Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

Hey guys,

This happened to me at the Mirage while I was in Vegas playing in the WSOP, in June.

Was playing a limit game. With no callers before me, I start a bluff on the button with 7-5. SB folds, BB calls. Flop comes A K 7. He checks, and I can tell he doesnt like flop so I bet, he calls after a bit. Turn comes K, he checks I bet, he again hesitantly calls. River is blank, he checks, I bet to try to take it, he calls after some thought.

When the showdown comes, I verbally say "pair of sevens" and flip over at the same time. He mucks his hand and says good hand, but the cards dont actually physically touch the pile of muck, they get like half way there, a few feet from his hand and face down. Then someone says "you couldnt beat 7s?" And he takes a closer look at my hand thats still face up as im raking in the pot and says "oh just two 7s, I thought you said three sevens" then he flips his hand over and shows wired tens. Then the dealer starts shoving the chips to him. And Im like "Ahhh, he mucked his hand, that pots mine". Then he tells me how the hand didnt actually physically touch the muck and its actually still alive for him to flip over.

Now I know that touching the muck is important for it being a dead hand. However, i thought that was when the dealer accidently takes your hand, you are able to save it if you get to it before it touches the muck. In a showdown situation, a hand should be dead as soon as they make an obvious folding gesture or say 'fold'. That sounds kinda loose, but an 'obvious' check motion is binding even if the person didnt intend to check.

How did it turn out? The dealer asked me if i wanted to ask the floor, I was in a good mood and it was low limit and I was just messing around, so I said let him have it, I dont really care, he made a good call, why not.

What do you guys think the rules are in this situation?

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

in the spirt of the game he won.

He had a better hand, didn't understand you, and you are trying to win a pot that your cards don't justify you winning.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

right, which is why I let him take it, without calling the floor.

But Id like to know what the technical answer is.

Im pretty sure I do have the right to the pot.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

The player called the last bet, so has a right to win the showdown if he has the best hand. His hand was not mucked, so he would probably be awarded the pot. (I don't know the specific rules at the Mirage)

As a dealer, they should immediatley muck the cards when they are folded face down and tossed towards them. But until they do so, the hand is retrievable.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

Then someone says "you couldnt beat 7s?"

"someone" deserves an ostomy.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Then someone says "you couldnt beat 7s?"

"someone" deserves an ostomy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or, at a minimum, a kick in the nuts if Mr Capone Jr is available.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
right, which is why I let him take it, without calling the floor.


[/ QUOTE ] No, you let him take it because you were in a good mood and it was low limit and you were just messing around.

Letting him have it doesn't make you a good guy. It just doesn't make you a dick, which is a good thing.

Also, your river bet was bad.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
As a dealer, they should immediatley muck the cards when they are folded face down and tossed towards them. But until they do so, the hand is retrievable.

[/ QUOTE ]

This would stop so much of the confusion.



Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.
You did a good job giving him the pot, but if you want it next time, just wait 'till cards are mucked.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
right, which is why I let him take it, without calling the floor.

But Id like to know what the technical answer is.

Im pretty sure I do have the right to the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't. If he had thrown his cards into the muck, and then tried to retrieve them, you still would have lost. Cards can still be played from the muck when they are "easily retrievable", and it's in the best interests of the game.

If the dealer mucks the cards, then they are dead. If the player mucks, they sometimes still can play.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

Even in the big clubs in LA where the rules are "more or less" standardized you are going to get different decisions here. When I worked the floor years ago I'd tend to award the pot to the best hand because my interpertation is that "card's speak" and "best hand gets the pot" (when all action is complete) trumps most other rules. But some very experienced floormen would argue that in this case "one player to a hand" was violated, and thus the pot would be awarded to you.

BTW, cards that are clearly identifiable can be retrieved from the muck in certain circumstances.

~ Rick

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) This is the FARTHEST thing from an angle if the play went as written. He said "pair of 7s", which is precisely what he had. The moron who folded his 10s instead of showing them deserved to lose the pot if he mucked without being sure of what he had.

2) Someone didn't ask to see the hand. They said "you can't beat 7s?" Had the dealer been doing their job, when the 10s got tossed to them, they would have scooped them in, and the guy would have learned a valuable lesson about paying attention.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is different from the hand in question. The OP was the last agressor, and has to show his cards first. He did, and said "pair of 7s" at the same time. "Villain" then mucked and at that point, the cards should be dead. There was no other player asking to see the cards, but one asking another player directly if he could have beaten the OP. Completely different.

That having been said, it was low limit, you did the right thing by not making a big stink of it, but you should have won the pot because he conceded it.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]

You don't. If he had thrown his cards into the muck, and then tried to retrieve them, you still would have lost. Cards can still be played from the muck when they are "easily retrievable", and it's in the best interests of the game.

If the dealer mucks the cards, then they are dead. If the player mucks, they sometimes still can play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retreive cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retrieve cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an example where cards should be retrieved from the muck under the supervision of a floorman.

Stud river action is bet-call. Little old lady with bad eyesight turns over 9-9-7-6-5-Q-J and says straight. Opponent pushes hand to wards dealer who starts to muck it touching edge of muck. Player or dealer finally notices that LOL does not have straight so about to be mucked cards are protected as much as possible. Floorman called. Everyone agrees that the opponents cards are clearly discernible. Floorman knows this lady probably overcalled hand due to bad eyesight, she's not an angler. LOL's opponent has two pair. He should get the pot.

~ Rick

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

i was playing 8/16 kill at viejas the other night and missed a flush draw and thought i hit a pair on the river, i called a bet and said i got a 4, the guy mucked his cards and i flipped mine over showing J2s (small blind) and said oh sorry i thought i had J4, i won the pot but the dealer said it would be nice for me to give some money back to the guy, i offered him a big bet and he wouldnt take it, later on i called the guy down with A high at least like 4 or 5 times and won, as soon as id call hed muck his cards, i could have called with the board and got the same results, i love habitual bluffers

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

I'm in favor of rules that support "binding action".

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is different from the hand in question. The OP was the last agressor, and has to show his cards first. He did, and said "pair of 7s" at the same time. "Villain" then mucked and at that point, the cards should be dead. There was no other player asking to see the cards, but one asking another player directly if he could have beaten the OP. Completely different.

That having been said, it was low limit, you did the right thing by not making a big stink of it, but you should have won the pot because he conceded it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This hand was just an honest mistake. But if you say a false hand intentionally in an attempt to have your opponent muck her hand, that would be an angle play. Of course, the floorperson doesn't know your intentions...

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You don't. If he had thrown his cards into the muck, and then tried to retrieve them, you still would have lost. Cards can still be played from the muck when they are "easily retrievable", and it's in the best interests of the game.

If the dealer mucks the cards, then they are dead. If the player mucks, they sometimes still can play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retreive cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Last night, 5-10 at Brantford, I held QT in the SB and called while three players saw the flop. The final board was 8-4-T-T-K and I lost to the button's 88. I mucked my cards after seeing his hand and they were definately in the muck and practically mixed in with the other dead cards when somebody asked to see my hand (not the button). The dealer (who seemed inexperienced) went looking for my cards and in frusteration asked me to announce my hand to the table, which I did, because I wasn't sure of the ruling, after which she flipped up my cards. It didn't cost me the pot but it's just an example of exactly how live "dead" cards can be.

EDIT: if anyone knows if the dealer can ask what my hand was, let me know.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
if anyone knows if the dealer can ask what my hand was, let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually procedure and training would have the dealer tell the other player that the hand is already mucked. The dealer should never ask you what your hand is.

~ Rick

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
if anyone knows if the dealer can ask what my hand was, let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually procedure and training would have the dealer tell the other player that the hand is already mucked. The dealer should never ask you what your hand is.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks. I thought it was a bit strange, but I didn't want to cause a fuss.

Re: Cards live till literally touching the Muck?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is different from the hand in question. The OP was the last agressor, and has to show his cards first. He did, and said "pair of 7s" at the same time. "Villain" then mucked and at that point, the cards should be dead. There was no other player asking to see the cards, but one asking another player directly if he could have beaten the OP. Completely different.

That having been said, it was low limit, you did the right thing by not making a big stink of it, but you should have won the pot because he conceded it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This hand was just an honest mistake. But if you say a false hand intentionally in an attempt to have your opponent muck her hand, that would be an angle play. Of course, the floorperson doesn't know your intentions...

[/ QUOTE ]

There was no mistake. He said his hand, tabled his cards and the villain mucked. No mistake, no angle shooting here. This is compltely different from miscalling your hand like "pair of 4s" when you have J2s in which case the villain IS entitled to the pot because you miscalled your hand, intentional or not.

If you miscall your hand, intentional or not, you should be subject to penalty. In this case, hero didn't. He called his hand correctly, and tabled the cards immediately. No problem. Hero should have kept the pot, though it was a nice low limit gesture to not contest it at the end.