Hypothetical situation:

Hand has progressed to the river and there are now 2 or more players remaining. Player X goes all in and leaves two or more players with shorter stacks then himself left to act.

Due to some unforeseen circumstance, maybe a medical emergency, Player X is no longer able to play his hand.

If the first player to act folds, is the remaining player the winner or does he have to call the bet? Who shows Player X’s hand? Does the outcome change if both players call? Does the ruling change if it is cash in comparison to a tournament?

In a morbid twist, let us assume player X has died. If he has the better hand, where does the pot go? Can his estate claim the pot? Is it a situation that cannot occur because Player X cannot win the pot without tabling his hand?

If it is unclear whether player X will be able to continue to play in the near future, let’s say there is a non-zero chance of Player X being resuscitated and willing to continue playing. How long would play be paused? Would someone eventually have to call a clock?

Since no one can raise X bet if anyone calls the we only need to address showdown. Since we can assume X was willing to showdown. Some will say X cannot table so his hand is dead. I will allow the floor to invoke rule 1 and table the hand.

Yes, rule 1, floor tables hand and impounds the pot if player X wins. The lawyers can fight it out after that.

Weird and morbid hypothetical, though.

Yeah, sorry for the strange question lol. I had a live session recently where a player went from moderately drunk to *very* drunk in a *very very* short time period and passed out at the table after going all in on a hand. He did wake up (and was told to go home) but I was wondering what the process was if he did not wake up right away.

The last time I saw a villain incapacitated during a hand at a casino, I'm pretty sure they chopped the pot up. I don't think it's a situation that comes up often enough where there's a hard and fast rule. Whatever the floor rules probably can't be too bad.

I think every circumstance may be slightly different than another .. drunk and death being very different events IMO.

You don't need to go down the morbid route either .. what if someone is tapped on the shoulder by security/police for an immediate exit/issue/removal? Each casino can be slightly different in their rules for 'abandoned' property due to their own policy or state law.

There was a Player in WSOP 2019(?) that got hit by a car between Day 1 and Day 2 and his stack actually cashed the tournament due to it's size despite the 'obvious' blinding down to zero. He actually 'won' two all-ins before his stack was gone due to his cards 'having' to be turned over via tournament rules. His wife claimed the prize in his absence. GL

Slightly off topic, but I wonder why this different online. At least on Stars, if you're sitting out you cannot win an all-in even if you have the best hand at showdown.

The WSOP uses TDA rules. How did his hand get turned over if it was immediately mucked after the deal?

Apparently when you're all-in it gets turned over .. GL

Under TDA I thought if you were all-in your hand has to be turned over?

If you search through Joey Ingram's podcasts, there's one with Bobby Bellande:

https://m.facebook.com/watch/?v=496303677767753&_rdr

"Guys dead, hands dead"

only Wild Bill Hickcok has the credibility to make this ruling

I think the more interesting hypothetical is one where Player X is fine, but the only remaining player in the hand becomes incapacitated before he acts.

As posted, I think the Player X's hand gets tabled if the remaining player calls and the best hand wins.

If a Player facing action can't/doesn't make a declaration then it's just a simple muck/fold and Player X would win the pot. No one should 'act' on behalf of the Player. Certainly a can of worms if we try to evaluate the likelihood of a Player's action should we table their hand for them.

I think a more interesting scenario would be if the incapacitated Player was the aggressor and had chips behind. Do you allow the V to simply raise and take down the pot because the Player can't act anymore .. Or do you only give them a call/fold option?

It's the same spot. No one should be put in a position to assume what another Player would've done in a spot without holding the nuts. Do we draw the line at the 5th nuts? GL

Neither, for both cases. Use rule 1 to declare incapacitated player all in for whatever he has already bet, much like online used to do early on if you disconnected, before people started abusing it. Then impound whatever he ends up with.

Its probably going to come down to the House rules and the ability of the Floor to interpret the situation.

If the incapacitated person was all-in I think most places would allow for the hand to be turned over and if it was the best hand to hold the money for the player (or the player's estate). I doubt anybody would object.

Personally, I think this should be handled in the same way as a hand in which a player walks away from the table in the middle of the hand while they still have cards on the table. In the WSOP and WPT televised tourneys, players can walk away from the table during the hand when they are all in and still be eligible to win (although technically they would have already turned over their hands). In the same way I think players who are all-in should be allowed to win. But if the player becomes incapacitated before they are all in and there is still action pending, then their hand should be dead. Maybe the exception would be if they had bet and all remaining players decide to fold (I would guess this would only happen if the players knew each other).

There was a movie based on this called "A Big Hand for the Little Lady". Great movie (1966 Henry Fonda, Joanne Woodward, Jason Robards). In this movie though, aside from allowing somebody to take over a hand from an incapacitated player, it also allows players to add to their stacks in the middle of a hand in any way imaginable...

I just watch Cincinnati Kid for the first time .. yes, amazing in the middle of the hand they start to pull out cash from coat pockets. As long as you had the cash/equal/voucher you could bump it up beyond what was on the table.

It's almost like if you couldn't call the bet you lost the hand .. which is hard to believe and seems very unfair. Imagine walking into a porker with the sign 'No Side Pots Allowed!' GL

It's not almost like that, it was exactly that.

"Table stakes" (and its complement, being "all in") is probably the single rule/innovation that made poker accessible to the masses, making it possible for people with different bankrolls to play together for a session.

Not having it ("open stakes") is why, in the earliest years of poker, you both (1) could go into your pocket for more at any time, and (2) had to, if your opponent bet more than you had on the table and you wanted to call (or raise).

Someone at my table had a seizure once. Obviously the game stopped and paramedics came almost immediately. After they worked on him, they took him away. I don't remember if they just killed his hand and gave me his share of the pot back or not. I know they bagged his chips. I think the hand continued with the other players in the hand once everything was cleaned (this was pre-COVID).