December 25, 2008 by scabros.

Posting the blinds in heads-up play…

Hi everyone,

It happens often that, in the last 3 players remained, the BB is eliminated and the game turns in heads-up play. Now, generally is obvious that when the BB is busted out, the very next hand only the BB is paid. So I used to do, in my poker room, even in these situations when players reduce from 3 to 2.

But the last night, one player complained that as seen he had to pay the BB, the dealer had to post his SB too. I noticed him that actually, the SB was the same payer who paid the SB the last hand also. So, it’d be uncorrect for him to pay the same blind twice in a row, and the rule declares that in the next hand, only the BB is forced to be paid before the flop.

Am I right? Can anyone help me in this topic?

Thanks to everybody and Merry Xmas too

Posted in Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Buttons & Blinds, Heads Up Play | Print | 1 Comment »

December 2, 2008 by frenchflush.

Well … during a live freeroll tournament with NO DEALER (but a big sponsorized prize pool and a record 1240 players in day one we made resently) this situation happened:

Players A B & C involved in a 50,000 center pot (A all-in at the flop)

Players B & C involved in a 20,000 side pot (at the turn)

We are at the river:

B (150000) checks … C (100000) says “I’m all in!” … then after a short time muck his cards thinking B folded (?) and forgetting A (!) (remember: no dealer and the muck s in the middle of the table) … so B fold his (weak) hand (without touching the muck) pretending to win the side pot has the last player alive! So immediatly C announced his 2 cards to all the table and finded it into the muck (!?) B contested that and called for the “Floor”!

My decision was (I’m absolutely not sure to be right : that’s why I’m telling the story here):

C made 2 mistakes : mucking his hand and searching into the muck (in theory his hand is dead) but B should have called the floor before acting. Another detail: the hand of C was winning the side pot but A was winning the center pot.

Because the tournament of C was depending on my decision and because B didn’t called the floor : I declared C lost the side pot but could keep his extra all-in raise!

In other word: HOW THE HANDLE A PLAYER GOING ALL-IN AND MUCKING BEFORE ANY OPPONENT REACTION?

GG

Posted in All-In Bets; Re-Opening Betting, Side-Pots, Split Pots, Fouled Hands, Protecting Hand, Dealer Ruins Hand, Player Responsible, Incorrect Pot Awards, Chaos: Sloppy Mgmt of Tables & Tournament, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties | Print | 3 Comments »

November 17, 2008 by pod_sp.

Guys help me out with this one.

The most bizarre situation happened to me recently at my regular freezeout game at my local casino. Mid tournament I was chip leader. I raise it up with KQsuited late position. I get one caller who had limped from early position. I noticed that this gentlemen had been drinking heavily and was quite intoxicated. He was also the only player at the table to have a very healthy stack besides myself. Flop comes 7 high, 2 diamonds. He checks, i bet, he calls. Im thinking im pretty much done with the hand. Turn pairs the 7 on the board. We both check. River comes a blank and he goes all-in for 8000, into a pot of about 7000 - but then IMMEDIATELY mucks his cards. He then reaches to retrieve his cards. I tell him his hand is dead but call the director for a ruling. He rules that because he pushed all his chips in and declared all-in whilst doing so before he mucked meant his hand was still in play. Annoyed at the ruling I ponder why he did it in the first place. I came to the conclusion that the way he played the hand and that he had been drinking he had a busted flush draw. I could afford a call and the pot was huge so I make the call with King high. He says “im done, im done” and again mucks his cards. I slam down my cards thinking I have made an amazing call with King high. He again retrieves his cards and shows he had pocket 6’s and his hand is allowed to stand. I ask the questions:

1. What is the ruling on him mucking his hand after declaring all-in?
2. What is the ruling on him mucking when I called his all-in the retrieving his winning hand?

Posted in All-In Bets; Re-Opening Betting, Side-Pots, Split Pots, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc | Print | 7 Comments »

November 16, 2008 by Gitboxjoe.

Home game, on the river, Player A bets 1200. Player B calls. Player A states that he has a flush and Player B throws his hand into the muck face down. Player A then throws his hand into the muck and starts to collect the pot. Another player states at the table he wants to see the winning hand and the dealer seeing the winning hand was laid on top of the muck flips the 2 cards over too see that Player A was lying. Then Player B rifles through the muck to find his hand and flips over his winning hand. Everyone at the table states that Player B wins the hand. Player A states that once the hand is thrown into the muck the hand is dead, saying that he knew that Player B would throw his hand in the muck if he said that. Other than this being an etiquette issue, whats the ruling? House rules have always been Casino rules…..

Posted in Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties | Print | 1 Comment »

October 17, 2008 by davethedealer.

This situation came up in a tournament i was running last night. It was the last hand before the break.  Self deal game so no house dealer. Just as the break had started Player A who was the dealer, said he had just awarded the pot to Player B, but just realised that he should have won the pot. Player A said he had KJ and Player B had J2 and that the board was 329 J 9. Therefore Player A should have won with 2 pair and a higher kicker.

Both players cards were turned face up at showdown. But Player A thinking he’d lost mucked all the cards and the board, although they didnt get mixed with the remaining stub. As the next hand hadnt started i felt i should try and reconstruct the hand in the best interests of the game. I worked out what the pot was  and figured if i could be 100% sure what the board was ,and that Player A had KJ and Player B had J2 then Player A should be awarded the pot. As in the rule  cards speak etc.

In the end i awarded the pot to Player B who had J2 because only one other person at the table would confirm that Player A had KJ. Either the other players at the table hadnt noticed what happened or didnt want to get involved.

I do believe Player A had KJ ,but without the other players at the table speaking up i felt i couldnt award him the pot without being 100% certain. I feel i made the correct ruling but id be grateful for your comments.

Posted in Dealers Responsibilities, Errors, Partial Faults, Etc., Protecting Hand, Dealer Ruins Hand, Player Responsible, Incorrect Pot Awards, Chaos: Sloppy Mgmt of Tables & Tournament, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Dealer Errors, Bad Flops, Etc. | Print | 7 Comments »

August 29, 2008 by frenchflush.

Hello,

Let’s try to find a “regular” solution about this kind of case (knowing we will allways have to make special decisions):

NLH tournament - 5 players at the turn - pot 700 - player A goes all-in for 500 - B, C & D folds - A (forgetting E) throws his cards faces down in the middle - the dealer reach it quickly before it touch anything (to save it & give it back to A) while E is saying “I call” and push his chips in the middle - E pretend that A folded & ask for the floor … E made absoluely nothing meaning a fold befora A made his mistake … for information : A has the winning hand at 100% (E is drawing dead) …

For me the important point is that A is all-in (if not it would be more simple) … but I hate to have a player eliminated on a stupid error … anyway I’m ready to listen for some of your straight opinion with respect & apply it: should the players be protected or put into their responsabilities of adults … this is the real question!).

Your opinion ?

Posted in All-In Bets; Re-Opening Betting, Side-Pots, Split Pots, Verbals, Gestures, & Actions: Bet Raise Fold, Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Heads Up Play, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Bets, Min Raise, StringBet, Fwd Motion, Act Out-Of-Turn | Print | 2 Comments »

August 7, 2008 by talisman.

Hello All,

First post here and would love some insight…Do other poker rooms have a specific rule that covers players being at the table for the duration of a hand to be eligible to win a pot?

Scenario — No laughing now….(cash game 5/5 NL 100-500 spread)Player A allin preflop with 9d10c called by Player B with KcKs. Pot size is about $200.

Both hands are tabled and dealer deals flop (lets say rags 2d 5d 5h) at which point Player A decides he cannot win and leaves the poker pit, and then the casino (exit is close by)…

Unobservant dealer is not even aware that the player has left, deals the turn (a diamond) and the river (another diamond)…and then ships the pot to Player B at which point it is noticed there are 4 diamonds on the board and the raggedy Player A 9d10c wouldve won the pot!

We have no specific Poker rule that states what happens but there is a Poker etiquette policy (which may or may not have any legal standing)which states players must be at the table for the duration of a hand to be eligible to win the pot.

We do have a get out of jail rule which says “In the event that a situation is not covered under the rules of Poker, then the casino managament will make a fair and equitable decision that protects the integrity of the game of Poker.

So Question……Who would win the pot?? Does a casino have a responsibility to keep the money that “wouldve” been won by Player A and make every effort to locate him.

Poker Supervisor decision was to give the pot to the only eligible Player at the table in this case was Player B even though he had the losing hand per se…The argument was that Player A had abandoned his hand and therefore any chance of winning the pot and soon as he left the Poker Room (of his own accord)

Thanks for any insight…

Posted in Fouled Hands, Poker Room and Casino Mgmt Issues, Verbals, Gestures, & Actions: Bet Raise Fold, All-In Bets; Re-Opening Betting, Side-Pots, Split Pots, Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Empty Seats, Penalties, Clocks, Ejected Players, Incorrect Pot Awards, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc | Print | 1 Comment »

August 4, 2008 by frenchflush.

Hello,

Here is again this typical situation:

Tournament - Two players left at the river: player A (on the left of the Dealer, place 1 or 2 and near the muck) raises … B takes is time and speaks a lot to try to guess A’s hand (but no move or no sound meaning a fold) … A imagining a fold (?) throws away his cards directly in the muck (!!!) … B pretend it’s a fold and claim for the pot (he had enought chips t pay the raise) … … … my ruling: because the amount was important for A (more than 50% of his stack) so for “the best interest of the game” and because for me a raiser can’t suddenly fold without being protected: I asked him for the exact cards and finded it quite quickly over the top of the muck: nearly the nuts! I gave him a warning (for playing out of turn creating a confusing situation) but exposed his hand alive while letting B decide to play free! Lot’s of complain from B … should I have killed A’s hand?

GG

Posted in Exposed Cards, Hand Discussion, Etc., Verbals, Gestures, & Actions: Bet Raise Fold, Fouled Hands, Official Rules & Guidelines, General, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties | Print | 8 Comments »

July 24, 2008 by riv.

Hi,

Omaha hi-lo. After the river. Player A bets, Player B calls, Player C calls. Showdown: Player A wins high, Player B wins low, Player C folds but his hand isn’t mucked. Player A said that he wanted to see Player C hand but Player B said that he didn’t want to show that hand. How do you rule?

We have such Robert’s rules:

“Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that was eligible to participate in the showdown, even if the opponent’s hand or the winning hand has been mucked.”

and:

“If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.”

What about two winners in hi-lo games?

If you ruled to show that hand, what if Player C hand is better than Player B hand, who actually didn’t agree to see that hand?

Waiting for your comments,

Best regards,

riv

Posted in Showdowns & Pot Awarding, High-Low Games | Print | 6 Comments »

July 15, 2008 by riv.

Hi,

This is my first post on this forum and first of all I want to say is that I really appreaciate this forum and have my big respect for all users and authors (sorry for my poor english). And these are my very first (but surely not last) questions:

1. Tournament. Blinds are 200/400. BB posts his blind with single 500 chip. Everybody folds, button calls and BB raises by putting another two 1000 chips without any comment (dealer doesn’t announce anything but a “raise” as well). Button reraises and BB folds but claims that he wants 100 back from his Big Blind 500 chip. How do you rule?

2.  Player A bets on every round of betting and player B calls. After the river player A bets, player B calls, player A immediately folds his hand which is mucked but asks to see opponent hand which is still retrievable. I wouldn’t let him see this hand because there was no sign of collusion and player A who was obviously bluffing wanted to take advantage to see opponent hand. But during WSOP 2008 Main Event they ruled to show winning hand. What do you think?

3. What’s your opinion about desicion taken on Brandon Cantu vs Nikolai Losev stringbet on Day 6 of WSOP 2008? Is there “rule of the table line” exist in LV and especially during WSOP?

Best regards,

riv

Posted in Showdowns & Pot Awarding, Buttons & Blinds, Mucking, Dead Hands, Etc, Etiquette, Behavior, Play Procedures & Penalties, Bets, Min Raise, StringBet, Fwd Motion, Act Out-Of-Turn | Print | 3 Comments »