Was this ruling correct

[zuko33]

[ QUOTE ]
If player B tossed his cards forward, then his hand is dead. If, however, he just picked them up and then put them down, and it was at all ambigous as to his intent, then angler-shooter A openned his mouth too soon and the Player B's hand should still be live (if he turns it over).

[/ QUOTE ]

That's how the floor ruled. But I thought that as long as the cards were not in the muck and are easily identifiable then he should have been able to just turn up the cards.

I know the player made a stupid move in not turning up his cards but it still just seems like a bad call to me and i was just wondering if this was a standard rule.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
If player B tossed his cards forward, then his hand is dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

For this part to be true his opponent would have to have been damaged by the action. Or be playing in a room where they are unfamiliar with poker (which I am find more and more common, I moved to a new market this spring and almost everyday I have someone tell me that I'm wrong because that isn't what they do down the street or isn't what the guy last fall did).

[pfapfap]

Am I the only person who feels this whole showdown one player to a hand stuff is nonsense? What's wrong with a neighbor saying, "oh you have a flush, show your hand"? Or, "the board plays, turn your cards up"? What's wrong with allowing all valid hands to claim the pot, regardless of where cards were thrown? It seems to me that this more than anything allows for angle-shooting and goes against the spirit of the game.

Or maybe I've been playing too much online, where all hands are protected regardless if the players know what they have. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of B&M play, but this type of situation seems weird to me. I get the feeling the rules arose from ye olden days and have been mutated by nits, completely inappropriate for modern poker.

You have your chances to get better hands to fold on all streets. At showdown, the best hand should win. Period.

Commence flaming.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only person who feels this whole showdown one player to a hand stuff is nonsense? What's wrong with a neighbor saying, "oh you have a flush, show your hand"?

[/ QUOTE ]

A player has the right to conceal information (the contents of his hand). If he is going to exercise this right he should not also have the benefit of someone looking over his shoulder. Violating one player to a hand could also create a very unfair situation. If a bad player flashed their cards everyone would tell them to show it because they want them to have the chips whereas a stronger player (if a stronger player that can't read his hand exists) would not this protection because it woudl be harder to get the chips from him. This is just off the top of my head, I haven't given any real thought to why we need one player to a hand.

[Wongboy]

Agree with RR. Also, it might be difficult to draw a real clear line on this one. If you say that it is OK to tell a player that they should show their hand because they hold the nuts, then can I also tell them to show their hand when I am 90% sure that they have the best hand (maybe because they hold bottom pair and I'm almost certain their opponent has a missed draw)?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for a rule that requires all hands to be shown at showdown. But if you don't do this, then I think you need to allow for the possibility that someone might muck the winning hand. After all, a player can always protect themself by tabling their hand every time.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

Typically until a player pushes them forward face down and the dealer takes the cards and mucks them, a hand is still quite live. Cards that haven't been properly mucked/killed by the dealer can still be retrieved by their owners and turned up live. Did he attempt to take his cards back when the other guy claimed they were mucked?

As for the ruling, I hate it. The floor let jerkoffsky make a blatant angle shot, then awarded the pot to (presumably) the worst hand. The rules on whether a hand is mucked were probably ignored as well, but I'm not sure what specific rules might be in place in that room.

The floor should always be looking to award the pot to the best hand. Only under the most dire circumstances should the best hand be killed and the worst hand given the pot.

Remember, the floor can make any ruling they deem to be in the interest of fairness and maintaining the integrity of the game, even if strict interpretation of the rules might indicate another ruling. Regardless of what the room's rules are, this is one of those times. Letting such a blatant angle shot succeed is a travesty.

Al

[andyfox]

If he wasn't holding them in his hand(s), he couldn't have put them on the table, they would already have been on the table. I assume you mean he pushed them forward.

I've seen many situations where a player tables a hand and his opponent pushes his cards forward a bit thinking that the tabler has a better hand than he actually has. He then sees that, wait a minute, he doesn't have two clubs for a flush, he has a club and a spade, and then picks up and shows his cards. If the cards are clearly retrievable, I've never seen the player denied the right to show them.

In this case, if the second player was clearly a novice to casino poker, he should have been given the benefit of the doubt and allowed to show his hand. Bad decision by the floor.

[Ol Dirty Bastard]

Was Player A a big guy with a big dark beard? I think I was at an adjacent table to this.

-ODB

[Veil]

This is very simple. As a dealer, the number one rule in this situation is that to be eligible to win a pot you simply must show your cards. There can never be a case when there is no bet at the final street, where both (or all) players are allowed to muck. Face up cards at the river is an indication of a check unless the player explicitly (puzzling behavior) motions to concede the pot (rules may differ depending on the casino of course). However, as soon as player B motions to muck, it's over. It is Player A's pot, with absolute no question - as long as the face down cards were at least slightly moved towards the betting line. You simply cannot have people pretending to muck their cards and then say "Oh I was only kidding," etc.