Where did you get that piece of information from? I don't see that anywhere in the OP.

Or maybe he thought P1 called the raise and now it's time for showdown?

OP didn't say "Dealer said 'Raise'". And P1 acted like P2's action was a call which he wouldn't if Dealer had said "Raise". Unless he was wearing headphones and then it is totally his fault. But OP didn't say that either...

Yes but that would be P2's mistake as P1 didn't put any chips out there. It is up to P2 to protect his hand in spots like this.

I always do. I start out outside of where the pot would go, with my hand on top of my cards.

I am fairly certain of that, even aside from this thread.

I didn't follow the action so I'm not sure what exactly happened.
I saw two hands tabled and dealer mucking the winning hand, not even sure in what order.
I think it went like this:
P1 throws his hand just past the bet line, face up, like a lot of ppl do at showdown when showing their hand. The hand wasn't anywhere near the muck or the middle of the table, just in a spot where it's clearly visible to the entire table.
Dealer picks up the hand and mucks it.
P2 shows his hand.
Pot is pushed towards P2.
I say: but the 66 wins? (I wasn't in the hand)
P1 says the same and doesn't understand what's happening
Dealer just says nope he didn't call.
Floor comes over because he heard the commotion.
Dealer explains what happened in like 5 secs, floor just agrees with him.

I find it very strange that not more people seem to think it's the dealer's responsibility to take 3 seconds to confirm the action?

I also found it very strange how the floor just instantly agreed with the dealer, he didn't even really seem to care what happened exactly.

Maybe they know the player and he does this more often?

The reason I think that this was handled very poorly is because P1 was a huge fish and quit shortly after this happened.

So from now on when opening a thread we just assume that dealer didn't follow proper procedure unless stated otherwise?

I have a regular, occasional tipper who holds his cards until he gets the pot.
Once he was in the 9 seat and had his fingers planted on his cards exactly where the pot needed to go.
I didn't want to push the pot over his hand and cards so I quickly slid his cards out
from under his fingers and moved them about 10 inches to his right and pushed the pot.

He hasn't tipped me since. 5+ years. =(

"DEALER STOP, I'm not folding."

A distinct possibility.

I'm not sure what you want the floor to do, OP. In your most recent version of events, P2 showed his cards in response to the fold and muck. Whether we spend 5 seconds or 5 minutes describing those events, we can't allow P1 to take back his fold.

P1 would be the first huge fish to permaban himself from poker over something like this. He'll be back, and he hopefully won't be tossing cards that he intends to show down.

Tell the dealer that next time he needs to confirm the action?

You want to do this every time someone makes what they consider a big fold and shows? No thank you.

Okay sure. I don't know if I agree that the dealer should be doing that, but I meant how would a hypothetical longer explanation affect his response. It is unclear which details the dealer relayed, and you are focused on the quickness of the message over its content.

Also, I would not expect that particular reminder to happen in the moment ever, but especially here where we don't want to give P1 the impression that the dealer is responsible for folding his hand. That could get messy.

Showing your hand prematurely is not an action. P2 did not fold. Folding is to discard or relinquish your hand while facing action, like a bet or a raise. P2 wasn’t facing a bet or a raise so even if he exposed his cards by also tossing them forward face up it also is not a fold. And definitely simply turning over his cards is not ever a fold. Since a poker action was not induced the rule provided is not applicable.

I am not (here and now) saying P1 did not fold. But I have not seen a rule that says his actions are a fold. I know his action would not be a fold in the rooms I frequent. Would be handled pretty much how Reducto described.

Do I want the dealer to take a full 3-10 seconds to confirm an action every time someone throws their cards face up towards the middle and it's unclear what their intentions are?
Damn that's going to waste so much time ...

This happens like once or twice in a session, that's a full 20 seconds tops wasted in a 6 hour session, damn!

If this was a court of law you would be right. Objection would be sustained.

But this is a thread where we have not been given all of the details. OP didn't say "the dealer said 'raise'" and OP didn't say "the dealer never said 'raise'". So we are left to guess what happened. And in situations like this virtually all of the time P1 acted the way he did because he was unaware that there was a raise. And he wouldn't have acted that way the vast majority of the time if the dealer had said "raise".

So you may be correct some small % of the time. But as far as I am concerned I will continue to assume that the dealer messed up by not saying "raise".

In all of the years I have been playing it has been extremely rare for the dealer to say "raise" and the player who is in the hand to not hear him (unless he is wearing headphones or is in conversation with someone like a waitress and misses it). It happens but very rarely. What happens more often is when a dealer doesn't say anything and a player acts as if a raise was a call. I have had to deal with that myself on at least 3 occasions. I got called each time, but in one case the other guy might have re-raised if he hadn't turned over the 2nd nuts.

There are some dealers who don't say anything at all when chips are placed out on the felt. And if this dealer was one of those and the room accepts that behavior, then so be it. But mostly dealers call out "raise" when there is a raise. Some dealers are inconsistent. When they are and they miss something, I will point it out assuming that the dealer missed the raise (and partly to avoid a flop, turn, or river being dealt that will have to come back and waste a lot of time).

As I said our room requires us to clarify when cards are tossed face up since a fold/muck must be face down. I can say it doesnt slow the game down. In OP, when the player raised and then other player tosses his cards face up, I just say what is your action? Then when he says its showdown, the problem is caught and I say 'he raised'. Or if he is folding, he just says so and the game moves on.

Sometimes in a situation like the OP, the player with a strong hand will think it is so obvious that he is calling that he tables his hand first, then there is a few seconds delay before he says call or pushes out chips. So it really isnt a big deal to clarify before mucking.

Live poker doesnt exactly move along at the speed of light. The 3 seconds it takes to clarify action on the few times an ambiguous situation arises will not affect the speed of the game at all, imo. But muck one hand and its disputed, the delay of getting a floor decision will be more than dozens of clarifications.

I'm pretty sure that >90% of the time when a player doesn't hear a dealer it's because he's wearing headphones or distracted by something else and not because the dealer didn't announce action.

I object. You are using creative clipping by leaving out Ricks subsequent additional justification.

Well heck. Now based on op latest description by op we don’t even know HOW the cards wound up near the BETTING line. We do now know cards are not in the middle and not near the muck. We don’t even know how far or how much card is over the line.

At this point I am more convinced than ever P1 did not intend to fold. He might have been trying to angle P2 or just extract info by exposing his hand. I believe he intended to call. As to angles, again IMO, the most likely angle is maybe P2 trying to get P1s hand killed.

It sucks to be the one who got distracted or made a mistake and unintentionally folded the winning hand, but I am leaning toward the OP being acceptable collateral damage to keep the games running quickly and not opening up any unnecessarily large spots for angle shooting.

Even though I don't like what happened to P1, I think I prefer it to the alternative where the floor gives him another chance to call the raise.

If applied consistently, this kind of ruling will work pretty well most of the time, and maybe I'm a pessimist, but that is about the most I think we can hope for.

Why is P2 showing his hand? To rub it in? This scenario 'really' defines the thought process/actions of the Dealer in this case.

I didn't review the OP for full details on the raise, but if in the Dealer's opinion the raise was 'fully defined' then it's only natural for this sequence to take place. Granted OP has indicated it may/may not be the correct sequence ...

I'm less inclined to even hold the Dealer 'accountable' for not pausing or verifying action. As indicated in some posts, there's a line for all Dealer/Player relationships and if there ever was a spot for a Dealer to show some favoritism it could be here. Not sure if OP gave the full Board, but if the Dealer had stopped and considered this to be a 'huge' fold and thus warranted verification, then we probably do have to start down the OPTAH path.

If this scenario was explained to the a Floor I can easily see a very quick and 'annoying' ruling take place.

It shouldn't be (by now), but it's always interesting how a spot changes if you change a sequence of events.

Not being there in the moment is a huge element for this spot. The timing of all the actions is very critical to ending up where we are in this thread. GL

see above^^^^^

HE folded plain and simple

what his intentions were might not be what he did ,
if player 2 had a higher set would you be making player 1 pay the raise he didn't call ?

Except the FACTS as originally shared have changed per OP. Now the cards are face up in front of P1. They are not in the middle. They are not close to or not “toward” the muck. And OP now describes how the cards got in their position as a common call method.

We don’t really know how the cards got turned up. We don’t know precisely where the cards are located. So we are going to kill an otherwise winning hand based on its location of a few inches.

The more we hear from op the more the situational facts get cloudy.

The latest from op, “… hand just past the bet line, face up, like a lot of ppl do at showdown when showing their hand. The hand wasn't anywhere near the muck or the middle of the table, just in a spot where it's clearly visible to the entire table.”

In a room where it doesn't matter if the cards are face-up or face-down, we're killing the hand based on the fact that it was released in a forward motion while facing action.

In a room where releasing the cards face-up does not constitute a fold, the dealer should not have killed the hand.

I don't think there's much disagreement about that. It just looks like there are rooms where releasing your hand forward face-up while facing action constitutes a fold and other rooms where it doesn't.

So we need to know what house rules at the casino in question are.

No they haven't, I just clarified them.
P1 did "throw" his hands towards the middle, just over the betting line, exactly the same as he would do at showdown, where everyone can clearly see the cards and the dealer can reach them.

I've done this myself so many times at showdown, assuming once you table your hand (at showdown) it can never be dead if it's the winning hand.
P1 just missed that it wasn't showdown yet.

To me it looked 100% as if he was showing down his hand to claim the pot, though I wasn't following up until he showed his hand, so I might have missed something.


Why is it ok for P1 to lose money because of his own mistake?
But it's not ok for P2 to lose money because of his own mistake?

I'm not sure if P1 should be given the chance to make the call, even after the cards have been shown. It's going to be unfair to one of the players either way.

The most fair option to me seems to let the cards speak though, P2 unfortunately showed his cards, so it's an easy decision for P1, but he does have the best hand.


Why are ppl arguing it's so hard and wastes too much time for the dealer to take 5 seconds to confirm P1's action?
He thought he was showing the winning hand at showdown, so did I, so did the player right next to him.
How is the dealer in a completely different world and does he not realize this?

How is this OPTAH?
The dealer doesn't even have to look at the hand he's showing, he just needs to ask "fold?"
He doesn't need to and even shouldn't analyse the hand or board or anything, he just needs to instantly ask "are you folding?" takes 3 seconds?

What is P2's mistake?