A new twist on our Dealer reading hands topic of the last week or so.

Player A tables a straight. Player B (Seat 10) flashes a full house but tries to muck anyway (thinking trips). Dealer turns cards over and says "Full house". No other player at the table saw the full house before the Dealer tabled the hand.

Player A call Floor and wants pot. Floor rules that Player A gets pot even though cards aren't fully mucked since Dealer can't read/announce an untabled hand 'first'. If someone else had spoken up before the hand was mucked it would be different.

Yes/No? GL

No. Tabled hand is a Tabled hand. Maybe player was about to grab for his own hand right after dealer tabled it.

In this case I don't feel strongly about anything other than asking dealer Wtf he was thinking after his string ends.

As played,hand is dead, flashing cards is not a tabled hand if the cards are then placed face down in a mucking motion.

Dealer could have asked "is that a fold?" for clarity,but that's a fold mistake by the player.



Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Well likely the next floor would rule the hand live cause it was not actually mucked , even though the dealer was out of line. Best hand wins. Then the next floor would rule something else.......... ! Rules are what the floor says they are right then. Live poker is annoying sometimes.

As explained, I think Player B should get the pot, but the dealer is WAY out of line here. Once the hand is opened by the dealer (without cards hitting a muck pile and being unidentifiable), I can't imagine a floor not paying the best hand.

Of course, this is ridiculous from the dealer and not a normal occurrence, so you're going to get different rulings from different floor supervisors in different rooms

If he's possession of his cards, I agree, but once he throws his cards face down he's no longer getting the benefit of the doubt.

Pot to A, KITN to dealer.

I'd start looking for another room to play in. Clearly the floor doesn't understand the "one player to a hand" rule either.

Good catch .. Figured Suit would be the one to see this ..

Players at the table can only assist with hand reading once the hand has been tabled, not 'in sight' or flashed. We've seen threads like this where even the rail will call something out and .... let the glaring begin for speaking out of turn. GL

I am assuming that the floor meant that if another player announced the hand, and then the orginal player retrieved his identifiable cards and tabled them. Another player cannot kill your hand by violating OPTAH.

Nothing about OPTAH says a had should be killed.

player A still gets the pot, it was a good ruling.

If anyone else had spoke up and told the guy to table the full house and he does, he would likely win the hand and the player who violated OPTAH would get a warning. But if a player says "You won" and he then turns his cards face up after being mucked face down, player A should still win.

Ugh. With the caveat that room rules trump all, an RRoP based ruling would be that B's hand is live because it was tabled, and not as a result of IWTSTH from the otherwise-winner.
No, you cannot kill a tabled hand. In general, if a hand makes it to showdown, and gets tabled, it is still live, even if player attempted to muck first.
What does "benefit of the doubt" mean?

Once the hand is tabled, it is live. Whether or not he threw his cards down/forward (at showdown) first.
Even if OPTAH is violated, which is debatable anyway if dealer is the one to do it, the person punished is the one who tells the player with a hand to table it. You do not penalize the player who received help. (Unless he actively asked for help somehow, which is a rarity, and surely doesn't apply here). Hand is live.
Yes, absolutely correct.

There is no RRoP rule which support this view that it matters who spoke up, who tabled the hand, whether it was mucked face down. It is a live hand once it is tabled.

"As played" not what dealer did.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Now is that violating Optah,or insuring the integrity of the game?

Not out of the question this can be seen as chip dumping.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

What the dealer did IS "as played". The dealer did it.

If you're saying the dealer should have just mucked the players hand once it was discarded face down, then sure, I think everyone here agrees. If you're saying that the dealer should clarify to make sure he means to fold, because something about his action makes that unclear, then sure.

If you're suggesting that, as played, if the dealer tables the hand then it should be considered dead, then no. The hand is tabled. It is live and can contend for the pot.

I'm not arguing with you,but brush up on semantics.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Eeyorefora is it your contention we should understand what you are saying?

I would argue the dealer can't table a hand. Is a hand tabled when IWTSTH is invoked by someone not in the hand? And I don't want to hear about touching the cards to the magic muck.

dinesh's posts ITT are good.

Wholly separate from the fact that there is no rule that kills the hand, another consideration is we probably don't want the "intent to muck" of an ultimately tabled hand to be a judgement call. The binary absolutes of "tabled" and "not tabled" make things simple and clear in a game full of gray areas.

The story in the OP might be viewed by detractors as an example of where that dichotomy is broken, but I see it working exactly as designed. Don't fix it!

This is a good counterexample. I'm tempted to call it an "exception", but that just opens the door to more exceptions. Then all of a sudden we can kill a tabled hand sometimes.

Maybe the difference is you can't kill a tabled hand, but you can show a dead hand on request? (As in all tabled hands are shown, but not all shown hands are tabled.)

I don't recall any definition of "tabled" that specifies WHO tabled the hand.

Case in point that I'm a bit embarrassed about TBH. At showdown, villain declared "two pair" on a paired board. I had an overpair in my hand but didn't consider the paired board and thought I was beat.

Tossed my cards down. They landed on edge, rolled, and fell face up, despite my very obvious and openly admitted attempt to muck.

Floor ruled I won and pot was mine.

I really dislike a few of the replies in this thread.

Dealer made a mistake. No doubt. But you know what? it's not a big mistake. It's a small one. If you want to call the floor in response and get the dealer admonished, fine. But this sort of thing happens.

While I respect one player to a hand, people who feel all offended when stuff like this happens and they lose a pot to someone who had the better hand are REALLY messed up IMO. If the floor had ruled B gets the pot (as I think the floor should have), there's ZERO injustice here. The best hand would have won, and A would have only been denied the right to a pot A didn't actually win based on a technicality.

You know what I do when someone helps a player table the winning hand against me? Nothing. Because that player deserved to win the pot. Indeed, I go further. When a player flashes the winning hand to me during a showdown against me, I tell the player to table it and take the pot. (Or to table it and chop, if it's a chop.)

If your poker strategy is "make opponents mistakenly muck their hands", you stink as a poker player. Seriously. The best hand should win at showdown.

Ok, so I understand where you're coming from. I don't want a pot I didn't deserve to win, but I also think it's up to each individual player to know their hand and know the rules. If you muck your hand without laying it down, you're giving up your right to the pot. If the dealer doesn't turn over your hand, you don't win the pot because YOU chose to muck your hand and didn't properly realize you had a winner.

How would you feel if it was another player who turned over the hand and not the dealer? Does this make a difference to you? Say it's a player in seat 9 who saw Player B's hand and turns it over for him when Player B intended to muck?

It's your job to know your hand, protect your hand, and play your hand. If you muck a winner, that's on you. It's not the dealer's job to turn your hand over and show that you had a winner that you gave up.

Now, in this scenario, if I'm player A, I'm going to be upset with the dealer for making a mucked hand a live hand, but I'm not going to try to have Player B's hand killed. He has the best hand and deserves the pot, but I would really hope the floor makes sure the dealer realizes they were wrong here and should instruct them to muck a mucked hand, not turn over the mucked hand.

A dealer can not make a mucked hand a live hand. The only exception is if someone uses the IWTSTH option.