Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > General Poker Discussion > Brick and Mortar
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 06-26-2007, 02:36 PM
sonofstev sonofstev is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 106
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

You're right - I'd have shipped him the whole pot had it gone the other way, which it very well could have. At any rate, I finished up ($42) in that game and the victim was down something like $800 when I stood up. He kept rebuying for $100 each time and losing it in one circuit.

Yes, it was a great game! I'm sure the other players thought so too after my misread.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 06-26-2007, 09:17 PM
Photoc Photoc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: center of my own universe
Posts: 7,368
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

Here ya go, quoted from Robert's Rules:

[ QUOTE ]
2. Cards thrown into the muck may be ruled dead. However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved at management’s discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game. We will make an extra effort to rule a hand retrievable if it was folded as a result of false information given to the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

--and--

[ QUOTE ]
2. Cards speak (cards read for themselves). The dealer assists in reading hands, but players are responsible for holding onto their cards until the winner is declared. Although verbal declarations as to the contents of a hand are not binding, deliberately miscalling a hand with the intent of causing another player to discard a winning hand is unethical and may result in forfeiture of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ruling was 100% correct.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 06-26-2007, 09:56 PM
lmcjaho lmcjaho is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 241
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

[ QUOTE ]
Here ya go, quoted from Robert's Rules:

[ QUOTE ]
2. Cards thrown into the muck may be ruled dead. However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved at management’s discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game. We will make an extra effort to rule a hand retrievable if it was folded as a result of false information given to the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

--and--

[ QUOTE ]
2. Cards speak (cards read for themselves). The dealer assists in reading hands, but players are responsible for holding onto their cards until the winner is declared. Although verbal declarations as to the contents of a hand are not binding, deliberately miscalling a hand with the intent of causing another player to discard a winning hand is unethical and may result in forfeiture of the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ruling was 100% correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

Okay, so I bolded the pertinent parts in your quote from Robert's that gives the most headaches on this one Photoc.

On one hand it says DELIBERATELY miscalling and on the other it says MAY result in forfeiture - at no point is either of those statements concrete enough to say any floor ruling either way in this case is 100% correct unfortunately - ambiguity is the seed of dissent.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 06-26-2007, 10:07 PM
Photoc Photoc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: center of my own universe
Posts: 7,368
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

Floor is perfectly correct to rule in all fairness of the game and for the best interest of the players. If I had to make the decision, I would rule the same way. Cards are live if easily identifiable. Floor's job is to not screw someone out of a pot that is entitled to it and not to let someone who isn't the winner get the pot, which is in all fairness of the game. Best hand wins.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 06-27-2007, 01:23 AM
lmcjaho lmcjaho is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 241
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

[ QUOTE ]
Floor is perfectly correct to rule in all fairness of the game and for the best interest of the players. If I had to make the decision, I would rule the same way. Cards are live if easily identifiable. Floor's job is to not screw someone out of a pot that is entitled to it and not to let someone who isn't the winner get the pot, which is in all fairness of the game. Best hand wins.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am completely in agreement with you Photoc - but the rule you quoted doesn't quite say what you are saying it does, and some others have even gone so far as to imply that miscalling a hand is grounds for having the hand declared dead - what if the OP had miscalled his Straight but was in actuality still the best hand with A high? Are you advocating that he still loses the pot because he miscalled his hand?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 06-27-2007, 03:14 AM
Photoc Photoc is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: center of my own universe
Posts: 7,368
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

[quote Are you advocating that he still loses the pot because he miscalled his hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope, I advocate best hand wins at the showdown. No funny business, whether intentional or not.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-27-2007, 03:43 PM
rubixxcube rubixxcube is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Bubbling
Posts: 251
Default Re: Weird Red Rock ruling

I agree that the correct decision was made here however i have seen similar situations happen where players cards were buried in the muck. As a rule of thumb since i have seen many players misread their hands on numerous occasions, accidental or not i always hold onto my cards until they table the hand they say they have, its not tough to do and makes sure you don't lose a pot for early mucking.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.