Hand dead - ruling

[tikay]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

 

Well spotted David, that would have whooshed all the young dudes.

[Doobs]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

Huh?

Surely the dealer and player that was punished are equally at fault, if at all.  Both should be paying attention so that the next 3 people shouldn't act before the player that was punished. 

If the player is new to the game or a bit of an amateur it is this kind of ruling puts them off.  It is stated this all happened in a few seconds give the guy a break and don't muck his hand. Give the dealer a break as well, you can't concentrate 100% of the time. 

More pictures of valets please to help us make better judgements of situations like this.

 

[tikay]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

Huh?

Surely the dealer and player that was punished are equally at fault, if at all.  Both should be paying attention so that the next 3 people shouldn't act before the player that was punished. 

If the player is new to the game or a bit of an amateur it is this kind of ruling puts them off.  It is stated this all happened in a few seconds give the guy a break and don't muck his hand. Give the dealer a break as well, you can't concentrate 100% of the time. 

More pictures of valets please to help us make better judgements of situations like this.

 

The FIRST mistake was by the player. We can't blame the dealer for that, imo, especially as, allegedly, it all happened so quickly.


Valet photos? No problem.

[Jon MW]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

Huh?

Surely the dealer and player that was punished are equally at fault, if at all.  Both should be paying attention so that the next 3 people shouldn't act before the player that was punished. 

If the player is new to the game or a bit of an amateur it is this kind of ruling puts them off.  It is stated this all happened in a few seconds give the guy a break and don't muck his hand. Give the dealer a break as well, you can't concentrate 100% of the time. 

More pictures of valets please to help us make better judgements of situations like this.

 

The FIRST mistake was by the player. We can't blame the dealer for that, imo, especially as, allegedly, it all happened so quickly.

...

And the second mistake was by the dealer - I'm not sure how it was relevant that the player did something wrong first. Isn't it part of the dealer's job to control the table?

[vegaslover]

Not sure if you mean the original player in seat two but cannot see how he can be blamed for other players acting OOT.

Soo easy for the others players to collude if all they have two do is instantly make 2 bets that render the original players hand dead

[cambridgealex]

Yeh I think this ruling needs adjusting.

Bill and Bob are best pals and are 3 handed with Jenny. Bill raises the button and Jenny 3 bets the small blind. Bill and Bob both call knowing that as soon as the flop comes down, hell, even before the flop comes down, Bill bets and Bob raises and Jenny's hand is now dead. 

[EvilPie]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

 

Well spotted David, that would have whooshed all the young dudes.

And the follow up would've whooshed many of the older ones.....

Fwiw I wasn't blaming the dealer for this incident as I don't know what was going on. I just know that I've seen dealers miss lots of action because they aren't concentrating on what they're being paid to do.

[doubleup]

And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

If it all happened very quickly - how was seat 2 (who has had his hand killed) meant to stop it if the dealer couldn't?

[Boba Fett]

Quite interesting how this thread developed.

It was quickly established that the player had erred, & his hand - according to the rules - should be declared dead.

But then it changed direction, & 4 or 5 players blamed the Dealer.

We don't know at what venue this arose, so we have no idea if the dealing standard is good, bad, or indifferent.

The original ERROR was by the player, not the Dealer. No question about that. And it's possible that the Dealer should have spotted it, though the OP says "it all happened VERY quickly".

How do we end up pointing fingers at the dealer? The original error was not by the dealer, it was by the player.

Even Matt The Hoople Russell chimed in, "it tilts the shit out of me". How would he ever know, he rarely lasts more than an orbit. Is that the dealers fault, too?

Huh?

Surely the dealer and player that was punished are equally at fault, if at all.  Both should be paying attention so that the next 3 people shouldn't act before the player that was punished. 

If the player is new to the game or a bit of an amateur it is this kind of ruling puts them off.  It is stated this all happened in a few seconds give the guy a break and don't muck his hand. Give the dealer a break as well, you can't concentrate 100% of the time. 

More pictures of valets please to help us make better judgements of situations like this.

 

The FIRST mistake was by the player. We can't blame the dealer for that, imo, especially as, allegedly, it all happened so quickly.

...

And the second mistake was by the dealer - I'm not sure how it was relevant that the player did something wrong first. Isn't it part of the dealer's job to control the table?

Well the original mistake is by the guy that acted out of turn. The next players to act OOT have made a mistake but they have seen the guy in their right act and believe the action to be on them. The player who was supposed to act 1st hasnt made any mistake yet in the ruling he is the only one punished.

I think the dealer should be paying enough attention that when the first OOT guy checks and the next 2 are betting and raising that they are stopping the action and returning it to the original player before it has gotten out of hand. Obviously it's not the dealers fault that someone acted out of turn but I think the dealer should absolutely notice it and react to it way faster than the person who is losing their action.

The rule seems to be set up to say that the player who was supposed to act is supposed to notice this and act on it and if they take an unreasonable amount of time to do this or an unreasonable amount of action occurs behind them that their hand is dead, I think if the dealer is doing their job it should never get to that stage.

[doubleup]

Yeh I think this ruling needs adjusting.

Bill and Bob are best pals and are 3 handed with Jenny. Bill raises the button and Jenny 3 bets the small blind. Bill and Bob both call knowing that as soon as the flop comes down, hell, even before the flop comes down, Bill bets and Bob raises and Jenny's hand is now dead. 

You don't even need collusion.  The second to act can just bet and hope to get an insta-fold and then first to act's hand is dead.  ez money

[cambridgealex]

Yeh I think this ruling needs adjusting.

Bill and Bob are best pals and are 3 handed with Jenny. Bill raises the button and Jenny 3 bets the small blind. Bill and Bob both call knowing that as soon as the flop comes down, hell, even before the flop comes down, Bill bets and Bob raises and Jenny's hand is now dead. 

You don't even need collusion.  The second to act can just bet and hope to get an insta-fold and then first to act's hand is dead.  ez money

I think it needs "two positive actions" to rule the hand dead, a bet and a raise, or a bet and a call? (Positive action = action with chips?).

A bet and a fold wouldn't count as two positive actions so I think his hand would still be live in your example.

[doubleup]

Yeh I think this ruling needs adjusting.

Bill and Bob are best pals and are 3 handed with Jenny. Bill raises the button and Jenny 3 bets the small blind. Bill and Bob both call knowing that as soon as the flop comes down, hell, even before the flop comes down, Bill bets and Bob raises and Jenny's hand is now dead. 

You don't even need collusion.  The second to act can just bet and hope to get an insta-fold and then first to act's hand is dead.  ez money

I think it needs "two positive actions" to rule the hand dead, a bet and a raise, or a bet and a call? (Positive action = action with chips?).

A bet and a fold wouldn't count as two positive actions so I think his hand would still be live in your example.

tda rules

35:   Substantial Action.

Substantial Action is either: A) any two actions in turn, at least one of which puts chips in the pot (i.e. any 2 actions except 2 checks or 2 folds)....

[Honeybadger]

There are quite a few generally accepted rules in poker that are utterly illogical and should be done away with. This is one of them.

There is no logical reason for his hand being declared dead. If this is the rule, then it is a very bad rule. If a rule is required to prevent the first player angle-shooting then it should be that once two players have taken any action after him (checking would be included) he is deemed to have checked, but his hand is still live.

[cambridgealex]

Is the substantial action rule what is being applied here? I know that's the rule for preflop (no misdeal after substantial action), but is it different here?

If not it's even more absurd. Then Bill bets and Bob snap folds, then Jennys hand is also dead?!

[Jon MW]

There are quite a few generally accepted rules in poker that are utterly illogical and should be done away with. This is one of them.

There is no logical reason for his hand being declared dead. If this is the rule, then it is a very bad rule. If a rule is required to prevent the first player angle-shooting then it should be that once two players have taken any action after him (checking would be included) he is deemed to have checked, but his hand is still live.

What if there is substantial action before the player who misses out?

e.g. if someone goes all in  - player doesn't act - two players after them fold?