This has to be a wind up? You can't really be serious?

1. Cards are in the muck - end of.

Errr hand was tabled - end of.

I can't see any reason why you shouldnt be awarded this pot, you tabled the best hand other players saw it and no further action has taken place.

because they've gone on a break and according to TD only  1 other player saw cf table kj. how does he know that cf hasn't gone outside and got his mate to agree to a story? not in any way suggesting that that happened but there's no way the td can know otherwise.

yes the cards were left on the table but they're easy enough to switch around when cf is the dealer

Was it not the case he hadn't left the room?

I had not left the card room.

The interesting thing here, is that a few people on this board, and a lot of people at the casino took the train of thought: "hand was mucked, that's the end of it", even if there was footage/proof of the hand. I don't understand this. Obviously, in this case the testimony of 1/2 players was not enough, which I accept. But it was the thought that even if something could be done, it shouldn't be, that interested me.

I think the issue here comes down to confirming the cards.

The rules state that the hand can be reviewed providing the next deal has not yet taken place. The reasons it being needed to be done before the next deal are obvious.

In the 2 hour example then I would think that if there is camera footage then the pot should be awarded to the correct player. In the case of the allin player then yes, it would suck to be him, but it should never have been his pot in the first place.

Without camera footage I would think it impossible to redo the hand, as after 2 hours people will most likely not remember the action accurately enough.

If you're going to quote Robert's Rules 2, 5 and 6 I suggest you also keep in no. 3 which affect any ruling

3. The proper time to draw attention to a mistake is when it occurs or is first noticed. Any delay may affect the ruling.

the fact that you were the dealer and thus responsible for awarding the pot combined with the fact that you happily went on a break for couple of minutes after the award should imo lead to you losing this pot

it's also interesting to note that this hand has been posted on another forum by the TD and while you claim that 2 other players backed you up the TD says that only 1 other confirmed your hand and makes no mention of most players having left the table

Well, the rule states that it's before the next deal. I think 1 or 2 minutes (literally was all it was) is a reasonable amount of time.

Had there been a camera on the table I am confident I would of awarded the pot as dave made every effort to fix what had happened, something I really appreciate.

The issue was confirming the hands, and whether 2 people siding with me was enough. (again, not something I want to argue over, but i'm 99% confident it was 2 people, if dave thought it was 1 then fair enough, 10 people surrounding the table all voicing their opinion at the same time wouldn't have made life easy for him - but whether it's 1 or 2 players probably doesn't make a great deal of difference)

Don't get me wrong, I know it was a silly mistake for me to make, but that's why the rules are there to cover it. The decision was to not change anything because dave felt he couldn't adequetly confirm the hands. In my defence, I didn't make a fuss once the ruling had been made and just got on with the game. Thankfully, I didn't get rattled by it and managed to make a recovery from my now crippled stack. I posted this thread on here just to see what other people's opinions on the matter were, and their reasons for said opinons.

A couple of points. Firstly, I tabled my cards face up. From RRoP:

2. Cards speak (cards read for themselves). The dealer assists in reading hands, but players are responsible for holding onto their cards until the winner is declared. Although verbal declarations as to the contents of a hand are not binding, deliberately miscalling a hand with the intent of causing another player to discard a winning hand is unethical and may result in forfeiture of the pot. (For more information on miscalling a hand see “Section 11 - Lowball,” Rule 15 and Rule 16.)

Secondly:

5. A ruling may be made regarding a pot if it has been requested before the next deal starts (or before the game either ends or changes to another table). Otherwise, the result of a deal must stand. The first riffle of the shuffle marks the start for a deal.

6. If a pot has been incorrectly awarded and mingled with chips that were not in the pot, and the time limit for a ruling request given in the previous rule has been observed, management may determine how much was in the pot by reconstructing the betting, and then transfer that amount to the proper player.


Obviously I was a bit of an idiot for not not reading the hand properly... but there are provisions in the rules to fix mistakes such as this. The fact it was the last hand before the break means we have obviously not yet started the next deal.

This one caused quite a frenzy at the £25 triple chance at Alea last night...

It's the last hand before the break, and I am dealing. The hand played as follows:

100/200
3 limpers
I limp in CO with KdJd
SB complets
BB checks

Pot: 1200

Flop: 429 (no flushes in this thread)

All check

Turn: J

SB/BB check
MP bets 400
Limpers fold
I call
SB raises to 1600
BB folds
MP calls
I call

Pot: 6000

River: 9

SB checks
MP bets 800
I call
SB calls

Pot: 8400

MP mucks, having missed his draw
I table KJ
SB tables J2 and announces 2 pair

I fail to read that I have 2 pair with a K kicker and give him the pot. I then turn both sets of hands face down, along with the flop and put it in the muck. The burn cards/flop are left where they are and we go on break.

A couple of minutes later the light bulb clicks in my head and I go "hang on a minute...".

I inform the TD of what has happened and if anything can be done. As the next hand has not yet started he says we can reconstruct the hand. I am able to perfectly remember the action above, and the pot total is confirmed by a seperate stack of chips that has not yet been sorted in the villian's stack.

The interesting part... there was no camera covering this table. And as it was the last hand before the break most players had left the table. Myself, the other player in the pot, and a third player at the table confirmed my hand. However, the villian would not, saying he didn't see my hand, only that he announced 2 pair and was awarded the pot.

What would you do?

The only one who takes his beats like a man is Jamie Gold, I think he is the only one who truly appreciates just how well he ran. Hachem is the worse, he has been a real dick of late.

Did anyone watch the live coverage of the EPT high roller's event? Hachem did some commentary on that. He came across as an absolute twat, and kept telling us why he, and the other players in this high rollers tournament were the best in the world, and much better than everyone else.

The preflop stuff has been said...

On the flop I think I would call this. I don't see any point shoving - if he's got a 4 you're in a world of hurt. If he's got the oesd/fd then he will probably call and you're not massively ahead.

You have position on him so you can see what happens on the turn. If he leads into the turn then this'd be the part where I probably give up. If he checks, I'd probably check behind to keep the pot small.

My guess though is the diamond draw - I see a lot of people do these silly little min-raises as flush draw semi-bluffs.

Hey Charles!

Hows the live poker going?

Not bad, have had a good run the last couple of weeks

You checked out Alea yet? Don't think I've seen you there.

Then yes, I do know him

Possibly, depends what the G stands for

from Robert's rules:

16. New players to a table as a result of balancing tables are dealt in immediately unless they are in the small blind or button position, where they must wait until the button has passed to the player on their left.

I couldn't see an intro forum so i'll post here

I've finally joined blonde! Some people on here may know me, i'm Charles from Leeds, so if you've been to Moortown or Alea then you've probably seen me. Been reading these forums for ages so it's about time I got involved

2 players in after the flop
Player A bets 2500 all-in but he has acted out of turn and the bet is returned to him.
Player B bets 2500 and turns his cards over before Player A has the chance to act!
Card Room Supervisor is called over for a ruling

Player A has the option to do what he likes, though in this case he obviously cannot raise as he has no more chips to raise with. If he wishes to fold he may do so.

Player B should technically recieve a warning/penalty here for exposing his cards, but this would be a little harsh given he clearly doesn't understand the rule.

If a player bets out of turn (whether the bet is all in or not) then the bet stands, unless there is an agressive action before him (opening a round of betting, or raising). If such action takes place he has the option to now fold, call, or raise. If the action before him is non-aggressive (check/call) then his bet stands.

In this instance Player B should have checked, which would of forced Player A to go all in.