Podcasts Poker Forums

Hey Bart

Listen to your podcast religiously and thoroughly enjoy it...

Since you have a wealth of experience playing live was wondering if I could get your thoughts on this call by the floor manager/pitboss

Setup:
game: $2/$5NL $300max buy in

I had a stack of $450 and I am UTG + 3 with 8h8c and raise to $20 (4X)at which stage my bet is placed in front of me.. and the guy to my immediate left goes all in for $250 the table folds around to me.. the dealer is pointing at me and waiting for me to act and the guy to my left is not paying attention like most live players thinks he has won the hand and throws his cards face down forwards ... teh dealer grabs the cards brings them in and the cards touch the muck pile CLEARLY A FOLD IN MY OPINION.

now at this point the dealer announces i havent acted yet and this player reaches and grabs his cards and I ask the dealer what is the ruling in this situation? at which point the floor manager comes over and says the guys hand is live and forced me to make a decision... I was of course disgusted as a regular at this casino that a players hand that has hit the muck can be reawarded...

In my opinion there are three options

1. this may be the harsher of the two.. he has made a bet and folded his cards.. the hand is dead but the bet is live.. and if i call I should auto win the hand as his hand is dead...

2. his hand is dead and he just has to match my $20 raise

3. the whole hand is dead...

what do you think should happen in this situation? Just wanted to see what is the normal ruling if you have every been in this sort of situation?

Im not bart. But if his hand was clearly retrievable from the muck (which it sounds like it was) then his hand should be given back to him and live until you finish your action.

The integrity of the game is more important than a strict application of the rules and in this case I believe the ruling should go against normal rules.

Im not bart. But if his hand was clearly retrievable from the muck (which it sounds like it was) then his hand should be given back to him and live until you finish your action.

The integrity of the game is more important than a strict application of the rules and in this case I believe the ruling should go against normal rules.

The rules are there for a reason - when any cards touch the muck pile they are dead as it is too easy for the wrong cards to be returned. You can't say the rules can be bent because in this instance it seems a little harsh.

I agree that -- if the cards were retrievable without discrepancy as to the exact two cards held by villain -- the action remains on Hero.

*Villain clearly did not muck his hand. Dealer error while waiting for hero's decision.

This falls under sportsman/gentleman conduct IMO.

NOTE: I have had my hand mucked unintentionally by a dealer OR another player mucking his hand on top of my revealed hand (technically mucking my hand). These times the other player allowed fairness to prevail (gentlemen's game). I always remember those times too.

Hey Bgach,

Definitely an interesting question this situation comes up a lot more than you think in casinos. First of all the answer depends on the individual rules of the cardroom. I find it absolutely amazing that there are not standard rules for cash games that apply to all casinos.

With that being said, at Commerce, where I play 90% of my poker this hand would be retrievable. In fact, I haven't run into a casino where there isn't at least some stipulations about retrieving hands from the muck. It actually tilts the hell out of me when guys say "it touched the muck the hand is automatically dead" when in fact the muck is not an instant end all dead zone. I can't think of one place where this is the case.

At Commerce there is a strange rule where the supervisor, not the floor, is the only one that is supposed to retrieve a hand clearly mixed with the muck. Cards barely touching the muck are for the most part not dead. I actually think that this should be the rule. I know it opens up a slippery slope as to what is in the muck vs touching the muck but in my view if the two cards are clearly visible and they haven't been intentionally tossed in and mixed into the muck they should be in play.

Of course another consideration is if you get a ruling in your favour (your suggestions 1 or 2).
You then have an immediate image of a rules nit who is willing to get a ruling to get a pot awarded for what in an obviously unintentional 'mucking' of a hand.
This puts you as enemy number 1 at the table ... not only for the 'victim', but for others at the table as well.
I wouldn't be surprised if there were comments made, or people playing differently against you as a result (which may or may not be good).
If you don't mind being the 'table douche', then by all means make a point of it ... otherwise simply accept the (reasonable) decision & get on with the game.

I learnt something here. Where I have played anything touching the muck is dead - and it has always seemed ridiculous when the cards are clearly retrievable. It seems it is card room dependent then & some common sense prevails.

Thanks for all the feedback guys it's one of those annoying situations in live poker where I have seen all sorts of different decisions being made and the inconsistency in the decisions often frustrate me.

Especially the casino I play at tend yo have rules that are skewed towards the recreational player. For example one thing I often see is out of turn actiion like people calling out of turn and then if you put in a raise they are allowed to retrieve their money and gold their cards which takes away the ability to punish out of turn limpers who wouldn't do that if the money they put forward is dead once a forward motion is made with their chips.

I guess all these things ate what you deal with in a live game situation.

Thanks again for all your feedback!