Poll

11 votes (68.75%)
1 vote (6.25%)
1 vote (6.25%)
3 votes (18.75%)

16 members have voted

WizardofEngland
WizardofEngland
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 8:31:13 AM permalink
Imagine your running a poker game, the game is Texas Hold'em. The buy in is around $50 (10 players).
A big pot is built up, the board looks like KQT73.
The aggressor has bet every street and has been called by a player out of position.
At the show down, the aggressor turns over his cards, the dealer announces an Ace high straight.
The other player instantly throws his hand into the muck.
It is then pointed out that the aggressor has only Ace-Nine and thus no straight.
The second player then claims to have folded a winning hand as a result of the dealer's error.

How would you rule?
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
dwheatley
dwheatley
  • Threads: 25
  • Posts: 1246
Joined: Nov 16, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:42:05 AM permalink
Easy one. A mucked hand is dead in almost any situation i can think of. Don't muck your cards, even if you think you've lost.
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
MathExtremist
MathExtremist
  • Threads: 88
  • Posts: 6526
Joined: Aug 31, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 8:43:55 AM permalink
I've never been a TD but I'd make a concerted effort to unwind the hand: give all players back all their bets as if the hand never happened at all. Did this scenario actually happen? If so, what was the resolution?

Edit: I know mucked hands are usually dead, but does the fact that this was a dealer error mitigate that? On the other hand, the mucker could have been shooting an angle...
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice." -- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:44:48 AM permalink
The mucked hand is dead. The players, as well as the dealer are responsible for verifying the content of their own and their opponents hands at showdown.

The easy way to prevent this situation is to always show your cards.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
WizardofEngland
WizardofEngland
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 8:48:03 AM permalink
Quote: MathExtremist

I've never been a TD but I'd make a concerted effort to unwind the hand: give all players back all their bets as if the hand never happened at all. Did this scenario actually happen? If so, what was the resolution?

Edit: I know mucked hands are usually dead, but does the fact that this was a dealer error mitigate that? On the other hand, the mucker could have been shooting an angle...



This did actually happen, and the card room manager (and I use the term loosely) deemed that the mucked hand should win the pot. His reason was that the player who called on every street is a known 'tight' player and would certainly have beat ace high. In his opinion. I now player poker somewhere else.....
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:49:22 AM permalink
Quote: WizardofEngland

This did actually happen, and the card room manager (and I use the term loosely) deemed that the mucked hand should win the pot. His reason was that the player who called on every street is a known 'tight' player and would certainly have beat ace high. In his opinion. I now player poker somewhere else.....



Where did this happen? Name and shame. In my opinion that is a terrible decision.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
WizardofEngland
WizardofEngland
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 8:52:33 AM permalink
Quote: Croupier

Where did this happen? Name and shame. In my opinion that is a terrible decision.



Are you sure ;-) ;-)
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
dwheatley
dwheatley
  • Threads: 25
  • Posts: 1246
Joined: Nov 16, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:53:24 AM permalink
It's probably in violation of their own posted house rules. Name and Shame!
Wisdom is the quality that keeps you out of situations where you would otherwise need it
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:54:27 AM permalink
Quote: WizardofEngland

Are you sure ;-) ;-)



Definately. I know it wasnt the club where I work. At least I think it wasnt........
[This space is intentionally left blank]
WizardofEngland
WizardofEngland
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 8:55:11 AM permalink
It was a G though, Leicester sq, poker in the pit.
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 10992
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:55:21 AM permalink
Were the cards mucked, or were they mixed into the muck?

According to Robert's Rules of Poker (Google it), if the cards can be easily retrieved, they should be. If they are not easily retrieved, then, sorry.

Note that some card rooms have different rules, and even separate rules for cash and tourneys.

In some cases, the eye-witness testimony of other players can also be considered.



HOWEVER, in NO CASE, should the emotional aspect of a player's history be the deciding factor.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 8:57:06 AM permalink
Quote: WizardofEngland

It was a G though, Leicester sq, poker in the pit.



They really should know better. Cant wait to tell my Card Room Supervisor about this. He split his sides.

I am embarrased to work for the [sort of] same company.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
WizardofEngland
WizardofEngland
  • Threads: 61
  • Posts: 638
Joined: Nov 2, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 9:02:44 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Were the cards mucked, or were they mixed into the muck?

According to Robert's Rules of Poker (Google it), if the cards can be easily retrieved, they should be. If they are not easily retrieved, then, sorry.

Note that some card rooms have different rules, and even separate rules for cash and tourneys.

In some cases, the eye-witness testimony of other players can also be considered.



HOWEVER, in NO CASE, should the emotional aspect of a player's history be the deciding factor.



I don't think they were totally mixed in, but they were not the top two cards.
I have run poker leagues in pubs, and always tried to re-create the action if I could, the aim of the evening was entertainment rather than winning loads of money, and the dealer was in error. But in this situation I would rule that they are dead, people who play in casino should learn, and quick if they want to be taken seriously.
http://wizardofvegas.com/forum/off-topic/general/10042-woes-black-sheep-game-ii/#post151727
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 9:59:17 AM permalink
Quote: WizardofEngland

At the show down, the aggressor turns over his cards, the dealer announces an Ace high straight.
The other player instantly throws his hand into the muck.


One solution would have been to ask the player what his cards were, and then turn over the cards that were in the vicinity of where he mucked them. They should be easy to retrieve if the dealer had stopped all action when the mistake was discovered.

The Tournament Director is given the power to make decisions "in the best interest of the game". If the hand could not be retrieved, it was still within his discretion to award the pot to the player who mucked.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 10992
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:05:03 AM permalink
Quote: WizardofEngland

I don't think they were totally mixed in, but they were not the top two cards.

Generally, they will NOT be the top two. The cards tend to be thrown onto the table towards the muck. If the dealer swept them into the muck, they could be anywhere and the hand is dead. However, if the dealer didn't touch them, or if he only swept them part way, where they could have been easily identified, and then they are live.


Quote: WizardofEngland

...people who play in casino should learn, and quick if they want to be taken seriously.

The flip side of that argument is that the dealer is supposed to be experienced enough to not make that kind of mistake.

I could derail this thread and talk about several dealer errors that I've been involved in....
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
minnesotajoe
minnesotajoe
  • Threads: 44
  • Posts: 168
Joined: Dec 18, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 10:06:44 AM permalink
Unless the poker room rules have it stated, once the player threw his hand into the muck, his/her hand is dead. The A9 wins.

I do not understand why players do not like showing losing hands. Just table your hand.

You can be so concerned about two pair or such, that you didn't see a four-flush or a backdoor-straight. Many consider Phil Ivey the best poker player right now. He mucked a winning flush... all he had to do was table his hand.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 10992
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:12:33 AM permalink
Quote: minnesotajoe

I do not understand why players do not like showing losing hands. Just table your hand.

Obviously, you don't play much poker. You never want to give away information.

Quote: minnesotajoe

You can be so concerned about two pair or such, that you didn't see a four-flush or a backdoor-straight. Many consider Phil Ivey the best poker player right now. He mucked a winning flush... all he had to do was table his hand.

Ivey's mistake was NOT mucking his hand instead of tabling it. His mistake was not double-checking before mucking.


Edit:

If the player that mucked in the original post had instead tabled his hand, the dealer would have (or at least should have) announced what it was, then turned it over into the muck. But if nobody pointed out the dealer's mistake, he still would have lost.

Keep in mind this was the dealer's mistake, not the player's.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
slyther
slyther
  • Threads: 13
  • Posts: 691
Joined: Feb 1, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 10:23:24 AM permalink
This.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Were the cards mucked, or were they mixed into the muck?

According to Robert's Rules of Poker (Google it), if the cards can be easily retrieved, they should be. If they are not easily retrieved, then, sorry.

Note that some card rooms have different rules, and even separate rules for cash and tourneys.

In some cases, the eye-witness testimony of other players can also be considered.



HOWEVER, in NO CASE, should the emotional aspect of a player's history be the deciding factor.

Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:25:53 AM permalink
Quote: Ayecarumba

If the hand could not be retrieved, it was still within his discretion to award the pot to the player who mucked.



But doing so would open a whole other can of worms. Awarding a pot to a player without cards is an extreme ruling. Such a ruling would open the Card Room Supervisor to accusations of collusion (especially if he ruled in favour of a regular player). It would also go against the common ruling of two cards needing to be shown to claim a pot.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:30:03 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear

Generally, they will NOT be the top two. The cards tend to be thrown onto the table towards the muck. If the dealer swept them into the muck, they could be anywhere and the hand is dead. However, if the dealer didn't touch them, or if he only swept them part way, where they could have been easily identified, and then they are live.



Standard company rules state when the cards are mucked the hand is dead. Doesnt matter if they are retrievable or not.


Quote: DJTeddyBear

The flip side of that argument is that the dealer is supposed to be experienced enough to not make that kind of mistake.



Us dealers are human and prone to errors same as everyone else. The actual guidelines we have state that players are responsible for thier own hands, and cards speak.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
Ayecarumba
Ayecarumba
  • Threads: 236
  • Posts: 6763
Joined: Nov 17, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:31:49 AM permalink
Quote: Croupier

But doing so would open a whole other can of worms. Awarding a pot to a player without cards is an extreme ruling. Such a ruling would open the Card Room Supervisor to accusations of collusion (especially if he ruled in favour of a regular player). It would also go against the common ruling of two cards needing to be shown to claim a pot.



Agree, this was extreme, but it was the TD's effort to correct a dealer error. The TD was within his rights and responsibilities to make the call.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication - Leonardo da Vinci
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:34:26 AM permalink
Quote: Ayecarumba

Agree, this was extreme, but it was the TD's effort to correct a dealer error. The TD was within his rights and responsibilities to make the call.



I agree with the rights and responsibilities, but there is just no way I can agree with the call.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
Lucyjr
Lucyjr
  • Threads: 0
  • Posts: 32
Joined: May 25, 2010
January 24th, 2011 at 10:55:53 AM permalink
Dealer error caught on tape at WSOP. Approx 150 players left at this point IIRC. Fair ruling IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dx47VMC0c0

As for the original post here, the TD made a terrible decision.
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 10992
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 10:57:08 AM permalink
Quote: Croupier

Quote: Ayecarumba

If the hand could not be retrieved, it was still within his discretion to award the pot to the player who mucked.

But doing so would open a whole other can of worms. Awarding a pot to a player without cards is an extreme ruling. Such a ruling would open the Card Room Supervisor to accusations of collusion (especially if he ruled in favour of a regular player).

"Whole other can of worms" is putting it mildly.

If that happened when I was at the table - even if I wasn't in the hand - I'd call gaming control (or whatever the governing agency is).


Quote: Croupier

It would also go against the common ruling of two cards needing to be shown to claim a pot.

Showing both cards to be awared a pot at a called showdown is a common rule. It is sometimes ignored in a cash game, but never in a tournament.




Quote: Croupier

Standard company rules state when the cards are mucked the hand is dead. Doesnt matter if they are retrievable or not.

Although it contradicts Robert's Rules, there IS a rule. That being the case, why was the rule ignored?


Quote: Croupier

Quote: DJTeddyBear

The flip side of that argument is that the dealer is supposed to be experienced enough to not make that kind of mistake.

Us dealers are human and prone to errors same as everyone else. The actual guidelines we have state that players are responsible for thier own hands, and cards speak.

Yes, dealers make mistakes too. Please forgive me if it seemed like I was assigning blame to the dealer.

My point was in response to a comment that the player should know the rules.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
DJTeddyBear
DJTeddyBear
  • Threads: 207
  • Posts: 10992
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 11:09:58 AM permalink
Quote: Lucyjr

Dealer error caught on tape at WSOP. Approx 150 players left at this point IIRC. Fair ruling IMO. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dx47VMC0c0.

Big mistake by the dealer, but an equally big mistake by the player. As was mentioned in the commentary, players need to protect their cards.

What was not mentioned is how important that is particularly for players in the seats on either side of the dealer. You will hear comments about it at any table where the player in either of those seats is not using a protector.
I invented a few casino games. Info: http://www.DaveMillerGaming.com/ ————————————————————————————————————— Superstitions are silly, childish, irrational rituals, born out of fear of the unknown. But how much does it cost to knock on wood? 😁
Croupier
Croupier
  • Threads: 58
  • Posts: 1258
Joined: Nov 15, 2009
January 24th, 2011 at 11:34:31 AM permalink
Quote: DJTeddyBear


Although it contradicts Robert's Rules, there IS a rule. That being the case, why was the rule ignored?



Pass. That is what makes it such a shocking decision.


Quote: DJTeddyBear

Yes, dealers make mistakes too. Please forgive me if it seemed like I was assigning blame to the dealer.



Not at all, I missed of a bit of my point. I also meant to say thatall players are encouraged to read the board, as dealers are only provided as a courtesy to facilitate the speed and consitency of the game, according to company guidelines - not strict rules.
[This space is intentionally left blank]
  • Jump to: