"Un-mucking" a mucked hand

[hayduke]

Sounds as if there was no dispute that she did indeed have the 7s, and therefore had the winning hand. It’s unclear whether she properly tabled either of the cards.

It’s also unclear whether the player with the X high flush tabled both her cards.

Since no one at the table is disputing that the player showed a straight flush, I think it is clearly in the best interest of the game to award the pot to that player. (Along with a warning about protecting her hand.)

In my experience, most floor people at Foxwoods rule that the muck has magical hand-killing properties. Therefore, the odds are that if a floor had been called, the straight flush would have been ruled dead. On the other hand, Foxwoods does have some floor people who do not believe in magical mucks. I have seen them rule that a player who flashes the winning hand and unknowingly mucks it is still entitled to the pot in the best interest of the game. (I long ago gave up trying to find out what the room’s “official” rule, if any, is on this point.)