Majestic Star/Trump last night - Page 2

ChicagoJoe · #11 05-25-2006, 08:57 PM

Majestic Star's rule is both cards must be exposed at the showdown to win the pot. It was MP's choice not to do this during the showdown. I agree the dealer was fast but not wrong. He looked at a hand that the player did not want to show.

Lestat · #12 05-25-2006, 09:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Majestic Star's rule is both cards must be exposed at the showdown to win the pot. It was MP's choice not to do this during the showdown. I agree the dealer was fast but not wrong. He looked at a hand that the player did not want to show.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course the dealer is wrong! MP showed a ten out of turn, but that means NOTHING! After EP turned his hand up, MP's hand is still live and he has the option of showing. The dealer took away that option. This is black and white. The dealer was wrong and it's not even close.

ChicagoJoe · #13 05-26-2006, 01:58 AM

I am a regular in Majestic Star's no limit games. MP created his own problem by showing only one card during a showdown. There was no way he could win with one exposed card and the dealer mucked his hand. After a hand is mucked it is dead. The dealer is not required to make a player show his down card. This is Majestic Star poker room rules. If MP showed both his cards at the showdown this would of never of been a problem. With all this no limit on TV players are jumping into this game without any knowledge of the basics of casino poker. I have seen all kinds of strange plays since Trump started the no limit games.

SheridanCat · #14 05-26-2006, 02:47 AM

[ QUOTE ]
MP created his own problem by showing only one card during a showdown. There was no way he could win with one exposed card and the dealer mucked his hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

What is it you're not understanding here?

MP is not yet obligated to show a card. He can sit there and not show any cards as long at EP doesn't show. But, he decides to show a card. Fine, but as far as any proper rule is concerned, he's not required to have shown anything yet. EP then flips his cards up and shows that he lost. Before MP can flip is other card, and thus claim his rightful pot, the dealer mucks his hand.

We all agree that you must show both cards to win a pot - no one, I assure you, is disputing that. However, the dealer - in the event described - did not give MP time to show his second card.

If a dealer is allowed to arbitrarily begin shipping pots to players who don't deserve the pot just because he doesn't like the guy who won it, collusion between regulars and dealers will become the norm.

If I were MP, I'd complain to the poker room manager (who knows who that is these days) and submit a complaint to the Indiana Gaming Board. There's absolutely no reason to believe that the dealer didn't get his cut later from EP. Now, that probably didn't happen, but it sure could and the appearance of impropriety can really hurt a room.

Both the dealer and the floorman who backed him up should be reprimanded.

Regards,

T

ChicagoJoe · #15 05-26-2006, 05:13 AM

Cat your bring up very good points. In this case what the players and Majestic Star feel on the rules are two diffrent things. I agree the dealer was to fast mucking his hand. All the Chicago area poker rooms follow the same rule. If the dealer mucks your hand with nothing on it to protect it the hand is dead. I do not like this rule but it's the poker rooms rule.

Lestat · #16 05-26-2006, 09:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I am a regular in Majestic Star's no limit games. MP created his own problem by showing only one card during a showdown. There was no way he could win with one exposed card and the dealer mucked his hand. After a hand is mucked it is dead. The dealer is not required to make a player show his down card. This is Majestic Star poker room rules. If MP showed both his cards at the showdown this would of never of been a problem. With all this no limit on TV players are jumping into this game without any knowledge of the basics of casino poker. I have seen all kinds of strange plays since Trump started the no limit games.

[/ QUOTE ]

C'mon man.. I've seen you post on this forum often enough that you should know how a showdown works..

I don't care that MP showed a ten out of turn. It doesn't matter. He called EP's bet and EP has to show his hand FIRST! Now MP has the option of turning both his cards over to take the pot.

MP had his hand on the cards! That means it's protected!! The dealer does not go taking cards out from under people's HANDS and mucking them. That's just wrong, wrong, wrong.. There's no reason why MP's hand isn't still live.

I'm serious when I say I would've leaped over the table and broken that dealer's fingers if that's what I had to do to retreive my cards. That is still a live hand and it's MP's pot.

Lestat · #17 05-26-2006, 09:49 AM

<font color="blue">If the dealer mucks your hand with nothing on it to protect it the hand is dead. I do not like this rule but it's the poker rooms rule. </font>

Joe - The reason I'm making such a big deal out of arguing this point with you is this quote from the OP:

[ QUOTE ]
MP's cards are maybe 3 inches away from the rail with his finger protecting the cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

BobbyShaftoe · #18 05-26-2006, 09:56 AM

Did the player have a chip protecting his unexposed card?

edit: heh, same thought, you beat me to it.

SheridanCat · #19 05-26-2006, 11:36 AM

[ QUOTE ]
If the dealer mucks your hand with nothing on it to protect it the hand is dead. I do not like this rule but it's the poker rooms rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. However, it's very unusual for a dealer to go out of his way to muck a hand. Accidental muckings happen all the time, but this was deliberate and indefensible, in my opinion. Also, note that MP had been protecting his cards with is hands.

If dealers just start intentionally scooping unprotected cards they're going to be doing a lot of mucking for people. It's still no justification for the described actions.

Regards,

T