This hand happened at my local 1/3 casino last night and I was so surprised by the floor's ruling that it finally inspired me to make a post on 2+2 after a couple years of lurking. I know there are two main schools of thought on these forums - those that feel the rules must be adhered to in all circumstances and those who think etiquette and common sense ought to take precedent under most reasonable circumstances, particularly in a low stakes live game, where players just aren't very good. I personally fall into the latter category and this obviously affects how I feel about the floor's decision, but anyways onto the hand.

Hero has KK in the LJ and raises it up to 16 over one limp. HJ calls, BB calls and limper calls. Relevant V in the hand is the BB - a very bluff heavy, very stuck young Asian guy. He got caught earlier bluffing with 52s and also relevant to the hand, he lead with trips on a 99j two-tone board into the field. He seems capable, but feels the need to win every pot.

Flop($65) 553
V leads out for $25. Limper folds, I call, HJ calls.

Turn($140) T
V leads again for $75. Hero calls, HJ folds.

River ($290) 2
V leads all in for $280 ish. Hero thinks for about fifteen seconds and calls.

V says "I have tens" very confidently looking at hero. Obviously, hero thinks V has pocket tens and begins to muck his hand. V then tables T9 offsuit after hero's hand crosses the betting line. Hero quickly tables KK before the dealer touches his hand or his hand touches the muck to showdown the winner. V then claims hero's hand was mucked and that he should win the pot. Two floors are called to make the ruling. First floor says that the V should win all of the pot except the all-in at the end since he misrepresented his hand at showdown and the second floor, after some deliberation, agrees.

Here is the problem I have with their decision: V was clearly angling to get hero to fold the winning hand by deliberately misrepresenting his hand at showdown. After the turn call, V mouthed to himself "Aces" thinking hero had an overpair. Furthermore, no one is betting a T there for value all in at 1-3. He knew he was bluffing and tried to win the pot by claiming he had pocket tens in an insanely scummy move and everyone at the table agreed. What should the floor's ruling be? Keep in mind that, while hero's hand did cross the betting line, no one had touched his cards nor had they touched the muck - it was clear as day which cards were his. Also, what do you do as the floor if V said he had a 5, but tables T9 offsuit in the same situation?

It seems to me that common sense should award hero the pot, but rules dictate his hand was in the muck. Should a player be allowed to deliberately misrepresent his hand at showdown to get someone to fold the winner? It seems to me the floor's ruling sets a dangerous precedent when they should err on the side of protecting players against angling, particularly of this kind.

What room is this???

This would be a snap ship to hero in most good rooms I've played in as it was not mucked

I think either way....the lesson to be learned don't do anything based off what any v says...wait until you see the cards

The problem is the rule on the betting line. In a casino with good rules, this wouldn't be a muck at all-- Hero retrieved the cards before they were in the muck, and therefore they play.

But if the rule is normally that pushing them past the line mucks them, it certainly should not be applied where the muck is a result of another player's ambiguous, angle-shooting declaration. (And that was what it was-- he wasn't actually lying, he did have tens, but he was saying it in such a way as to try and get you to push your cards across the line.)

However, Hero should consider simply always tabling the hand in a situation like this. Your opponent knows you have an overpair. So you are giving away NO information by tabling it.

This was in Edgewater Poker Room, Vancouver. Thanks for the clarification - I was pretty sure the ruling was absurd, but wanted to check. I guess they have strict rules about cards crossing the betting line, but it was almost surreal to me that common sense didn't prevail here. I have never had a bad experience with a floor at this casino until this day, but haven't played there all that much.

Assuming you have selection around you, I'd never play in a room such as this that rewarded angling. Just take my business elsewhere. :/

This was your mistake. It turns out it was a very costly one. Bet you won't muck again without seeing your opponent's cards. BTW, "I have tens" means exactly what it meant in this situation more times than not. 95% of the time in this spot when a player says I have tens, they mean they have 2 tens, not 3. If he had 3, he would usually say I have tens full or I have a boat. It was not as much of an intentional misrep as you make it out to be.

As for the ruling...

If the room has a rule about your hand crossing the line then well, that's the rule and you lose. If they don't have that rule, then the ruling was horrible and you should always win that pot. In every room I have been in you would get the pot no matter what V claimed to have for a hand.

That's a pretty awful ruling. Never release your hand based on what an opponent says, but I'm guessing you won't ever make that mistake again.

Did it require two floors because there is a rule about a released hand being dead and there was a question over whether V's declaration invalidated his claim to the pot? Or was it because there was a question over whether your hand was dead based on it being released? Or was it something else?

I disagree about that. Usually people would say I have a ten, not I have tens, at least wherever I have played, though true people might say tens full as well. Either way, given the V's demeanor, it was a clear angle and probably shouldn't be tolerated.

I asked for a second floor decision because I disagreed with his decision - I thought common sense would prevail if two of them talked it through. I'm normally a very quiet player so I have never really had to deal with a floor in a serious confrontation in this way. I was obviously super heated and not thinking super clearly. In the future I will definitely ask those questions in a clear way so a logical conclusion is reached. That being said, given the ruling, I think it's clear the second floor was called because there was a question over whether my hand was dead based on it being released.

I think this post lets the angler and the room off the hook way too much.

It is an angle to say "I have tens" here, because it could mean two different things. I'll give 99 to 1 odds the person who said this did so hoping that maybe Hero would misread the hand.

And no, even if the betting line is normally the muck line, the room should still allow the cards to be retrieved when the muck was induced by an ambiguous declaration. Otherwise, you are basically encouraging players to try to angle themselves into undeserved victories at showdown.

Kinda sucks for hero but I agree with Suit. Villain's announcement is certainly ambiguous, but he did not misdeclare his hand. He didn't say "I have pocket tens" or anything like that. You hear players announce "aces" all the time when they table Ax on Axxxx and announcing "tens" here isn't any different in my opinion.

I hate for rooms to have a hard enforced line that instantly kills a hand, but if a room has that rule players have to deal with that.

That's the thing about angles, they don't work if you don't let them. Also, by definition angles are not against the rules.

Common sense would say that rules should be put in place to prevent these types of angles.

The guy did in fact have a pair of tens.

what angle? Did he say he had a set?

If the board is paired and someone announces two pair and tables a pocket pair, is that also an "angle"?

mods will change the misleading thread title (that's the only angle itt)

Had it not been an angle, V should have no problem letting H win pot?

WTF floor 1? Cards easily identifiable and not in muck. Your pot. No penalty for V you misunderstood what he meant by "Tens". If he would have clearly miscalled hand like "full house" then gtfo ban that MFer.

He's just trying to call him out on a technicality. Greedy selfish poker players will do it any chance they get.

The guy declared his hand correctly. If he had pocket tens, he would have had a full house. No one says "I have tens" when they have a full house. And very rarely do people say "I have tens" when they have a set. So the hard truth is that you mistook what he was saying and compounded it by mucking your hand before even seeing his hand, which as others have said, you should never do, as sometimes even an honest player misreads his hand and declares something he doesn't have by mistake. It's an unusual rule they have about not being able to recover and table a hand at showdown after it crosses the line, but given that rule, I don't see how you have any recourse. The guy said he had tens when he did. You blew it.

You got lucky that the floors made a bad decision by letting you off the hook for the all in on the river. There is no basis in the rules for that. This is one of those live and learn type lessons. Sorry to sound so harsh, but it really is your fault.

Maybe "angle" is a BIT of a stretch. I agree H is somewhat (if not mostly at fault) Regardless, better rules would have prevented this, and I'm sure many more situations like it (with actual, worse angles)

Such as?

Having that rule encourages players to try to shoot this angle. Why wouldn't you try it every time? Either the line is the muck line or it isn't. There's no exceptions. Everyone gets the same chance to show their hands.

PS. It must be regional because in my room ppl say I have tens in that spot all the time. No angle intended, just don't know any better. And to be honest, he said I have tens, which technically was not a lie. If he had said I have tens full or I have pocket tens, then we would have a defense. In the case at hand, we do not.

Welcome to the forums! Thank you for bringing us an interesting and well-written situation with your first post. I appreciate it.

I agree with you somewhat insofar as your opponent's declaration of "tens" is ambiguous. However, I can't agree with you that he misrepresented his hand. He had two pair: tens and fives. When he said "tens," he declared the part of his hand that wasn't obvious from the board texture. He did not say that he had pocket tens or tens full. So unfortunately, I think your thread title might end up misleading or setting incorrect expectations for readers of the thread. If you'd like me to change it, let me know.

As for the floor's ruling, I personally hate "split the baby" rulings, which is exactly what happened here. Win or lose, I prefer a floor to make a ruling that makes sense logically and is consistent with the rules. In your situation, many rooms would rule that your hand is still live because the cards were clearly identifiable. Under those circumstances, you should receive the entire pot. But in some rooms, forward motion with face-down cards inside the betting line count as a fold. In those rooms, you should receive none of the pot because your intention was in fact to relinquish your claim to the pot. I think the floor in your case made a weak ruling that didn't comport with either set of rules.

[Aside: If your opponent actually had misrepresented his hand by saying he had pocked tens or a full house AND you'd folded based on that misrepresentation, then you should get the entire pot. But that's not what happened to you here.]

As for how you can better handle the situation in the future, there was a poster years ago who wisely said something along the lines of, "You can only control your own actions and emotions, not the actions and emotions of your opponents." So when I play, my opponents are welcome to say whatever they want at showdown. My response to whatever they say is me not releasing my cards until I have the pot in my possession or my opponent shows me a hand that beats my hand. If you do as I do, you'll never run into this problem again.

Best of luck in the future and thanks again for the strong first thread.

Villain here did not misrepresent his hand by stating a higher hand. Actually if anything, he UNDERrepresented it by announcing a pair of tens when he technically had tens up.
I really doubt he was angling. In fact, once I had a set of kings and when I said I had "kings", my opponent got angry because he briefly thought his pair of aces was good.

However, hero should still win the hand, at least in most card rooms and under my preferred ruleset. He retrieved his hand before it was mucked. Moving cards forward when not facing a bet doesn't mean anything.

The actual ruling, while not hurting hero as much as giving the whole pot to villain, makes no sense at all. If they have a rule that cards pushed forward are mucked, villain should win the whole pot. If not, hero should win the whole pot. Giving back the last bet makes no sense at all.

His hand not being ruled dead as it was not mucked.

That has nothing to do with what you perceive as an angle here.