Tourney Need a Ruling (plus a Devil's Advocate hypothetical) (1 Viewer)

[Moxie Mike]

The following situation came up in a live tournament a couple weeks ago:

Player A UTG: Has all relevant opponents covered. Opens for a standard 3x.

Player B UTG+1: Calls.

Player C BB: Jams all in for a 15 BB stack.

Player A calls rather quickly.

Player B takes for a few seconds then folds.

Cards are revealed. Player A has pocket sixes; Player C has KK. The entire table saw this.

Before the flop is dealt, Player B casually revealed that 'he had pocket sixes as well'.

Upon learning this, Player A then pitches his cards into the muck face down as if the fate of the hand is sealed. They are irretrievable at this point and the suits are unknown.

As he begins pushing the pot toward Player C (Player A was the physical dealer in this hand), I stopped him (as host/TD) and insisted he deal an flop, turn and river.

The board ran out clean for pocket kings so there was no controversy. But my question is this:

What would be the ruling if the board had ran out 5 of the same suit (or some other type of 'chop')? Can Player A be awarded half the pot without holding a 'live hand'? Or did he technically concede the pot regardless of the runout?

Along those lines, what would be the ruling if the board came 2-3-4-5 and he made a straight with his sixes? Can he be awarded the pot without hole cards? I suspect not.

 

[SlowPokeTony]

There’s no good reason to muck there. First it might not even be true that the other hand was 66 and even if it was he’d still have 3-5% equity depending on suits. But once they are mucked that’s it, hand over. You can’t split or win a pot with no cards. My question to you is what your plan was if there was controversy because you’re the one that insisted on the board being run when everyone else was content to have the hand be over.

 

[tabletalker7]

Once the hand is in the muck it is over.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

Mucked and irretrievable means hand is over. Award pot and on.

 

[grebe]

Hand is over...and he should probably have a warning since it's a tournament and the outcome of the hand effects everyone.

If it came out a chop or somehow 66 would have won, that's what you would call an "idiot tax". He still wins nothing.

 

[CraigT78]

I'd have just called clock and tanked until the break was over

 

[Rhodeman77]

If the hand was tabled it can’t be killed. Otherwise players could use this move to dump chips.

 

[Frogzilla]

Decide what you’re doing before running out the board. Either he’s got live 6s, or there is no flop. If the cards are irretrievable I think hand over, not like you have much choice. Definitely don’t want to see 4578 pop up and then have to make the decision

 

[Hornet]

If the hand was tabled it can’t be killed. Otherwise players could use this move to dump chips.

+1 … once hand is tabled, a player cannot just concede in a tourney.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

If the hand was tabled it can’t be killed. Otherwise players could use this move to dump chips.

It wasn’t tabled. It was mucked, face down, into the pile.

 

[Jonesey07]

If the hand was tabled it can’t be killed. Otherwise players could use this move to dump chips.

This is the correct answer.

 

[Jonesey07]

It wasn’t tabled. It was mucked, face down, into the pile.

Cards were revealed otherwise how would player c know to say he also had 6’s.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

Cards were revealed otherwise how would player c know to say he also had 6’s.

True, B folded and mucked first. But when C picks his cards up, and tosses them face down into the muck I think he forfeits the pot.

Player C has the duty to protect his hand.

The biggest mistake was the OP making the dealer run it out after C mucked.

 

[Hornet]

It wasn’t tabled. It was mucked, face down, into the pile.

After it was tabled.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

After it was tabled.

Well I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. I think a point those saying it was tabled first are overlooking is the the OP said “suits are unknown.” So if don’t know which 2 sixes are his how do you pull it out of the muck? You pull the wrong two and 4 of either suit come then player C gets a pot he was never entitled to get.

 

[Hornet]

Well I guess we just have to agree to disagree on this one. I think a point those saying it was tabled first are overlooking is the the OP said “suits are unknown.” So if don’t know which 2 sixes are his how do you pull it out of the muck? You pull the wrong two and 4 of either suit come then player C gets a pot he was never entitled to get.

A hand is either tabled or not. Were the cards placed face up on the table? I don’t see how we can disagree on that question.

The consequences of the cards being thrown in the muck after being tabled is really the open question based on the hypothetical.

In my opinion, once the cards are tabled, a player cannot simply concede by throwing his cards in the muck. The same way a player wouldn’t be allowed to give his chips to his opponent by walking away from the table. And what if the guy next to the player all in decided to throw the cards in the muck? Would your answer be different? You still wouldn’t know what suits the sixes were.

 

[Perthmike]

This is why I always prefer to have a dealer.

 

[Bluegrass Poker]

A hand is either tabled or not. Were the cards placed face up on the table? I don’t see how we can disagree on that question.

The consequences of the cards being thrown in the muck after being tabled is really the open question based on the hypothetical.

In my opinion, once the cards are tabled, a player cannot simply concede by throwing his cards in the muck. The same way a player wouldn’t be allowed to give his chips to his opponent by walking away from the table. And what if the guy next to the player all in decided to throw the cards in the muck? Would your answer be different? You still wouldn’t know what suits the sixes were.

So how do you decide which cards are Player C’s? You know he has 66 but no one knows which 2 sixes. I’m invoking the best interest of the game rule and awarding pot to A with no board dealt.

I don’t think their is any collision or chip dumping based on the OP.

You have a different opinion. That’s fine. I could be wrong, won’t be the first or last time. But that’s how I’d rule in my game.

 

[Legend5555]

In a tournament in an all in situation, a player cannot muck his cards. The board must be run and a player cannot concede. The hand must be retrieved. This isn't a cash game.

 

[glynn]

You have a different opinion. That’s fine. I could be wrong, won’t be the first or last time. But that’s how I’d rule in my game.

Okay. OP is inquiring about the correct ruling, not about one of the set of infinite incorrect rulings.

I’m invoking the best interest of the game rule and awarding pot to A with no board dealt.

That is not in the best interest of the game.

The biggest mistake was the OP making the dealer run it out after C mucked.

That was not the biggest mistake. Player A throwing his hand in to the muck is a bigger mistake, as is the dealer allowing it (to the extent that the dealer could have prevented it).

In fact, having the dealer run out the board is among the most correct things to have happened here.

 

[Hornet]

So how do you decide which cards are Player C’s? You know he has 66 but no one knows which 2 sixes. I’m invoking the best interest of the game rule and awarding pot to A with no board dealt.

If the table doesn’t know which sixes, as a last resort, I give him two random sixes.

 

[davislane]

Cards in the muck. Dead hand. Pot awarded to the player with the live hand. Shuffle up and deal!

 

[Machine]

In fact, having the dealer run out the board is among the most correct things to have happened here.

Its actually bad form to roll the flop, if it wasn't already in the air. Any forward motion of a hand towards a dealer is considered mucked, especially when the hand is face down. When a pot is uncontested you should discontinue exposing cards and award the pot immediately.

If the table doesn’t know which sixes, as a last resort, I give him two random sixes.

I also had pocket Aces, I don't remember which ones, go a head and chop up the pot please, while I go get some tea out of Russell's Teapot



Re-reading the OPs post,

Cards are revealed. Player A has pocket sixes; Player C has KK. The entire table saw this.

Were the 6's tabled? did he lay his hand down face up?
IF this was the case, AND he was all in, every single one of his chips in the pot; This is a very niche thing, its a tough call, but in this case, I may call the hand live and treat it as an all in moment.
The major consideration being that the player is not a seasoned player, and its a game where the focus is not on the money, but the entertainment value of the evening.

 

[Legend5555]

Cards in the muck. Dead hand. Pot awarded to the player with the live hand. Shuffle up and deal!

Does not happen under TDA rules. Once a player is all in and called, the cards cannot be mucked until the board is run and pot correctly awarded. If cards thrown into the muck, cards are retrieved if possible. But this should never happen as a dealer will force the showdown.

Allowing people to muck before the board is run when a player is all in is chip dumping.

 

[Legend5555]

 

[upNdown]

If the table doesn’t know which sixes, as a last resort, I give him two random sixes.

Yeah, that’s what I was thinking.
How do NEITHER of the two guys know which suits they had. Buncha dummies in this one. Except kings guy.

 

[glynn]

Any forward motion of a hand towards a dealer is considered mucked

No. That is not what "mucked" means.

When a pot is uncontested you should discontinue exposing cards and award the pot immediately.

This pot is contested. The hand has been tabled, and so it definitionally cannot be untabled.

 

[davislane]

Does not happen under TDA rules. Once a player is all in and called, the cards cannot be mucked until the board is run and pot correctly awarded. If cards thrown into the muck, cards are retrieved if possible. But this should never happen as a dealer will force the showdown.

Allowing people to muck before the board is run when a player is all in is chip dumping.

the scenario states they were not retrievable.

They are irretrievable at this point and the suits are unknown.

This states what should happen but the scenario didn't play out that way.

View attachment 816774

the only thing you can do when you cant retrieve the cards is to award the player with a live hand the pot. If you want to get all heavy-handed you can punish the person who mucked their hand. otherwise shuffle up and deal

 

[Machine]

OP is inquiring about the correct ruling, not about one of the set of infinite incorrect rulings.

This assertion is very aggressive, in context I would not only agree with @Bluegrass Poker and I can cite references, but I'm not making the assertion blue is incorrect, I would ask you @glynn to cite your source.

That is not in the best interest of the game.

Can you elaborate on why you disagree that its not the best interest of the game? Feels a little bit like ad hominem, rather than discourse.

 

[Legend5555]

the scenario states they were not retrievable.


This states what should happen but it the scenario didn't play out that way.

It's not clear if they are unretrievable. OP says they are, but not why. Many people think if the cards hit the muck they are unretrievable, and that isn't true.