Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next View previous topic :: View next topic  
Jon MW
The British Cowboy


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1865
Location: Hastings

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:31 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
An unusual matter to rule on occurred at the London Live tournament.

The action is folded to the small blind who raises
the big blind reraises

Small blind: "all in"
Big blind: "is that an all in"
Small blind: "yes, all in"
Big blind: "call"

So the small blind turns over his cards - the big blind turns over his cards

And the dealer sweeps up all the cards on the table and starts shuffling for the next hand.

Apart from sacking the dealer - what happens next? What is the ruling?
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
brigal
Trips


Joined: 08 Aug 2006
Posts: 167
Location: london

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:37 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Just Wow, I don't even know where you begin to solve that. Ask both players what they had, confirm with the table, fish the cards out, reshuffle and play it out. But I think this is wrong but just my 2 cents worth
stowjon
Royal Flush


Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 9071

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 1:42 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
both hands are declared dead at the same time so the small stack should be all in and the big stack has to cover him then they should split the pot.

if he had only mucked 1 hand then the other would win the pot its down to the players to protect their cards.
dik9
Straight


Joined: 22 Aug 2005
Posts: 495

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 2:40 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Jon MW wrote:


So the small blind turns over his cards - the big blind turns over his cards



The way it is explained it seems there are no board cards out, but both players cards have been exposed.

If this is the case, the tabled cards must be given back, remaining cards shuffled up and continued as normal.

Then take the dealer outside and kick shit out of him before showing him his new home on AR 1
_________________
http://pokerforheroes.org

My decision is final, but I reserve the right to change my mind!
ryanpb
Full House


Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 1500

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 11:16 am
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
stowjon wrote:
both hands are declared dead at the same time so the small stack should be all in and the big stack has to cover him then they should split the pot.

if he had only mucked 1 hand then the other would win the pot its down to the players to protect their cards.


Yeah I thought it was this, the latter scenario happend to me a few months ago... was sick
Jon MW
The British Cowboy


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1865
Location: Hastings

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 2:21 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
stowjon wrote:
... its down to the players to protect their cards.


This is true, but both players could name their hands so they could be retrieved and you're left with what would have been the case if they had kept hold of their cards, that is every other card being shuffled together.


dik9 wrote:
...
The way it is explained it seems there are no board cards out, but both players cards have been exposed.

If this is the case, the tabled cards must be given back, remaining cards shuffled up and continued as normal.
...


This was the ruling, the small blind went mental at this ruling. He said he could accept any other ruling but this was just wrong. He argued vehemently with the TD (which obviously is more than a little pointless when the TD has made the decision) and then went off to fume for half an hour after the hand had played out.

Any sympathy from anyone for the Small Blind saying that this was just a 'wrong' decision?
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
Joe The Elegance Beevers
Mobster


Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 1935

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:13 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Jon MW wrote:
stowjon wrote:
... its down to the players to protect their cards.


This is true, but both players could name their hands so they could be retrieved and you're left with what would have been the case if they had kept hold of their cards, that is every other card being shuffled together.


dik9 wrote:
...
The way it is explained it seems there are no board cards out, but both players cards have been exposed.

If this is the case, the tabled cards must be given back, remaining cards shuffled up and continued as normal.
...


This was the ruling, the small blind went mental at this ruling. He said he could accept any other ruling but this was just wrong. He argued vehemently with the TD (which obviously is more than a little pointless when the TD has made the decision) and then went off to fume for half an hour after the hand had played out.

Any sympathy from anyone for the Small Blind saying that this was just a 'wrong' decision?


The ruling is the correct one and the fairest one. They both have the right hands, no action has been cancelled or taken away and they still have the same equity.

I am guessing that the Small Blind had the worst hand, right?

I am interested in why he thought it was wrong and what he wanted to happen instead. Do you know? Who was it?
Grumbledook
Royal Flush


Joined: 25 Dec 2003
Posts: 16061

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:35 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
he thought it was wrong cause he had AT and the big blind had AA ;]
stowjon
Royal Flush


Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 9071

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 4:42 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
[quote="Jon MWAny sympathy from anyone for the Small Blind saying that this was just a 'wrong' decision?[/quote]

to be honest he should be happy that all 48 cards are now back in the deck, he still needs the same cards to hit, BUT he now has every chance now that they are in the deck and not potentially in the muck!
Jon MW
The British Cowboy


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1865
Location: Hastings

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 5:22 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Joe The Elegance Beevers wrote:
Jon MW wrote:
stowjon wrote:
... its down to the players to protect their cards.


This is true, but both players could name their hands so they could be retrieved and you're left with what would have been the case if they had kept hold of their cards, that is every other card being shuffled together.


dik9 wrote:
...
The way it is explained it seems there are no board cards out, but both players cards have been exposed.

If this is the case, the tabled cards must be given back, remaining cards shuffled up and continued as normal.
...


This was the ruling, the small blind went mental at this ruling. He said he could accept any other ruling but this was just wrong. He argued vehemently with the TD (which obviously is more than a little pointless when the TD has made the decision) and then went off to fume for half an hour after the hand had played out.

Any sympathy from anyone for the Small Blind saying that this was just a 'wrong' decision?


The ruling is the correct one and the fairest one. They both have the right hands, no action has been cancelled or taken away and they still have the same equity.

I am guessing that the Small Blind had the worst hand, right?

I am interested in why he thought it was wrong and what he wanted to happen instead. Do you know? Who was it?


He was insistent that because it wouldn't be exactly the same cards that came out then it shouldn't be that ruling - he refused to accept the randomness/probability being the same argument - to be fair I think he was genuinely upset about the ruling and wasn't, as some suggested, angle shooting because he was so far behind (as Grumble said he had AT v AA).

Stowjon's and ryan's split pot because both hands are dead was one suggestion, I think the fairest alternative to the the TD's decision was an equity split of the pot, he'd have got about 9% (?) of the pot that way - there were a few players who were sympathetic towards his argument on the table so I suggested I'd put it on here and see what a wider view was.

The small blind was Oliver Schaffmann I don't know how much of a player he is, but however strongly he felt about it I thought he was completely wrong to argue with the TD once the decision was made.
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
Joe The Elegance Beevers
Mobster


Joined: 18 Sep 2003
Posts: 1935

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 5:30 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
To me it looks like an angle shoot.

It's a dealer mistake and it has to be dealt with. I can't see any other fair way to rule it. If you kill both hands the player with AA has been massivily prejudiced.

The equity split is exactly the same as the ruling in theory but you can't do things like that in tournaments anyway.

Quote:
he refused to accept the randomness/probability being the same argument

This is just laughable to be honest.

I wonder if he would have made such a fuss if he had the AA and the other player had the A10. I seriously doubt it.
Jon MW
The British Cowboy


Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1865
Location: Hastings

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 5:35 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Joe The Elegance Beevers wrote:
To me it looks like an angle shoot.

...

I wonder if he would have made such a fuss if he had the AA and the other player had the A10. I seriously doubt it.


Very Happy I took his argument at face value rather than thinking it was an angle shoot, maybe I just haven't been spending enough time around poker players recently Very Happy
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield

2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341
The Reverend
In Rhythm


Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 6192
Location: In Rhythm

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:03 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
Jon MW wrote:
The small blind was Oliver Schaffmann I don't know how much of a player he is, but however strongly he felt about it I thought he was completely wrong to argue with the TD once the decision was made.


Might not know what sort of player he is but it's pretty clear what sort of person he is.

Who was the TD? I'm actually surprised the correct decision was made. Even though it's clearly the only fair solution, and rectifies the dealer's error, I'm sure some a few TDs would have decided both hands were dead because they hit the magical muck, and nothing is more important than that.
Phil
Full House


Joined: 25 Oct 2004
Posts: 793

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 9:28 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
stowjon wrote:
to be honest he should be happy that all 48 cards are now back in the deck, he still needs the same cards to hit, BUT he now has every chance now that they are in the deck and not potentially in the muck!


Mr. Green Mr. Green
_________________
A fine is a tax for doing wrong. A tax is a fine for doing well
darrensprengers
Misclick


Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 7551

PostPosted: Sun Apr 03, 2011 10:29 pm
View user's profile Send private message Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote
as i said on the day when you told me. total angle shoot.

@stowjon that makes no difference to the cards
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Hendon Mob Forum Index -> Mob Poker Forum All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 1 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum