Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Casino & Cardroom Poker Discussions of the activities, rules and etiquette of Live Casino and Cardroom Poker Venues.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-20-2017, 11:37 AM   #1
donbarzini
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 73
Wait, I still have cards

1/2 game. Several players see the flop. ~$12 in pot.

Seat4 bets $10 on the flop. Everyone appears to fold quickly. Dealer ships pot and Seat4 mucks cards (roughly simultaneously).

Seat8 says, "wait, I still have cards".

Notes:
-Cards are not retrievable.
-Seat4 got phone call after cards were dealt (I guess it's allowed)
-Dealer is about to get a fill and is also slightly distracted.
-This is the 2nd time Seat8 has said "I still have cards". I couldn't tell if he covered with his hands, or he was just too slow for everyone else (probably both).

Ruling?
donbarzini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 12:09 PM   #2
Playbig2000
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Playbig2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Suffern, NY; PA, LV
Posts: 7,610
Re: Wait, I still have cards

The fair thing would be for them to split the pot.
Playbig2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 12:12 PM   #3
dinesh
veteran
 
dinesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,044
Re: Wait, I still have cards

If he is found to be covering his cards, his hand is dead and pot goes to seat 4. Note that this would be a rare ruling. Note also that if he is covering his cards, unless it is his first hand, he should have already been warned not to do this.

Otherwise, it's a judgment call based on what happened and how fast. How much time after action passed seat 8? Did other players fold after him? How did seat 4 muck his hand irretrievably so fast? Dealer should kill losers, move board, then push pot, then kill the winner with the board. We have this procedure in place for a reason - it helps protect against this scenario.

It's hard to speak in generalities about this situation, but I'll try. In general, last person with a live hand wins the pot. But also in general, you have to protect your action. But also also, seat 4 needs to protect his action by knowing who else is in the pot. So it could go either way, depending on context.

Luckily it's only $12, so everyone gets a good, cheap lesson.
dinesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 12:19 PM   #4
Aurora Tom
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 451
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Under most situations, I would rule that the hand is over but the player with cards gets the money back that he's invested in the pot (sounds like $2 here). Since it's happened more than once, I'd warn Seat 8 about covering his cards. I'm not sure how Seat 4 getting a phone call matters. Not sure how a fill coming in matters either but maybe a word to the dealer about being more focused.
Aurora Tom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 12:53 PM   #5
Bene Gesserit
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bene Gesserit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: my old Kentucky Home
Posts: 6,274
Re: Wait, I still have cards

OK unless he is covering his cards with his hands, how else does he end up with cards after the pot is pushed in two seperate hands? He is either doing it on purpose or being oblivious to the flow of the game for several well known reasons. One warning , the first time , should have been enough. I think the Dealer/Floor should consider killing the second hand. Of course house rules might preclude this.
Bene Gesserit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 01:24 PM   #6
donbarzini
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 73
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bene Gesserit View Post
OK unless he is covering his cards with his hands, how else does he end up with cards after the pot is pushed in two seperate hands? He is either doing it on purpose or being oblivious to the flow of the game for several well known reasons. One warning , the first time , should have been enough. I think the Dealer/Floor should consider killing the second hand. Of course house rules might preclude this.
He didn't get warned the 1st time since it didn't result in as big of a problem as this. I don't think the dealer/floor really took that into account much.

It's also possible that the 9 or 10 seat is just folding out of turn too much. I couldn't really tell how hidden his cards were since I was in seat 1.
donbarzini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 01:29 PM   #7
donbarzini
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 73
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
If he is found to be covering his cards, his hand is dead and pot goes to seat 4. Note that this would be a rare ruling. Note also that if he is covering his cards, unless it is his first hand, he should have already been warned not to do this.

Otherwise, it's a judgment call based on what happened and how fast. How much time after action passed seat 8? Did other players fold after him? How did seat 4 muck his hand irretrievably so fast? Dealer should kill losers, move board, then push pot, then kill the winner with the board. We have this procedure in place for a reason - it helps protect against this scenario.

It's hard to speak in generalities about this situation, but I'll try. In general, last person with a live hand wins the pot. But also in general, you have to protect your action. But also also, seat 4 needs to protect his action by knowing who else is in the pot. So it could go either way, depending on context.

Luckily it's only $12, so everyone gets a good, cheap lesson.
It was a few seconds before I heard him speak up. It is possible that he was trying to get the dealer's attention sooner, but wasn't noticed.

I believe that the 9 and/or 10 seat did muck out of turn.

Also, there is now $22 in the pot, not $12.
donbarzini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 01:33 PM   #8
answer20
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
answer20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Corner of Walk/Don't Walk
Posts: 6,158
Re: Wait, I still have cards

A huge key for me here is how many players were in the hand 'after' Seat 8 ... Seat 8 is allowed a 'reasonable' amount of time to stop action, but 'significant' action may have taken place and thus Seat 8 loses his rights to the pot.

Was the board 'mucked' as well? As stated, it's tough to offer a firm opinion without being there.

I'm a very deliberate player. I certainly don't think I stall, but I don't really make 'waterfall' decisions as I've had plenty of 'seller's remorse' when I've insta-mucked a hand along with the rest of the table when a player makes a polarizing bet. I make the players on my left very aware of this fact just by the way I play IMO. Just last night a straddle player shoved $240 into five $10 limpers. Normally I would just insta-fold with 66, but I took my time and evaluated the player's demeanor and the way his voice was different when he shoved. Yes, I could've been crushed but I put enough AK/AQ/22-55/AJs/ATs into his polarized range and made the call. He turned over 44. I Flopped a set anyway, but the point is ... take 'some time' to think about every one of your decisions. GL
answer20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 01:38 PM   #9
Bene Gesserit
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Bene Gesserit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: my old Kentucky Home
Posts: 6,274
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by donbarzini View Post
He didn't get warned the 1st time since it didn't result in as big of a problem as this. I don't think the dealer/floor really took that into account much.

It's also possible that the 9 or 10 seat is just folding out of turn too much. I couldn't really tell how hidden his cards were since I was in seat 1.
If he was not warned not to hide his cards with his hands the first time, then whether it is deliberate or oblivious would be hard to tell the second time. Dealers get busy and distracted , but knowing who still has cards in a hand is an important part of the job regardless.
Bene Gesserit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 02:11 PM   #10
12bigworm81
adept
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 930
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Seems like a weird spot for seat 8 to angle with only $2 invested.

I agree with Dinesh on the breakdown of what-ifs.

Seat 4 is only potential loser in the ruling, and fortunately its the difference between winning $10 or $5. Split, warn and move on.
12bigworm81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 02:28 PM   #11
Rawlz517
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Team SirKillsALot
Posts: 57,515
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Playbig2000 View Post
The fair thing would be for them to split the pot.
Splitting the pot is rarely a fair ruling. It's a "the floor has no clue what to do" ruling.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
If he is found to be covering his cards, his hand is dead and pot goes to seat 4. Note that this would be a rare ruling. Note also that if he is covering his cards, unless it is his first hand, he should have already been warned not to do this.

Otherwise, it's a judgment call based on what happened and how fast. How much time after action passed seat 8? Did other players fold after him? How did seat 4 muck his hand irretrievably so fast? Dealer should kill losers, move board, then push pot, then kill the winner with the board. We have this procedure in place for a reason - it helps protect against this scenario.

It's hard to speak in generalities about this situation, but I'll try. In general, last person with a live hand wins the pot. But also in general, you have to protect your action. But also also, seat 4 needs to protect his action by knowing who else is in the pot. So it could go either way, depending on context.

Luckily it's only $12, so everyone gets a good, cheap lesson.
Agree with dinesh here. It really depends on a lot of factor. I think pushing the entire pot to either play here is much better than chopping it.
Rawlz517 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 04:10 PM   #12
donbarzini
enthusiast
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 73
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawlz517 View Post
Agree with dinesh here. It really depends on a lot of factor. I think pushing the entire pot to either play here is much better than chopping it.
Floor gave the $22 to Seat8. I thought he should only get $12, and Seat4 should get his $10 bet back since it was never called.
donbarzini is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 04:34 PM   #13
Aurora Tom
grinder
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 451
Re: Wait, I still have cards

I think that ruling opens the door to regular angling in this fashion.
Aurora Tom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 05:03 PM   #14
dinesh
veteran
 
dinesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,044
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by donbarzini View Post
Floor gave the $22 to Seat8. I thought he should only get $12, and Seat4 should get his $10 bet back since it was never called.
That is a hella bad ruling. As you and others have said, the $10 was never called, so if you do manage to rule that seat 8 gets the pot, he should not get that $10.
dinesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 05:08 PM   #15
BigBlue56
veteran
 
BigBlue56's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: The Garden State
Posts: 2,603
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Lots of info missing that could sway a proper decision. Agreed that it's a cheap lesson for the table.

Because the pot was pushed, I'm declaring seat 4 held the cards long enough. Seat 8s hand is dead.
BigBlue56 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2017, 05:58 PM   #16
Playbig2000
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Playbig2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Suffern, NY; PA, LV
Posts: 7,610
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Now I know why seat 8 likes to keep his cards hidden. smh
Playbig2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2017, 04:34 AM   #17
chillrob
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
chillrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: under a dark cloud
Posts: 12,193
Re: Wait, I still have cards

I have said this before, but it really doesn't work in the long run to punish someone for giving up his cards after being pushed the pot. If you do that, the only way a player can protect himself is by taking ridiculous measures before giving up his hand which would slow the game to a standstill. In almost all cases the player pushed the pot shoud keep it.
chillrob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-23-2017, 09:04 AM   #18
venice10
Referee
 
venice10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Nowhere special
Posts: 22,670
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawlz517 View Post
Splitting the pot is rarely a fair ruling. It's a "the floor has no clue what to do" ruling.
QFT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chillrob View Post
I have said this before, but it really doesn't work in the long run to punish someone for giving up his cards after being pushed the pot. If you do that, the only way a player can protect himself is by taking ridiculous measures before giving up his hand which would slow the game to a standstill. In almost all cases the player pushed the pot shoud keep it.
Nobody wants a game where the dealer sits there for 10 seconds after saying, "speak now if you disagree with the awarding of the pot to Seat X or forever hold your peace."

One of two things are happening. Either the player is hiding his cards, which means he should get a warning about doing that, which his punishment this time is to lose the pot. Or the dealer is getting sloppy which means the floor should be spoken to (away from the table) that the dealer needs some re-training about making sure everyone has folded before awarding the pot. Some dealers are so intent on getting as many hands dealt as possible that they get sloppy.
venice10 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2017, 03:53 PM   #19
Suit
Pooh-Bah
 
Suit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,982
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by donbarzini View Post
Ruling?
Only ruling options that should be considered:

Ruling A - Seat 8's hand is dead. Seat 4 gets the pot.

Ruling B - Seat 8 gets the pot minus the $10 that is returned to Seat 4.


I would almost always go with Ruling A here, but there could be spots where B is used. This is a judgment call for the floor to make.

Quote:
Floor gave the $22 to Seat8.
This is just terrible.
Suit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-28-2017, 05:59 PM   #20
callipygian
slowrolled by tpiranha!
 
callipygian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: but I don't know which
Posts: 19,683
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by donbarzini View Post
Floor gave the $22 to Seat8.
I can't tell qhether the responses after this meant that giving $22 was a bad ruling (but $12 would have been OK) or that giving $12 would have been a bad ruling too.

I think $22 was bad, but $12 would have been fine if the house detwrmined (e.g., video) this was plurality dealer error.

The house should be held accountable for dealer errors.
callipygian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2017, 11:34 AM   #21
Suit
Pooh-Bah
 
Suit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,982
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by callipygian View Post
The house should be held accountable for dealer errors.
If this were the case, you could say goodbye to live poker in casinos.
Suit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2017, 07:32 PM   #22
chillrob
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
chillrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: under a dark cloud
Posts: 12,193
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Suit View Post
If this were the case, you could say goodbye to live poker in casinos.
Why?
chillrob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2017, 08:08 PM   #23
dinesh
veteran
 
dinesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,044
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Because it costs way more to hire near perfect dealers, and to police/insure against players angling casinos out of dealer error repayments, than players would be willing to pay in rake.
dinesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-29-2017, 08:10 PM   #24
chillrob
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
chillrob's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: under a dark cloud
Posts: 12,193
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinesh View Post
Because it costs way more to hire near perfect dealers, and to police/insure against players angling casinos out of dealer error repayments, than players would be willing to pay in rake.
But if you don't pay for that, you will pay the same in the long run through losing pots to dealer error, right?
chillrob is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2017, 01:21 PM   #25
Suit
Pooh-Bah
 
Suit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,982
Re: Wait, I still have cards

Quote:
Originally Posted by chillrob View Post
But if you don't pay for that, you will pay the same in the long run through losing pots to dealer error, right?
Not if you protect yourself by paying attention. The house paying for all dealer errors would mean many things.

-One/several errors big enough could put the house in the hole.
-dealers would be fired for making a big enough or multiple mistakes. Dealer turnover is an expensive thing for casinos
-It would encourage players to try to get dealers to make mistakes.
-players would pay attention less, knowing that any mistake will be made up by the house.
-imagine a dealer makes a mistake and the wrong player profits. He keeps his mouth shut and the correct player realizes it a couple hands later, then the house pays the correct player. Good way to scam the house. It will just never happen.
Suit is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online