|
Title: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: JK on September 30, 2012, 03:18:57 AM Blinds 75/150. Player A makes it 300, Player B calls, Player C (on the button) makes it 600. Player A calls and Player B calls. Just before the flop is dealt Player C says to the dealer that he'd like a second card. He'd only been dealt one and had raised knowing this.
The dealer calls floor and its now on you. What do you do and why? Will post my opinion after a few replies Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: AndrewT on September 30, 2012, 03:22:40 AM Smash Player C's teeth straight out through the back of his head,
Not really interested what happens otherwise. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: jgcblack on September 30, 2012, 04:13:30 AM Kill his hand and let the other two play it out...?
He has no 'hand' he technically forfeits this hand..? Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: rfgqqabc on September 30, 2012, 04:13:57 AM Kill his hand and let the other two play it out...? He has no 'hand' he technically forfeits this hand..? This Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Cf on September 30, 2012, 10:15:42 AM Kill his hand and give him a penalty for doing this on purpose.
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: doubleup on September 30, 2012, 11:33:47 AM He's on the button so give him the poxy card and let the hand play out then Smash Player C's teeth straight out through the back of his head, Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Boba Fett on September 30, 2012, 12:56:47 PM How can his hand be dead?
It doesn't affect the deck at all to give him his 2nd card and play the hand out. He probably has an ace, maybe a king, tried to win it with 1 card, got called and is now sweating having a premium or junk Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: titaniumbean on September 30, 2012, 01:07:19 PM How can his hand be dead? It doesn't affect the deck at all to give him his 2nd card and play the hand out. He probably has an ace, maybe a king, tried to win it with 1 card, got called and is now sweating having a premium or junk he's knowingly played on without correcting the deal. punish him for being a complete twat kick in the nuts imo Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: mondatoo on September 30, 2012, 01:53:19 PM Sick levels imo, give him his card and a round of applause (once he wins the hand).
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: cambridgealex on September 30, 2012, 02:08:20 PM His hand is dead obv.
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Alverton on September 30, 2012, 02:10:39 PM Smash Player C's teeth straight out through the back of his head, Not really interested what happens otherwise. Kill his hand and let the other two play it out...? He has no 'hand' he technically forfeits this hand..? Kill his hand and give him a penalty for doing this on purpose. His hand is dead obv. All of this. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: dik9 on September 30, 2012, 02:41:01 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :)
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: WotRTheChances on September 30, 2012, 02:55:07 PM Player C clearly should have asked for another card when the action was on him.... and 3-bet as his 2nd card is being given to him (just to make it obvious he hasnt bothered looking at his 2nd card).
As is... search for the 2d in the deck and give it to him face-up, announcing 'play that f***er!'. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: titaniumbean on September 30, 2012, 03:08:02 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) if he takes it down pre is it all fun and games but if the hand continues he gets another card? doesn't seem right. kick him in the nuts over and over imo. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Young_gun on September 30, 2012, 03:55:43 PM Declare his hand dead and the player a see u next tuesday
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: bobAlike on September 30, 2012, 04:06:53 PM Surely the only person he has disadvantaged by this shit play is himself and as such he should be made to play every street win or lose.
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: doubleup on September 30, 2012, 04:31:19 PM On further consideration the hand must be dead, as he could potentially have been dealt two cards and concealed one. It would be obvious that he hadn't been dealt a card if he spoke up immediately. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: JK on September 30, 2012, 05:02:11 PM This was from PokeinEdinburgh's Facebook page (cheers fett :P).
Someone quoted this from Roberts Rules Quote 9. If you play a hand without looking at all of your cards, you assume the liability of having an irregular card or an improper joker. Your hand is declared dead if: (d) The hand does not contain the proper number of cards for that particular game (except at stud a hand missing the final card may be ruled live, and at lowball and draw high a hand with too few cards before the draw is live). The page admin also pointed out, how is it possible to determine which card is missing? Also, how do we know that Villain hasnt palmed a card off (being on the button and this a common mistake, this would be easy to get another card if you could remove the first one)? Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: FallenAngelAlex on September 30, 2012, 05:47:42 PM surely the end result would mean he wouldnt be able to claim any pot anyway. You need two cards in your hand to win the pot. Simple
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Cotter1 on September 30, 2012, 05:52:58 PM this exact thing happened at Luton many years ago.
Ruling was that as more than 1 player had acted, play should carry on with the player only having 1 card. No 2nd card was given to the player but he could carry on with 1 card if he liked and play his 1 card + the board. Can't remember if they then burned two cards pre flop, but don't think so? Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: doubleup on September 30, 2012, 06:56:59 PM this exact thing happened at Luton many years ago. Ruling was that as more than 1 player had acted, play should carry on with the player only having 1 card. No 2nd card was given to the player but he could carry on with 1 card if he liked and play his 1 card + the board. Can't remember if they then burned two cards pre flop, but don't think so? Was this before Ratched confiscated the cigarettes or when McMurphy stole the bus? Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: david3103 on September 30, 2012, 07:15:58 PM A rather inebriated player at Gala a couple of years ago called behind two all-ins.
Cash so no showdown but as the other two debated, "do you have a set?", "I have the flush", he announced " I have the ace" Asked "what with?" he replied "Just the Ace..." which was accurate since he did indeed have just the one card... The lady with the set attempted to get the entire hand declared dead, she was happy enough to fail in that when the board paired on the river. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: JK on September 30, 2012, 08:38:48 PM this exact thing happened at Luton many years ago. Ruling was that as more than 1 player had acted, play should carry on with the player only having 1 card. No 2nd card was given to the player but he could carry on with 1 card if he liked and play his 1 card + the board. Can't remember if they then burned two cards pre flop, but don't think so? Was this before Ratched confiscated the cigarettes or when McMurphy stole the bus? LOL Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Cotter1 on October 01, 2012, 12:18:54 AM this exact thing happened at Luton many years ago. Ruling was that as more than 1 player had acted, play should carry on with the player only having 1 card. No 2nd card was given to the player but he could carry on with 1 card if he liked and play his 1 card + the board. Can't remember if they then burned two cards pre flop, but don't think so? Was this before Ratched confiscated the cigarettes or when McMurphy stole the bus? [/it was before forums', or maybe I'd have written about it. Great film btw.] Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Sulphur man on October 01, 2012, 11:46:49 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) Or TD pulls out an automatic riddles him reloads another clip then calls security to remove the corpse headfirst via fire exit. Why just kill his hand. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: jgcblack on October 01, 2012, 11:59:15 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) Or TD pulls out an automatic riddles him reloads another clip then calls security to remove the corpse headfirst via fire exit. Why just kill his hand. way too much anger... Just chill, tell him that he is not a very nice person and that in this hand his hand is dead. Thank him for his custom and request he leaves by the nearest exit. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Sulphur man on October 02, 2012, 12:04:18 AM Agreed fully.
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: tight4better on October 02, 2012, 10:19:20 PM Hand is dead as the dodo. Or 100% should be.
Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: mouth on October 03, 2012, 09:44:16 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) Or TD pulls out an automatic riddles him reloads another clip then calls security to remove the corpse headfirst via fire exit. Why just kill his hand. way too much anger... Just chill, tell him that he is not a very nice person and that in this hand his hand is dead. Thank him for his custom and request he leaves by the nearest exit. You need more angst and bad times in your young life so you get as angry as the rest of us. Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: jgcblack on October 03, 2012, 10:06:37 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) Or TD pulls out an automatic riddles him reloads another clip then calls security to remove the corpse headfirst via fire exit. Why just kill his hand. way too much anger... Just chill, tell him that he is not a very nice person and that in this hand his hand is dead. Thank him for his custom and request he leaves by the nearest exit. You need more angst and bad times in your young life so you get as angry as the rest of us. Thanks, I think. Im making a conscious effort to be a nicer, gentler, more passive listening person more. I've got the fire, balls, stupidity, bravery to tell anyone anything... But do I need to? :P Either way - the hand above should be an ex-hand. Its probably just sleeping though... Title: Re: An interesting ruling I found on Facebook Post by: Sulphur man on October 03, 2012, 10:20:45 PM This is tricky, he has acted with the incorrect amount of cards ... So technically his hand is dead. However it is of no hardship just to give him the next card as it is his and everything is correct. Common sense lets them complete the hand, then you can smash the cocky twats teeth in :) Or TD pulls out an automatic riddles him reloads another clip then calls security to remove the corpse headfirst via fire exit. Why just kill his hand. way too much anger... Just chill, tell him that he is not a very nice person and that in this hand his hand is dead. Thank him for his custom and request he leaves by the nearest exit. You need more angst and bad times in your young life so you get as angry as the rest of us. |