This Never Happened to Me Before - Ruling - Page 4

LiveInPeace · #31 09-10-2007, 07:05 PM

>>>>There is a rule against chatting with your friend not at the table and slowing the game down and not paying attention to your action.

Reference/link please?

Edge34 · #32 09-10-2007, 07:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
>>>>>There is soemthing you seem to be missing here. The Player didn't muck his cards. He gave them to the dealer after the dealer pushed the pot.

And the practical difference is what exactly? The cards end up in the muck. The ruling difference is what exactly? I know of no rules that distinguish giving the cards to the dealer to be mucked, or mucking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, please consider listening to all those who have been playing live and posting on these forums for years. Significant action had happened. The difference is that SB can't just sit there and hide his cards and talk to his friend without paying attention to the game and use that to his advantage.

SB kept his cards from being visible to everyone, including the dealer - who was seated right next to him. He should have protected his action instead of worrying about the gossip. Asking for the full amount including OP's raise is a lame angle shot.

Edge34 · #33 09-10-2007, 07:10 PM

[ QUOTE ]
>>>>There is a rule against chatting with your friend not at the table and slowing the game down and not paying attention to your action.

Reference/link please?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. I'll humor you, but you're still wrong. Take this section of protecting your action somewhat loosely, since there weren't 3 players to act behind the SB. Or Google "Robert's Rules of Poker". Or go play live and ask a floorman. They're the ones in the suits, so you'll know who they are. The first time in a casino can be intimidating, I hope that helps.

"11. To retain the right to act, a player must stop the action by calling "time" (or an equivalent word). Failure to stop the action before three or more players have acted behind you may cause you to lose the right to act. You cannot forfeit your right to act if any player in front of you has not acted, only if you fail to act when it legally becomes your turn. Therefore, if you wait for someone whose turn comes before you, and three or more players act behind you, this still does not hinder your right to act."

Three or more players is what is now termed "significant action". I'd call the shipping of the pot because you hid your cards and were too damn busy talking significant.

LiveInPeace · #34 09-10-2007, 07:12 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Had I mucked my hand as soon as I saw the bb fold (assuming I was the only one left), I would wholeheartedly agree with you. Seat 10 gets the blinds AND my raise.

But what I learned from posting this, is that the dealer awarding me the pot makes all the difference in the world. Seat 10 must speak up BEFORE the pot is shipped!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? The dealer makes yet another mistake and this should work in *your* favor, not SB? This kind of ruling just invites collusion and cheating between a player and dealer. The dealer could be shipping a person early pots once a night (missing players "inadvertendly" because they were talking/half-hding cards/insert excuse of choice) and the player slipping him a few bucks outside for the benefit.

AngusThermopyle · #35 09-10-2007, 07:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
>>>>There is a rule against chatting with your friend not at the table and slowing the game down and not paying attention to your action.

Reference/link please?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you play at all in a cardroom/casino? You really come across as someone who has less than 40 hours total experience in a B&M.

LiveInPeace · #36 09-10-2007, 07:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
>>>>>There is soemthing you seem to be missing here. The Player didn't muck his cards. He gave them to the dealer after the dealer pushed the pot.

And the practical difference is what exactly? The cards end up in the muck. The ruling difference is what exactly? I know of no rules that distinguish giving the cards to the dealer to be mucked, or mucking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Once again, please consider listening to all those who have been playing live and posting on these forums for years. Significant action had happened. The difference is that SB can't just sit there and hide his cards and talk to his friend without paying attention to the game and use that to his advantage.

SB kept his cards from being visible to everyone, including the dealer - who was seated right next to him. He should have protected his action instead of worrying about the gossip. Asking for the full amount including OP's raise is a lame angle shot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd agree with you that it was an angle shot if we knew it was deliberate, but I see no indication from OP that it was.

LiveInPeace · #37 09-10-2007, 07:18 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
>>>>There is a rule against chatting with your friend not at the table and slowing the game down and not paying attention to your action.

Reference/link please?

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. I'll humor you, but you're still wrong. Take this section of protecting your action somewhat loosely, since there weren't 3 players to act behind the SB. Or Google "Robert's Rules of Poker". Or go play live and ask a floorman. They're the ones in the suits, so you'll know who they are. The first time in a casino can be intimidating, I hope that helps.

"11. To retain the right to act, a player must stop the action by calling "time" (or an equivalent word). Failure to stop the action before three or more players have acted behind you may cause you to lose the right to act. You cannot forfeit your right to act if any player in front of you has not acted, only if you fail to act when it legally becomes your turn. Therefore, if you wait for someone whose turn comes before you, and three or more players act behind you, this still does not hinder your right to act."

Three or more players is what is now termed "significant action". I'd call the shipping of the pot because you hid your cards and were too damn busy talking significant.

[/ QUOTE ]

I appreciate you getting the rule. That's interesting. However it doesnt' apply to this situation as you noted yourself, not 3/player significant action. "Action" refers to check/call/raise etc. Not talking, or even awarding the pot as far as I can tell.

psandman · #38 09-10-2007, 07:19 PM

[ QUOTE ]
>>>>>There is soemthing you seem to be missing here. The Player didn't muck his cards. He gave them to the dealer after the dealer pushed the pot.

And the practical difference is what exactly? The cards end up in the muck. The ruling difference is what exactly? I know of no rules that distinguish giving the cards to the dealer to be mucked, or mucking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you don't you've made that obvious.

To fold or muck your hand is to relinquish your claim to the pot.

To give the cards to the dealer in exchange for the pot does not relinquish your claim for the pot obviously.

LiveInPeace · #39 09-10-2007, 07:19 PM

Additionally that rule only says "may", which means probably that it's still at floor's discretion whether player loses the right to act. I still say that SB has not done enough wrong to warrant losing the right to act, and that dealer's mistake should not cost SB the right to act.

LiveInPeace · #40 09-10-2007, 07:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
>>>>>There is soemthing you seem to be missing here. The Player didn't muck his cards. He gave them to the dealer after the dealer pushed the pot.

And the practical difference is what exactly? The cards end up in the muck. The ruling difference is what exactly? I know of no rules that distinguish giving the cards to the dealer to be mucked, or mucking them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Of course you don't you've made that obvious.

To fold or muck your hand is to relinquish your claim to the pot.

To give the cards to the dealer in exchange for the pot does not relinquish your claim for the pot obviously.

[/ QUOTE ]

If a player gives their cards to the dealer in exchange for the pot when they have no right to make that exchange (since someone else still has cards), then they are both in violation much more so than SB in my opinion.