 12:46 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by redcar
LOL TY
If we have to take Florida we want California as well
Please do then. Even better for what remains USA.

As to original OP questions, that statement should not be binding, especially multiway. But if the house to make such a rule, there are worse things in poker. But regardless if bing or not, the hand was never dead.
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-15-2016 , 01:53 AM
I might be beating a dead horse here, but most of Canada's gaming stemmed from British influence. Magical mucks and 'technical' dead hands aren't that rare (this has been improving over time).
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote
05-15-2016 , 02:08 AM
Conditional statements being binding is a house rule that seems to be growing. It's made it's way into TDA, I believe.

If you're going to hold him to the raise, mucking his hand is just stealing. Guy that wanted the hand ruled dead is an angle-shooting scumbag.
QQ on rules/ettiquette re verbal declaration Quote

      
m