iPod

[GiMac]

I agree with HB. The line on the table is there for a reason. Once cards have crossed the line, they are mucked and are not retrievable....

Not necessarily true. Only if they touch a chip or the muck are they dead, in most cardrooms in UK, whether there is a line on the table or not.

[HaworthBantam]

I always force the player to call the rest of the raise for the reason I quoted earlier.

I NEVER let people off when they"ve made a mistake. I"ve found that folk tend to absorb the rules better when mistakes are costly.  

[HaworthBantam]

I agree with HB. The line on the table is there for a reason. Once cards have crossed the line, they are mucked and are not retrievable....

Not necessarily true. Only if they touch a chip or the muck are they dead, in most cardrooms in UK, whether there is a line on the table or not.

And I"m not so sure that once the cards hit the muck are they declared dead, Gordon.

I"m sure I"ve seen an instance of winning cards being retrieved from the muck. Unfortunately I can"t remember who it involved or what the situation was. Perhaps somebody out there has a better memory than I....?

[GiMac]

My understanding of the rule is that if the chips pass the line without a verbal declaration, they"re in the pot and cannot be brought back. It"s then up to the player to Call the rest of the raise or Fold.

I"d be interested to hear if there is a written-in-stone rule.

There isn"t a written rule, however clause 1 of the TDA Rules state: "1 Floor People. Floor people are to consider the best interest of the game and fairness as the top priority in the decision-making process. Unusual circumstances can on occasion dictate that decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over the technical rules. The floor person's decision is final."


As this states the overriding rule in poker should be fairness and if it was quite obvious that the player"s intent was only to make up and not call a raise then, in the interests of fairness the chips should be returned and the player allowed to fold. However, if a verbal declaration is made it would still be binding. Oh don"t we just love the grey areas of poker, it"s what makes it great.  

[lukybugur]

... and what keep us talking to each other in between tournaments ...  

[HaworthBantam]

... and what keep us talking to each other in between tournaments ...  

Absolutely !!

I"d still like us to aim to colour in those grey areas though  

[GiMac]

I agree with HB. The line on the table is there for a reason. Once cards have crossed the line, they are mucked and are not retrievable....

Not necessarily true. Only if they touch a chip or the muck are they dead, in most cardrooms in UK, whether there is a line on the table or not.

And I"m not so sure that once the cards hit the muck are they declared dead, Gordon.

I"m sure I"ve seen an instance of winning cards being retrieved from the muck. Unfortunately I can"t remember who it involved or what the situation was. Perhaps somebody out there has a better memory than I....?

Retreiving cards from the muck is a big no, no in my book, after all the reason the rule is there is that once they have touched the muck, how can you be sure you are retrieving the correct cards? Although I can see a case for it if it was down to a showdown in a tournament to stop chip passing.

We had 2 cases in Newcastle recently, albeit in cash game, and the rulings were made on what the "intent " of the players were and not on the technical rules,  where hands are declared dead on touching the muck or pot.

First one guy calls a big bet on river. Initial raiser shows a house and guy loses temper saying "Dam, I knew you had a house, I just got a flush" and threw his cards into the muck. As they hit the muck they flipped and exposed that he actually had a Royal Flush!!!!! The ruling was that his intention was to muck and since the cards had been mucked, albeit ending face up, he had conceded the pot.

Second one. Guy limps early position. Button raises. Limper pushes all in. Button (who was sitting next to dealer) Calls. Limper shows 77 and button throws over AQ. As cards hit table the Queen "bounced" and touched the muck. The dealer dealt flop turn and river. First card being an A which held up. Dealer then announced the AQ hand as dead because it had touched the muck. The ruling was that the obvious intent of the button wasnt to muck his cards, as the all in and call had happened pre-flop.

If common sense and fairness is applied to rulings, which I think we all would like applied to us if it happened to us, then nobody can complain really. Can they?

[AMRN]

If common sense and fairness is applied to rulings, which I think we all would like applied to us if it happened to us, then nobody can complain really. Can they?

But then we wouldn"t be acting like true Brits would we!!

[HaworthBantam]

Retreiving cards from the muck is a big no, no in my book, after all the reason the rule is there is that once they have touched the muck, how can you be sure you are retrieving the correct cards? Although I can see a case for it if it was down to a showdown in a tournament to stop chip passing.

I"d have to agree with you.

We had 2 cases in Newcastle recently, albeit in cash game, and the rulings were made on what the "intent " of the players were and not on the technical rules,  where hands are declared dead on touching the muck or pot.

First one guy calls a big bet on river. Initial raiser shows a house and guy loses temper saying "Dam, I knew you had a house, I just got a flush" and threw his cards into the muck. As they hit the muck they flipped and exposed that he actually had a Royal Flush!!!!! The ruling was that his intention was to muck and since the cards had been mucked, albeit ending face up, he had conceded the pot.

Second one. Guy limps early position. Button raises. Limper pushes all in. Button (who was sitting next to dealer) Calls. Limper shows 77 and button throws over AQ. As cards hit table the Queen "bounced" and touched the muck. The dealer dealt flop turn and river. First card being an A which held up. Dealer then announced the AQ hand as dead because it had touched the muck. The ruling was that the obvious intent of the button wasnt to muck his cards, as the all in and call had happened pre-flop.

The second one is correct, you can"t muck a players cards when he"s called an all in, until the flop, turn and river are exposed and his hand is shown to be the losing hand.

Retrieved this from the APAT rules

 64.  Tournament venue dealers cannot kill a winning hand that was turned face up and was obviously the winning hand.

Although this doesn"t technically cover your first example......

[GiMac]

 64.  Tournament venue dealers cannot kill a winning hand that was turned face up and was obviously the winning hand.

Although this doesn"t technically cover your first example......
[/quote]

No it doesn"t. This rule is used when player turns over cards to claim pot and dealer then accidently mucks hand. The players intent in the first example was clearly to muck his cards, hence the ruling which I think was correct.

imagine waiting the 40,000 odd hands to get teh ultimate hand and then mucking it, lol.

[HaworthBantam]

 64.  Tournament venue dealers cannot kill a winning hand that was turned face up and was obviously the winning hand.

Although this doesn"t technically cover your first example......

No it doesn"t. This rule is used when player turns over cards to claim pot and dealer then accidently mucks hand. The players intent in the first example was clearly to muck his cards, hence the ruling which I think was correct.

imagine waiting the 40,000 odd hands to get teh ultimate hand and then mucking it, lol.
[/quote]

 

The only drawback I can think of to the ruling given in example one, is where collusion is going on, and in particular, chip dumping. I think this is why a number of events (including APAT, I believe) state that once all betting has been completed, all hands still live should be turned face up, before the winning hand is determined.

[Digger]

Wasn"t this thread about ipods?  

[AMRN]

Wasn"t this thread about ipods?  

Exactly!! So, what"s the ruling if your iPod crosses the line and touches the muck?

 

[GiMac]

The only drawback I can think of to the ruling given in example one, is where collusion is going on, and in particular, chip dumping. I think this is why a number of events (including APAT, I believe) state that once all betting has been completed, all hands still live should be turned face up, before the winning hand is determined.

Definitely agree, although to be fair the ruling was made in a cash game, which is a little different.

[GiMac]

Wasn"t this thread about ipods?  

Jeez, can"t even hijack a thread without the post police coming in and hassling you.