Another "who gets kicked in the nutz"

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
New guy gets a kick in the nuts but with kicker must wear soft fuzzy bunny slippers to cushion the blow

[/ QUOTE ]

Very well said. I was going to say everybody, just for the sake of completeness, but this is better. OP is ok too, cards speak and anyone can point that out no prob, esp if it prevents an angle shot.

Al

[Bulldog]

How anybody voted in this poll without voting for the OP (among others) is beyond me. ONE PLAYER TO A HAND. If some guy doesn't want to turn up his hand, that's up to him. Stay out of it. An example:

Recently while playing 1/2 NL, I saw two guys get all in on a flop of JT8. About $375 in the middle. Turn A, river 8. Raiser at the far end of the table shows JT for JJTTA. Caller next to me picks up his cards shaking his head in disgust, high enough for me to easily see his KK for KK88A, the best hand. He doesn't table his hand or even reveal it to anyone else. Then he mucks. That was his choice.

[Rottersod]

Jesus, friggin christo! One player to a hand. OP gets a full KITN for getting involved when he's not in the hand AND the hands haven't been tabled (and BOTH cards have to be up for the hand to be official). Stay out of other players pots. This is no different from telling a player that he will chop the pot by playing the board if he just tables his cards.

[chucky]

Big difference. In your story the guy with kk mucks the hand without showing cards to the table. Yes you could see it, but the table couldnt. In the OP's story the guy turned over a card to show the table. It should not have been a muck.

[steamboatin]

One player to a hand doesn't apply at the showdown, cards speak. The villian only turned over one card so how can the new guy be penalized for doing the same?

[DrewOnTilt]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op is fine because this is a showdown and the action is over.

[/ QUOTE ]

No this is the wrong reason. A player may not tell another player to table his hand just because it is showdown. However OP doesn't get a kick in the nuts here because he didn't speak until it was clear that the player was trying to table his hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

No sir. It is a showdown, and the "one player to a hand" rule no longer applies.

[DeuceHigh80]

Related situation at another Indiana casino during a tourney last thursday (Belterra). Jack high board, two people to the showdown, first guy tables a jack with a small kicker. Second guy has a jack with a higher kicker. He casually tosses his hand towards the center of the table -- the jack lands face up but his second card catches on edge and almost lands face down. Neither card was close to the muck or any other cards.

The dealer awarded the pot to the second guy but warned him that if one had landed face down then the hand would be immediately dead. He was not allowed to turn over cards on behalf of a player and the player was not allowed to reach in and properly table the hand himself.

It was almost like the dealer was extending the "magic" muck to the betting line and once cards came across they were dead unless both were face up.

I didn't think to question the floor while I was down there unfortunately. Has anyone else run into this rule at Belterra?

[DrewOnTilt]

That dealer deserves a swift kick in the nuts, for sure. The common-sense rule is that the pot should be awarded to the player with the best hand whenever possible, and that this rule overrides other rules whenever there is a conflict. In other words, if the cards are easily identifiable, and there is reasonable doubt that the player intended to muck, then the hand is live.

[youtalkfunny]

[ QUOTE ]
How anybody voted in this poll without voting for the OP (among others) is beyond me. ONE PLAYER TO A HAND. If some guy doesn't want to turn up his hand, that's up to him. Stay out of it. An example:

Recently while playing 1/2 NL, I saw two guys get all in on a flop of JT8. About $375 in the middle. Turn A, river 8. Raiser at the far end of the table shows JT for JJTTA. Caller next to me picks up his cards shaking his head in disgust, high enough for me to easily see his KK for KK88A, the best hand. He doesn't table his hand or even reveal it to anyone else. Then he mucks. That was his choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't see the differences between your story and the OP?

In the OP, the new player was TRYING to turn up his cards. One landed face-down. The dealer reached for the cards. The new guy did not try to stop the dealer. It should be obvious that the new guy didn't know that cards need to be protected from the dealer--he almost certainly assumed the dealer was going to turn the hand up for him. The OP spoke up to disabuse the newb of that notion.

Yes, technically, it could be interpreted as a violation of "one player to a hand". But only technically. Clearly, the OP was concerned with procedure, and not the "play" of the hand.

Bottom line: If newb wasn't trying to table his hand, and was trying to throw it in face-down, I'm quite confident OP would've kept his mouth shut, just like you did in your story, for the same reasons. Those reasons did not apply in this case.

[Bogeysave]

Similar story....playing 1/2 NL last night two guys go all in with a straight each using one card from their hand for a tied pot. They both have tabled the hand. Dealer grabs one players cards, turns them face down puts in the muck and starts to push the pot to the other player without chopping it up. The table almost collectively is trying to get out a "wait" (including the guy the pot is being pushed to) when the dealer realizes his mistake. Dealer calls over the floor and explains what happens.

Floor asks if anyone else at the table can verify which we all do including the guy the pot is being pushed to. The floor person then tells the mucked card guy he is responsible for protecting his hand! He had already tabled the winning hand what the hell is he suppose to protect?