Pushed pot to wrong person....POLL

Playing 3-6 HE, waiting for another game. I'm in BB with J7h. anyways long story short. Flop hits me w/trips, but a 4 str8t on the board by the river. It was checked around (3 players) and both players turn over a Q for top pair, or so the dealer announces. I didnt see that the guy at the other end of the table also had the dummy end of the str8, nor did the dealer. So I said oh ok I got the jack....trips...send-it. And they did.


30 seconds go by and the players at the table say hey he had a str8. The dealer is already dealing the next hand. The floor gets called. When the floor asked me I said hey I saw a Q the dealer said pair I showed trips they sent it.


I must say I have no problem the best hand gets the pot. The floor told the player he'd look at the tape, count it down and that I would give it back. When he said this he was very confident that I wouldnt have a problem with it, but he did "check me out" as he was saying this.


So 4-5 minutes and a few hands later the "winner" says he's still waiting for his "payoff" with a real pissy attitude.

I kinda pipe up. Hey sir, you better be nice. I'M the one cooperating here. I can cash out. I gathered a little sick sense of humor from this.


So the floor cames back, lets me know how much, I give it up. And the floor buys me dinner. Ooooops they made the dealer pay for it.


Now the questions are.....


Would you give it back?


How far would you go in defending rules like, protecting your own cards, a new hand is being dealt etc?

well, i wouldn't berate you for your cooperation, especially since the floor was pretty cool about it. however, 99% of poker is making money from your opponents' mistakes. one of the mistakes a player can make is to not protect his or her hand. most clubs ive played in have somewhere in their printed house rules that each player is responsible for protecting his or her own hand. the pot was pushed, the guy allowed his hand to be mucked thus giving up a claim on the pot. it is by all rules your pot. if it had been me, i may have argued the point. depending on the situation of course. if the guy was a fish and a real party-thrower, then perhaps id want to keep him at the table. this happened to me once, similar situation. i had a better kicker than my opponent to the same best pair, and the dealer pushed me the pot, even though there was a kicker on board that counterfeited both of our personal kickers. i noticed, but figured if the dealer and the player didn't say anything, who am i to give a sucker his money if i know the rule but he doesn't? i say take every chip they push you, and don't give 'em back easily unless you have a good reason to.

This is a no brainer to me. Cards speak. The other player had the best hand, and numerous other players saw it. Whether you saw it or not is irrelevant. You did the right thing.


BTW: "protect your own hand" has nothing to do with it. The other player did protect his hand and exposed it face up.


Even if there were a rule (sort of like instant replay in football) that all disputes must be resolved before the next hand is dealt, I'd still give back the money. Why alienate the whole table with an unjust technical reading of the rules?

I've only been playing in card rooms for about a month now. Last time I was playing I saw something very strange and I was just wondering how often these types of things happen. I've seen a few posts on here about errors in this area and was just wondering how often it happens. I can't fathom playing the game and not paying attention to what the winning hand is and who should get the pot.


As I was saying the strange occurence I saw amazed the whole table. I forget the entire board, but there was a Queen and an Ace on the flop. On the river it's heads-up between two players. One of them bets and the other calls. The better flashes AKs and says Aces with a King. The other guy says that's good and as he starts to roll over his hand to show he had a Queen (why I don't know...) the first guy tosses his hand into the muck.

Immediately the second guy says why did you just do that? You just gave up the pot. There was back and forth banter and the dealer and the "loser" call for a floor person almost right away. The floor person told the "winner" that he can't just throw his hand away and that he lost rights to the pot. He was quite flustered at this point and politely asked the other guy for the pot. The floor person cut him off and said that he lost. At this point the "loser" said that he was planning on letting him have the pot anyway but he wanted to make sure he understood what he had done. The pot was pushed to the best hand and he was fairly rattled for the rest of the evening.

Yeah, I'd give it back. If the guy turned over his hand and layed it on the table, he is entitled to the pot. I can only assume the guy with the straight didn't know he won the pot. Otherwise why would he let the pot be awarded to someone else and another hand be dealt without saying anything?


I saw something similar last week. There were 3 players and the hand was checked around on the river. Two guys turned over top pair and the third guy turned over a straight. The dealer looked at all 3 hands, killed the hand of the guy with the straight, and started to split the pot between the other two players. Everyone told the dealer he had made a mistake, and the other two players acknowledged that the 3rd player indeed had had a straight and he was awarded the pot.

Call me cynical, but if I didn't see it, I don't believe it. If I did see it at the time he tabled his hand, I'd have spoken up then and said "He has a straight". If I didn't see it and somebody else says something AFTER the hand is in the muck, I would dispute it.


Personally, I have no comprehension of people who speak up about what somebody had AFTER it's too late. Why would you wait until the next hand is being dealt before saying something? It would be different if you saw somebody's hand but they didn't actually lay it on the table. Then you're not supposed to speak up until they do lay it down. And, depending upon all the circumstances, I might say something to the guy (though not very often).


So, I say prove it to me, or you don't get the money. And no, I wouldn't agree to watch the tape after the fact. I feel it's too late then.


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

100% with greg here. you have to see the winning hand or dont give it up. the house may rule against you but i wouldnt pay unless i had to. after the next hand is startd its too late to make a claim. if the player overlooked his hand its possible the other players overlooked what he had as well. the floor should only go to the tape if the losing player makes a claim in time, then the tape is valid. and you should be entitled to go see the tape. id feel insulted that the house didnt pay the pot off and expected me to and then offer me a dinner.

Here's another weird one, and to this day I don't

know what the correct rule is.


Let me preface by saying that this was when I had

just started playing poker (I make plenty of mistakes

still -- just different ones). I was holding

pocket aces, including Ac. There was a club flush

possibility by the turn. A fourth club comes on

the river, and it's heads up. My opponent bets.

I call. He shows a flush, and I didn't realize that

I had the nut flush. (I know -- I'm great to have

at a poker table.) I'm very averse to showing cards

unless I have to, so I didn't. The dealer was about

to take my cards when someone at the table asked the

dealer to show them. The dealer turns them over,

and of course, I win. But what's the rule? The dealer

awarded the money to me (he said he had to pay off the

highest hand), but I didn't show voluntarily.


Thoughts?

IME, the most common rule is thus. If the "winner" of the pot asks to see your hand, the hand is exposed and if it's the better hand, you become the winner. If anybody else asks to see the hand, it is shown (often after being ceremoniously tapped onto the muck to kill it) but does not win even if it is the best hand.


So, in your case, the unanswered question is who asked to see?


Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

Jen,


Usually when you muck face down and someone (doesn't matter who) asks to see your hand, the dealer should take your mucked hand and tap it on the muck pile twice before exposing your hand. In that way, your hand is considered dead by definition. There's no controversy that your hand is "dead".


That's the way they do it in AZ. I think it's a pretty good procedure. Anyone else have any input/comments on this?


Mike


PS: In a heads up pot at showdown, I will show my hand 99% of the time anyway just to avoid unpleasant circumstances like these. Think about doing this, especially with a highly coordinated board. IMO, the benefits will outweigh the negatives of showing a losing hand if you can handle that stigma.

Some random guy at the table asked to see, not the one

still in the hand...

If the word of a floorman counts, Greg is correct. If a player concedes the pot and another player asks to see the hand it shall be touched to the muck and then exposed. However, such a hand may be ruled dead even if it is not touched to the muck. If the winner asks to see the hand and it turns out to be a better hand, then it is considered 'live' and will be awarded the pot. Sort of reminds me of the old saying " be careful what you ask for".


P.S. Just for arguments sake, I totally disagree with a player asking to see your hand in this situation. Unless you were a 4th street initiator, (bettor or raiser), I cannot see any reason to see your hand. Tommy Angelo wrote a great piece in pokerpages in regards to this boarderline offensive practice. I believe that a houseman should have been called prior to your hand being shown and he/she should have ruled it dead and not shown it. JMHO.


Larry

This is why when I play, I say my hand when I'm showing it.