Tourney ruling - Correct?

strewelpeter · 28-09-2007 12:57pm #1

As usual there are only house rules and ...we really should be doing something about getting a standard rule book for tourneys even for Ireland but thats another threads work.

Obviously the decision that was made here stands but the split was about 50 50 as to whether it was correct or not ...I didn't really have an opinion and I'm still not decided!

Two players involved in a pot no one but the players involved is playing that much attention to the hand as it comes to a post river showdown,
First to show shows A7 the other player looks at the board turns his cards to show A5, kind of dangling them over the table and the pot is awarded to the A7.
As the A7 guy is hoovering up the pot some 20 or 30 seconds later as the cards are being shuffled for the next hand someone from the other end that chips in "Shouldn't that have been a split pot"
As you can imagine chaos ensued :rolleyes:
After contributions from most of the people at the table piecing it back together it was agreed that the board was Q 3 3 6 10 meaning it should have been split.
The clock was stopped a ruling was made and then the Poker Manager was called to make a definitive ruling.
The ruling was that the dealer had made a mistake and the chips should be taken out of the A7 guys stack and split. It took another five minutes to work back the pot.

Even with the stopped clock we only got through one lap in that whole level :eek: I was not pleased.

Clareman · 28-09-2007 1:02pm

Have all the cards been mucked? Even though the guy took the pot doesn't mean the hand is over (I think).

Holdem isn't like other games where you have to name your hand, the board speaks for itself, but if a genuine mistake has been made once the hand is over the hand is over.

I would have ruled it that if the cards were still in play, it's a split pot, if the cards had been mucked and the next hand was being dealt the original (wrong) ruling should stand.

I'm running a tourney tonight, I hope nothing like this crops up and if it does I will rule as above (unless someone corrects me)

cooker3 · 28-09-2007 1:16pm

I believe the ruling should be the that pot is recreated as in they go back street by street and figure out how much is bet and then what that is done it's split.
It's and dealer error and hands were shown so as long as action hasn't taken place for the next hand then it should be split

CelticPhantom · 28-09-2007 1:19pm

Normal rule is that once the next hand has started (i.e. the dealer has started shuffling the cards) no changes can be made - even if as in this case an error was made.

ozpoker · 28-09-2007 1:31pm

CelticPhantom wrote:

Normal rule is that once the next hand has started (i.e. the dealer has started shuffling the cards) no changes can be made - even if as in this case an error was made.

What CP said.

It's the player's responsibility to not relinquish his hand until he's convinced it loses. Once he does, he gives up any claim to the pot. The reason these sets of rules exist is because people's memory can be different even a few seconds after the event.

Were I the floor, and assuming the next hand started, I'd rule the A7 keeps the pot, because the evidence is all gone at this point. Hard luck to the other player.

-Oz-

strewelpeter · 28-09-2007 1:32pm

Edited to add that the cards were well and truly mucked

Taxipete29 · 28-09-2007 1:33pm

Where did this happen?

strewelpeter · 28-09-2007 1:34pm

At the Fitz EOM last night.

semibluff · 28-09-2007 1:41pm

its the dealer and the players mistake (mr A5). the hand stays with A7 is the official ruling AFAIK. this happened ages ago in the red cow and the guy who had been awarded the pot had no problem splitting it, and so they did, but was told if he had of complained, by the rule the pot was his.

dont give in your cards unless your sure.

not to hijack thread, but reminds me of a funny situation a was involved in during a cash game. i was playing a live game and had raised pre with AQ, with only one other player. it was checked to the river, were the final card came out was a 10. the dealer announced ten, my opponent wasnt paying attention (eating food) and bet ten, thinking he was calling me.
i folded he won the pot, and it turned out on the river he was calling with an OESD. my ace high beat his nine high. fkn dealer!

BigCityBanker · 28-09-2007 1:43pm

strewelpeter wrote:

At the Fitz EOM last night.

lol

connie147 · 28-09-2007 2:03pm

Once the next hand hasnt been played,and if it was obvious that the hand should have been a split pot,I would be in favour of figuring out what was in the pot and splitting it.He showed down his hand and is entitled to half the pot.Why should he not be?

ozpoker · 28-09-2007 2:13pm

connie147 wrote:

Once the next hand hasnt been played,and if it was obvious that the hand should have been a split pot,I would be in favour of figuring out what was in the pot and splitting it.He showed down his hand and is entitled to half the pot.Why should he not be?

Play Omaha H/L with a break in dealer and you'll know why this rule exists.

-Oz-

connie147 · 28-09-2007 3:59pm

ozpoker wrote:

Play Omaha H/L with a break in dealer and you'll know why this rule exists.

-Oz-

Oz
If the question was about omaha H/L,fine, but it wasn't, its a nl holdem tourney and in the interest of fairness(and common sense),that pot should be split.