Re: Yet another Floor Decision question (the magic muck)
[ QUOTE ]
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!
[/ QUOTE ]
You should shake this notion outta yer head. You keep coming back to the magical muck, and claiming that whatever card first touches it loses. That's just wrong.
Let's hypothesis. Let's say we're heads-up, I make a bet, and you toss your cards face down towards the dealer. Dealer pulls the cards close in but they never touch another card. I then fire my cards into the muck. By your logic, I would lose, because your cards are still on the table, but mine touched the muck first.
In OP's case, question 1 COULD be answered by "who folded first?" but NEVER what cards touched the muck first. I'd be ok with THAT decision if player 8 claimed "I saw seat 1 muck his hand, so I then tossed in my winner". Seat 8 can have the pot. (OP says in his story seat 1 tossed his cards in first.) But the floor ruling as he did claiming it was because Seat 1's cards touched the muck while Seat 8's did not is not good.
|