blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 08, 2025, 04:03:30 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2262124 Posts in 66599 Topics by 16764 Members
Latest Member: Hotdog1
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Poker Forums
| |-+  The Rail
| | |-+  Another Ruling Debate
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Down Print
Author Topic: Another Ruling Debate  (Read 5941 times)
Rexas
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1963


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: September 20, 2014, 12:54:54 PM »

If the cards were easily retrievable, as suggested, it probably means they weren't in the muck. If so then I agree with rexarse and co, that common sense means they are retrieved and hand played out

I was at the table when this happened, the cards were absolutely in the muck. The guy who was all in was sat in seat 9 and placed them clearly on top of the pile of cards that constitutes "the muck". They were only easily retrievable because he put them on top, not inside.

But you could identify them easily, as could he?

Yes, I could be absolutely certain of which two cards he had held.

Could the Dealer?

If so I'd say his hand is retrieved and placed face up and the board dealt out. Whether he gets to eat his pudding depends then on the cards not some f==k up

I can't be sure if the dealer saw where the cards were placed, but they were directly on top of the muck and I'd say chances are that she did.
Logged

humour is very much encouraged, however theres humour and theres not.
I disrepectfully agree with Matt Smiley
Pages: 1 2 [3] Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.102 seconds with 20 queries.