Need help with ruling

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I guess the real question is can you invoke the IWTSTH rule before the pot has been awarded by the dealer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well if you don't your not going to have any cards to invoke it on because all the losing cards will be mixed into the muck before the pot is pushed.

If you want to invoke IWTSTH you better do it before the dealer mucks them (oddly enough I often have to explain this to players -- "Yes I heard you , you want to see those cards. But you see you didn't say that until I had already mixed those cards into the muck. now how do you propose that I show you those cards?").

[/ QUOTE ]
I have only invoked this rule once (guy did it to me twice) and that was at Caesers. It was a three way pot and this guy had gone all-in on the flop. At the river, he mucked before the other players and I asked the dealer to see his hand. He took the two cards and put them beside the muck. He then sorted out the pot between the other two players, mucked their cards pushed the pot to a player and then showed the hand.

I am fairly certain that when I asked to see his hand, it could be considered live but after the pot was awarded to the player, his cards are then dead.

Am I getting this correct or not?

So when that first player mucked, if I had just reached out and flipped his cards over instead of asking the dealer and gone through the process I described above, does that mean his cards are now live again and he can win the pot?

And if this is true, then I suppose I could sit beside a fish and turn his hand over on the river every time just in case he won one of those pots. I want the money to stay with the fish.

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is that at the time you said IWTSTH if the player had immediately grabbed back his cards and flipped them before the dealer got them to muck then they would have been live. Your saying IWTSTH does not kill a hand.

Now the procedure the dealer used here was not the procedur prefer, and part of the reason that is the case is that it creates e issue of uncertainty.

When a player tosses his hand and another player (not the putative winner) asks to see it I will immediately grab it in touch it to the muck (ceremonially denoting it was killed) and then flip it over to be seen and then flip it back over and mix it into the muck.

By holding it aside till after the pot is pushed you create the problem of uncertainty as to when the hand got killed (which is the issue you are concerned about) and also it creates a second problem. And that is if for some reason a floor person rules that hand live and it turns out to be a winner now the pot has already been pushed and we have a much bigger problem.

As to your flipping the hand ove abbsolutely believe the hand is live, simply because you cut off the players opportunity to do it himself. But you miss the other point. If you do this you are subject to penalty. And while the first penalty you get may simply be a warning, if as you say you do it everytime the player folds you will find yourself no longer permitted to play.

[/ QUOTE ]
Okay, I think the issue has boiled down to the window between a player releasing their hand face down and the dealer taking that folded hand and killing it.

And I believe you are talking about a player tossing their cards face down and forward and then (or at the same time) another player tables a hand that the previous player can beat. Then if they are faster than the dealer, they can grab their cards back and put them back into play because the dealer had not yet killed the hand. And I also believe you are stating that another player doing the flipping is same result for the player, his hand is live still.

That may be true in some places are even all places. Maybe some dealers are slow, maybe some players are lighting fast. I just don't like it and I don't like it a lot.

[SyrialKilla]

Poker has a saying..its one player per hand. It is the dealers fault for not absolute mucking the cards. All dealers should pull all face down cards immediately into the muck. This would stop this problem all together. Honestly, I would have had to call that hand DEAD. Two reasons, one being she thought she had lost, she folded her hand, she gave up her right to win that pot. EVen if you are able to retrieve and expose the cards, they are dead, even as winners. The second reason I would call her hand dead is because there cannot be a second person involved in the hand. I.e. her boyfriend was looking over her shoulder, saw her cards, saw they were winners. It is a players responsibility to know how to read poker hands and know the order in which they win. If she didn't know her hand was a winner it is dead. One player per hand. I couldn't really tell if you had the best or the second best hand from this post but I hope that you didn't loose too much money in this hand.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
Two reasons, one being she thought she had lost, she folded her hand, she gave up her right to win that pot. EVen if you are able to retrieve and expose the cards, they are dead

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats not the rule in many rooms. I have seen that rule used and don't really like it. Of course if that is the rule in your room then so be it, but understand that it is not the only rule.

[ QUOTE ]
The second reason I would call her hand dead is because there cannot be a second person involved in the hand.

[/ QUOTE ] So then as i understand it, if you are in a hand and there is a bet to you and I not being in the hand anymore say to you something like "Well you have to call your getting 20 to 1 on your money", or I say "Well I guess he has the flush" Your hand is immediately dead for violation of 1 player to a hand. That is basically what you are saying here.

[ QUOTE ]
If she didn't know her hand was a winner it is dead.

[/ QUOTE ] so then if I don't realize that my hand is the winner but I flip it face up, I still lose?

[bav]

A "gimme back my cards" happened last night at TI and the floor got it right (I think). NL1/3, three way to the river, $250 pot, board is Txxxx with three diamonds and the aggressor shows down KT for top pair, AT is shown for TPTK, and the third player just stares for 10 seconds and then pushes his cards forward. Simultaneously as the dealer is putting his hand on the cards, a person not in the hand says "nobody has a flush?" and instantly the third player says "WAIT!" and demands his cards back. The dealer is sitting there with his hand covering the two cards (still clearly identifiable and a solid 6" from the muck) as TPTK says "NO WAY!" Dealer says apologetically "once I touch the cards, they're dead, sir" and calls the floor. Floor comes over, listens, and explains "once he touches the cards, they're dead, AND especially since someone else spoke up and 'helped'--AT gets the pot."

The third player said he wasn't actually sure what he had, but wasn't sure he didn't have a flush. He claimed the dealer "grabbed the cards out of my hand" but nobody else saw that and the floor didn't buy it. It MAY have happened that he pushed the cards far forward and still had his fingers on them as the dealer pulled 'em in, but I'm pretty sure there was no "grab". I wasn't looking at the cards at that exact instant as I turned to glare at the guy who said "nobody has a flush?" That guy's excuse was "I know I'm not supposed to say anything, but, gee, I thought we were playing at an experienced table where everybody could read hands."

I'm not keen on the rule that once the dealer touches the cards they're dead.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not keen on the rule that once the dealer touches the cards they're dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have worked with people that believed such nonsense.

[Demonic1]

ok,BAV is 100% correct,this is an issue of one player to hand,when the boyfriend reached out and turned over HER cards this was a clear violation if that all important rule of poker. It would be the same as his verbally telling her(coaching) what to do in the hand, it is STRICTLY forben. I for one truely hope that this was a home game not a bonified poker room and two that you're not thinking of playing there again unless you have a full understanding with management of what took place. They very well may take steps to "make it right" based on the correct info.

[psandman]

This wouldn't be the first time that management in that room made a bad decision.


[ QUOTE ]
hat guy's excuse was "I know I'm not supposed to say anything, but, gee, I thought we were playing at an experienced table where everybody could read hands."

[/ QUOTE ]

every time I hear this I look at the player and say. If its so obvious what was the point of your saying it?

[bav]

TI dealers seemed a bit shocked that I thought it was an odd rule. I asked around a bit to verify it really was an official TI rule and there seemed absolutely no doubt about it. "The dealer is an extension of the muck--that's a Vegas standard" was one reply (something like that, anyway). Well I don't think it's a Vegas standard, but it apparently IS the rule at TI. And yes, I have heard the "extension of the muck" rule before, but I don't remember where, and no place I play regularly have I ever seen it invoked.

[psandman]

[ QUOTE ]
TI dealers seemed a bit shocked that I thought it was an odd rule. I asked around a bit to verify it really was an official TI rule and there seemed absolutely no doubt about it. "The dealer is an extension of the muck--that's a Vegas standard" was one reply (something like that, anyway). Well I don't think it's a Vegas standard, but it apparently IS the rule at TI. And yes, I have heard the "extension of the muck" rule before, but I don't remember where, and no place I play regularly have I ever seen it invoked.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the cards are in my hand and a player wants them back I hold them where they are and call the floor to let the floor decide. I have yet to have a floor person tell me not to give them back.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
TI dealers seemed a bit shocked that I thought it was an odd rule. I asked around a bit to verify it really was an official TI rule and there seemed absolutely no doubt about it. "The dealer is an extension of the muck--that's a Vegas standard" was one reply (something like that, anyway). Well I don't think it's a Vegas standard, but it apparently IS the rule at TI. And yes, I have heard the "extension of the muck" rule before, but I don't remember where, and no place I play regularly have I ever seen it invoked.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the cards are in my hand and a player wants them back I hold them where they are and call the floor to let the floor decide. I have yet to have a floor person tell me not to give them back.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the standard thing for the dealer to do and the standard floor decision.