Two CallTheFloor Events in One Tourney

bav · #1 03-22-2006, 09:33 AM

Sahara 11pm tourney and it's getting near the money. Shortstack goes all-in with KJ and gets called by AQs who has her covered. Cards are flipped face up, the board is dealt and a J comes up. Guy with AQs flips 'em face down after the river is dealt with a "that sucks" comment. Only turns out he had a flush. Oh... fine, turn the cards back face up. Only the lady is now outraged! Nononooooo! He mucked his cards! Give me my pot! HE MUCKED! CALL THE FLOOR! Floor comes over and once he gets the whole story instantly makes the obvious and correct call--soon as the river card was dealt the hand was done and turning the winning cards over at the end doesn't change that (even if the cards had been tossed into the muck it wouldn't have changed the outcome, but in this case they were just turned face down in front of the player). Lady (and at this point using the term "lady" is stretching things a bit) let fly a "THIS IS BULLSH..!" and stormed out.

That wasn't as interesting as the earlier event. As they were combining down to two tables, a player came over and started to sit in the 10-seat. Cards were dealt to him as he was still moving his chips over and sitting down. But the person in the 1-seat didn't see that a new player was coming in, so soon as the 9-seat acted, the 1-seat folded as did the 2-seat, 3-seat, 4-seat, 5-seat, 6-seat. About this time the 10-seat guy gets seated, looks at his cards, and puts out a large raise. The big blind in the 8-seat throws a fit, claiming it's totally unfair for the 10-seat to have the knowledge that all the subsequent players are folding and use that to decide to raise. He's right. 10-seat claims it ain't his fault. He's right, too--he wasn't even in his seat as all this is happening so it's not like he had the opportunity to stop the action. The floor got called but before he could actually make a ruling the raiser in the 10-seat with obvious hard feelings gave in and agreed to just chop it with the BB and take back their respective bets. Button didn't move and it was redealt. Which in my book was unfair to the rest of the table as well as to the raiser...the big blind was allowed a do-over when he was obviously holding rags. But I don't see any way to "fix" this such that it isn't unfair to someone. Floor said, had they allowed him to rule, that he woulda let the raise stand.

RR · #2 03-22-2006, 10:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Floor said, had they allowed him to rule, that he woulda let the raise stand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This ruling would have been incorrect. Also allowing the players to work it out in a tournament is wrong as the other players are impacted.

bav · #3 03-22-2006, 01:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Floor said, had they allowed him to rule, that he woulda let the raise stand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This ruling would have been incorrect. Also allowing the players to work it out in a tournament is wrong as the other players are impacted.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what is the correct ruling? Punishing the guy who was just moving in to the seat is wrong. Punishing the blind by letting the new guy raise with knowledge that it'll be heads-up is wrong. Calling it a do-over is wrong. I ain't got it figured out how you fix this without screwing somebody.

psandman · #4 03-22-2006, 06:37 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Floor said, had they allowed him to rule, that he woulda let the raise stand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This ruling would have been incorrect. Also allowing the players to work it out in a tournament is wrong as the other players are impacted.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what is the correct ruling? Punishing the guy who was just moving in to the seat is wrong. Punishing the blind by letting the new guy raise with knowledge that it'll be heads-up is wrong. Calling it a do-over is wrong. I ain't got it figured out how you fix this without screwing somebody.

[/ QUOTE ]

Players miss hands all the time while transfering tables, I really don't think it rises to the level of "punishing" to simply muck that players hand because he wasn't at the table when it was his turn to act.

Patrick del Poker Grande · #5 03-22-2006, 11:17 AM

Situation #2 is why I like the rule (in tournaments) that if you're not seated when the button gets his second card, your hand is dead. Done. Easy.

RR · #6 03-22-2006, 11:23 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Situation #2 is why I like the rule (in tournaments) that if you're not seated when the button gets his second card, your hand is dead. Done. Easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

This rule is generally not applied when the floor says "deal in the big blind, I am bringing you a player"

Spook · #7 03-22-2006, 02:00 PM

If a player doesn't protect his action on a later round, he forfits his right to bet.
Is there a rule for when there is already an uncalled bet infront of him?

psandman · #8 03-22-2006, 02:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Situation #2 is why I like the rule (in tournaments) that if you're not seated when the button gets his second card, your hand is dead. Done. Easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

This rule is generally not applied when the floor says "deal in the big blind, I am bringing you a player"

[/ QUOTE ]

According to OP the Floor was not involved in this . . . The Player had "started to sit down" .

The Player was not the Big Blind.

Those two factors make this a different situation than when the floor comes over and says "deal in the big blind, I am bringing you a player"

RR · #9 03-23-2006, 12:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Situation #2 is why I like the rule (in tournaments) that if you're not seated when the button gets his second card, your hand is dead. Done. Easy.

[/ QUOTE ]

This rule is generally not applied when the floor says "deal in the big blind, I am bringing you a player"

[/ QUOTE ]

According to OP the Floor was not involved in this . . . The Player had "started to sit down" .

The Player was not the Big Blind.

Those two factors make this a different situation than when the floor comes over and says "deal in the big blind, I am bringing you a player"

[/ QUOTE ]

I was in a hurry when I responded, but from the OP

[ QUOTE ]
As they were combining down to two tables, a player came over and started to sit in the 10-seat. Cards were dealt to him as he was still moving his chips over and sitting down.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no way this player loses his hand by not being in his seat, he was in the process of moving from another table, if he is dealt in before he arrives at the table the action shoudl wait for him to arrive. If he is not yet to the table he really shouldn't be dealt in, but once he is dealt in he has the right to act on his hand. This is not the situation TDA has in mind when someoen leaves the table and needs to be back at the table.

psandman · #10 03-23-2006, 02:02 AM

I envisioned the scenario a bit differently but on rereading I suspect I was incorrect about what was happening. I envisioned the guy shuffling over setting down some chips and the dealer starts dealing to him and he wanders off (without a word) to go get either the rest of his chips, his jacket, his drink or whatever and returns to the table has the player in seat six is folding his hand.

Now that I reread it, it doesn't appear that he went anywhere, but was just distracted from the game maybe standing next to his chair but physically there doing his thing.

However that being the case the player being present at the table has to have some responsibility for protecting his action. So this guy is there at the table and six players act behind him and he doesn't say a word. Now I understand that players can muck their hands pretty quickly, but 6 players all mucking thier hands is a lot of action happening behind this guy.