card on the floor
 

the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

Re: card on the floor
 

[ QUOTE ]
the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

[/ QUOTE ]

the floor ruled correctly.

Re: card on the floor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

[/ QUOTE ]

the floor ruled correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if the Js didn't belong to that particular game? How about if it was from the alternate deck that's in the shuffler? I honestly don't know.

After the hand is over, the dealer should verify whether they are missing a Js.

Re: card on the floor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

[/ QUOTE ]

the floor ruled correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]
Even if the Js didn't belong to that particular game?

[/ QUOTE ]

That is precisely why the floor ruled correctly. They cannot determine mid-hand, therefore the correct procedure is to stop the hand.

Re: card on the floor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

[/ QUOTE ]

the floor ruled correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would unwind the action and give everyone back their money they had put in rather than having the 5 still in the hand to split the pot.

Re: card on the floor
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the game was on the turn allready, when one player saw a card on the floor. it was js. five players were in the pot, but pot was small, so the floor ruled, that they should split the pot. i think that Jack of spades should be considered as peace of paper, like burnd card.

[/ QUOTE ]

the floor ruled correctly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would unwind the action and give everyone back their money they had put in rather than having the 5 still in the hand to split the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

although i agree with you in principal with many rooms its a straight split the pot scenario. If thats how they conduct business then the ruling is correct of course. In the event the policy allows for the unwinding of the hand and the floor decided not to do this then I'd be first in line to say the floor was wrong.

Re: card on the floor
 

I need to get a few cards for up my sleeve when I am in trouble in a hand. I can shove back put my face in my hands, say OMG and "pick" a card up off the floor from next to a player beside me all in one motion. Chop!

Patty