Re: Yet another Floor Decision question (the magic muck)
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ah, another situation where a dealer didn't quickly and irretrievably muck a hand.
[/ QUOTE ]
Both hands were tossed toward the muck. I guess you feel the dealer should have "irretrievably mucked" both.
Then who gets the side pot?
[/ QUOTE ]
I knew someone would ask that! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
Put it this way: the first hand that hits the muck gets mucked. That leaves ... well ... only one hand left that can claim the pot! The one that hasn't been mucked yet!
Is this ruling getting a bit technical? Yeah. Does it suck, even a little bit? Yeah. Thing is though, I believe that chopping pots sucks more, as it set dangerous precedents, especially in tournaments.
I'm sure there will be plenty of people out there who would argue that chopping a pot in this instance would, in fact, suck less. That's cool; it's a perfectly valid opinion. What that illustrates is that some situations will arise where there are no perfect rulings. The key is to be able to make the least imperfect one. I'm sure the floorman (in the OP) believed that was what he was doing.
|