Hypothetical Bad Beat Jackpot situation

It has been my experience that problems can arise when an unfamiliar situation presents itself and a ruling is required. In the case of a ruling on a Jackpot hand, this could be quite a bit of money involved in the decision and people might just end up being visibly upset. Really.

Now this is about an improbable a situation you would ever hear of, but it occurred to me today that you could conceiveably have a hand in Texas Hold'em where TWO "Bad Beats" occur on the same hand.

Give one player AA, another KK, and another 33.

Let's make the board AK3-3-K.

All players are using both their hole cards, and the AAAKK loses to 3333A which is beaten by KKKKA.

Are provisions typically in place for just such an occurrence in most cardrooms? How would this be handled?

I realize this is of about as much practical use as "should you bet or checkraise a Royal Flush" but I thought I'd throw it out there.

[CORed]

Interesting question: None of the posted rules I have seen in cardrooms have ever addressed the "two qualifying losers" situation, but it must have happened some time.

Usually the posted rules list a loser's share, a somewhat smaller winner's share, and the balance of the jackpot divided among other players seated at the table. It seems that the most equitable solution would be to split the loser's share between the two losers. Another possibility would be to say that only the best loser gets the loser's share. I wonder if cardrooms have rules to address this, as making a decision "on the fly" is certain to result in bad feelings, if not lawsuits. Unlikely as this scenario is, it can happen and it will happen.

[Jimbo]

If you utilize tournament rules the first person out which in the given example would be the pocket kings would get the bad beat portion. It might become even more complex if one of the players were all-in during this hand.

Jimbo