Everybody is wound up because of three reasons:

1. It was a sick runner-runner bad beat
2. The solid pro played well and lost
3. The dumb donkey played bad and won

None of these facts should have any effect on whether the ruling was correct or not.

some of you fools are more worked up about it than JC was(or wasnt). and it was the correct ruling too lol.

Listen very carefully. I understand what the ruling is. However, if this ruling (in place to prevent collusion) which can be EASILY be taken advantage of by those colluding, causes the villain to be awarded the pot, after having his cards hit the muck, it is disgraceful. Where is the differential between an all-in event in a cash game or a donkament that requires separate rulings?

IMFHO, anyone who decides having their cards hit the muck, for WHATEVER reason, is more important to them than letting the cards read, deserves them to lose their right to the given pot and is MUCH more important than flipping cards up in every donkament all-in event to prevent "collusion". If a player wanted to collude, there are any number of ways to work out dumping a stack without turning up the cards. That is a pathetic excuse for allowing this [censored] to happen.

If not, then why the [censored] have the 'cards hit the muck they're dead rule' at [censored]ing all?

OP should get a life and stop posting silly things like this.

Cardplayer airs this and calls it "contraversial" because a well known pro was involved and they need to find something interesting to report on in a boring tourny game to make the report meaningful.
Anyone with 1/2 brain understands that there is nothing contraversial about the ruling and you can give JC credit for at least 1/2 a brain so he doesn`t protest much.

It`s just slightly annoying to see an idiot win chips but that`s a common sight in donkaments.

Please, OP, explain to me in the next 5 minutes 3 ways to accomplish this. I'm just not following you.

I am still reeling from the fact that JC got bad beat.

sheets

your completely wrong.. there is no magical muck that cards touch killing a hand. In NLHE cash games if a hand is tabled face up cards speak not the players. It doesn't matter what the guy says although some places enforce a "you win" rule. Your saying If i table the nuts face up on the river after a guy calls me and it touches some area you consider the muck my hand is dead? In any casino cards always speak.

Normally I charge by the hour but....making numerous large bets and leaving yourself with essentially nothing, without being felted and mucking. Moving AI and purposely having your cards irreversibly mucked. Which could be explained as, I didn't want anyone to see what I had, but either way, who is going to prove for what reason anyone makes any bet...blah blah blah. The donkish nature of this particular reply is a DIRECT function of how foolish the original rule is in the first place. The whole idea of keeping the cards out of the muck, even if put there by the player's own will in order to "prevent collusion" is stretching it reaaaalllll thin.

The difference is that you would have to be pretty ******ed to chip dump in a live cash game. Whereas going all in to chip dump in a tournament could be beneficial to the two involved.

wow i was responding to your rediculous 1/2nl situation and i didn't even realize you were also the OP.

[X] IN BOTH HANDS FLOOR RULED CORRECTLY

This is honestly the last time I'm going to say it. I understand what the current rules are. HOWEVER, the theory behind them are simply, ridiculous.

As I have stated already numerous times in this thread why that is, I'm not going to keep posting the same thought process over and over. If you feel that the very avoidable security feature which this rule provides against collusion is more valuable to the integrity of the game, than a pot being awarded to a player who has every intention of folding his hand, up to and including physically placing the cards in the muck, then just wow. gl and gg

I really just wanted to waste a few more mins of your time. As for the second part of your statement, you cant muck your cards all-in in a tournament! When the AI is called, both hands are flipped face-up.

How can you say that retrieving somebody's hand from the muck in a tourney is more detrimental to the integrity of the game than chip dumping?

the two hands are completely different situations with different rules. Cards speak has nothing to do with collusion it has to do with the spirit of the game, and prevents certain angles.

Let's not forget that Tran limped UTG with J9 (it looks like suited hearts) and then called a 5xBB raise from the Big Blind. We don't know anything about the game conditions and can't determine stack sizes. But, I think most players are folding that hand both times Tran had a chance to fold pre-flop. Then again, he's up against a bluff-monkey who pushed all-in with an unimproved A7.

Buddy, if the guy intentionally jammed his cards under the pile of muck laying in the middle of the table, there is NO way to tell which 2 are his....

chan=tran w/e. Lol at tran playing J9 like that and chiang limp folded 1010.

Show me where I said that.

You can see the player take back those chips at about 1:35.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Tran knows what he is doing......a la CP TLB

Maybe I misunderstood, but this was the part I was referencing.

If you feel that the very avoidable security feature which this rule provides against collusion is more valuable to the integrity of the game, than a pot being awarded to a player who has every intention of folding his hand, up to and including physically placing the cards in the muck, then just wow. gl and gg

nice job leaving out the most important part of this story. did villain call your allin bet before throwing his cards away?

i don't understand why this thread is so long. the obvious (correct) ruling was made in a very simple situation. waht's there to talk about?

Chiang = Giang w/e. (OMG racist!?!?)


Chau Giang does too and he says he folded TT.