Dispute? ruled right or Wrong

[Azirapheal]

cards face down and over the line are dead and waiting to be mucked

i had an incident on an aqqxx board one night 1 player tables aq the other player flashes his cards at his mate to the left then places his cards face down over the line so i mucked them. the guy claimed to have aq after his cards were mucked which was verified by 4 players at the table (including independants) but he had killed his hand.

if in doubt, table your hands instead of mucking or declaring, that way its the dealers responsibility a responsibility you forfeit when you declare a loss or interfere with the dealers job

the ruling was right imho as the dealer had not mucked the cards - which the dealer should have done to prevent the grab and flip. however under strict play rules both hands would have to be tabled on request, A high should win it

[Legionnaire]

Hi
this happened to a couple of my customers at another casino (Thankfully)


two players bet and call to the river where they both check, Player1 says you win and throws his cards face down over a line on the table (Not used as a bet line or a fold line) BUT it has not touched the muck, the dealer starts to ship the chips over to player 2 who shows King high, Player 1 then says i can beat that and reaches over and flips his cards to shows ace high.

The tournament director ruled in favor of player 1.

Player 2 was furious and said the Verbal declaration of "you win" and the throwing of his cards over the line constituted a fold and the chips should be his

I know the dealer should have mucked player 1s cards before shipping out the chips but think this is the correct decision

Would like to hear your views

What would your ruling have been Zac?

[relaedgc]

I had this happen to me the other day. Or at least a similar example.

In a four card Omaha pot, we have come to showdown and player 1 has asked player 2, "Have you got the top straight?"

He responds no, and shows   

The board reads.            

Player 1 then says, "You win."

However, he keeps his cards in his hands and after a pause just tosses them down onto the table.

I notice that, (having all landed face up) that he has    and announce that it is a split pot.

Player 2 was not impressed, however, I said that despite the fact that he said "You win.", his hand was tabled and the cards speak for themselves. In this situation, I think that despite his verbal passing and throwing down of cards, that they stand.

[Girgy85]

In this example whatever the player with A high said means nothing as his hand is still live as the dealer had not killed it and he was able to retrieve it.

In future the dealer should muck the cards before shipping the pot to the other player who must table 2 cards to win the pot!!

[Alverton]

Right ruling. But bad dealing. Dealer should muck cards before shipping the pot.

Ka ching.

this

[K9sixtwo]

one of the first things i learnt playing poker was "the verbal declaration is binding"

Couldn't saying "you win" and then before the dealer kills your hand or you muck it turn it over to show the winning hand be construed as slow rolling.. and also  put you in line for a good solid beating?

[phatomch]

Right ruling. But bad dealing. Dealer should muck cards before shipping the pot.

Ka ching.

this

agreed

[Cf]

I had this happen to me the other day. Or at least a similar example.

In a four card Omaha pot, we have come to showdown and player 1 has asked player 2, "Have you got the top straight?"

He responds no, and shows   

The board reads.            

Player 1 then says, "You win."

However, he keeps his cards in his hands and after a pause just tosses them down onto the table.

I notice that, (having all landed face up) that he has    and announce that it is a split pot.

Player 2 was not impressed, however, I said that despite the fact that he said "You win.", his hand was tabled and the cards speak for themselves. In this situation, I think that despite his verbal passing and throwing down of cards, that they stand.

This is correct imo. Once the cards have been tabled face up the verbal declaration by the player is irrelevent - the cards speak.

Obviously, a player intentionally misdeclaring his hand should be given some sort of penalty. In this instance though I'm more inclined to assume it was an honest mistake.

[kinboshi]

one of the first things i learnt playing poker was "the verbal declaration is binding"

Couldn't saying "you win" and then before the dealer kills your hand or you muck it turn it over to show the winning hand be construed as slow rolling.. and also  put you in line for a good solid beating?

It's not a verbal declaration at showdown that's binding - it's the cards.  If you said "I have the nuts" it wouldn't be accepted unless your cards agreed with the statement.

Slow-rolling is bad, but if you've got the winning hand you still win the pot.  You might win a beating as well though.