Am I Horrible For Doing this? Would you have done the same???

[ariston]

my I love iceman tshirt hasnt arrived yet.

 Caught me on a bad day 

[ariston]

The main point is that it was a self - dealt game in which the player discarded his own cards into the pot, which had been awarded to jj. The cards speak rule can not be applied because only one person still has active cards that the td can 100% verify.

if you want to play that way fine- you are certainly a cheat (even though jj clearly isnt and has learnt his lesson). If you know you are beat and still claim the pot I hope I'm never on a table with you.

[The_nun]

my I love iceman tshirt hasnt arrived yet.

 Caught me on a bad day 

I can hold my hand up for having those too, along with most when part of such a large community. x

[dik9]

The main point is that it was a self - dealt game in which the player discarded his own cards into the pot, which had been awarded to jj. The cards speak rule can not be applied because only one person still has active cards that the td can 100% verify.

Regardless the person awarded the pot (JJ) acknowledges after the cards had been tabled, that his hand was beaten, and uses a rule as hard and fast, and against the spirit of the game, which should always be a Paramount Rule and superseeds all others.

[phatomch]

i dont play, so the cheat comment is a little off. but a td can only make a ruling on what he/she see's, if it was a dealer dealt game the casino has someone there that can verify what has happened, in self- dealt we do not have that luxury. So we make decisions on what we are told by the players (which in this incident not all players on the table could tell us what cards where shown)

[dik9]

So at the time, did the player awarded the pot, tell you that he actually had the worse hand, or is this the first you have heard about it?

[phatomch]

Bob stated what hand he had but with no cocnclusive proof on the table or a memeber of staff present to confirm the cards. The hand could not be reconstructed as the cards had been mixed up with the rest of the muck. The pot had already been scooped by jj before the td was called for by the players.

[phatomch]

sorry jj still had his cards face up in front of him

[ariston]

jj has admitted that bob had AJ and that it was face up on the table. hand tabled it wins end of

[dik9]

Did JJ admit to you at the time, that he had the worse hand, as he admits here?

[phatomch]

jj and a few others on the table where unsure of the exact hand bob had (suits included) the td was actually having his dinner when this all happened and when he was called back the only player with cards was jj.  jj was mistaken in his details that the river had already been dealt or the td was told a different account by jj and Bob.

[dik9]

From JJ's own post, he seems very clear what hands and suits everyone had, and the order it happened. It looks like some facts may have been omitted to the TD in which case, it was a blatent angle shoot.

[phatomch]

i would like to point out this was a rookie comp so other players on the table and possibly jj and bob are not hot on all the rules but the casino's and td's can only give rulings on what they know and are told by the dealers / players, it may not always be the most favoured ruling but i believe that they must do it on facts alone. With all due respect to the spirit of the game sometimes the correct ruling will go against it.

[AgentChip109]

as a regular players at southampton grovesnor, i can tell u there wouldnt have been a dealer cos all tournys are self dealt (seat 2 shuffles, seat 9 cuts, seat 1 deals, and it goes in a continuous clockwise fashion)
so there would have been no mistake by the dealer as there wouldnt have been one there apart from the final table

i dont know if this changes anything about how the hand was played out.

im also quite interested as to who the characters in question are as ive rarely seen any out of order players at southampton

[MANTIS01]

If you read the original post again there are a number of clear indisputable facts...

JJ states that his opponent held A-J

Therefore "Bob" has the best hand with the broadway straight and wins the pot. This is a fact and cannot be challenged.

When the TD is called he/she makes a judgement call based on second hand information concerning the "mucking" of cards. The decision is to award the pot to JJ. Whether this decision is technically correct is hardly relevant...a decision is made. As players, if we don't accept decisions there would be chaos. Therefore it is now JJ's pot to keep. This is a fact and cannot be challenged.

So "Bob" WINS the pot but JJ is AWARDED the pot. These are the two facts that can't be argued.

But....

With all due respect to the spirit of the game sometimes the correct ruling will go against it.

This is something I don't agree with. No TD or single person has authority over the spirit of the game. This is a much greater entity and cannot be "ruled" against.

This post is not about the rule-book and the technicalities of the game. If it was, the cold-hard facts about the hand would be presented in isolation. But if you read the post there is much talk about jibes, insults, revenge, threats etc etc...and this is where the heart of the thread lies. So no, I don't think that the spirit of the game is subject to a TD's ruling.....this is a moral issue and principles are something that individual players must uphold if they choose to do so.

The thread is not entitled "Technically Is This My Pot?" it is headed "Am I Horrible For Doing This?"

The reason JJ does this is because his opponent is a shit....but now JJ wants to know if this makes him a shit too. The actual "ruling" is inconsequential in my eyes.