MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

4/8 limit hold ‘em
UTG folds, UTG+1 raises, MP appears as if he wants to call and says to the dealer “where are my cards?”
Dealer says “you mucked them”.
MP says, “No, I didn’t. That’s a misdeal”.
Dealer says “UTG+1 declared raise, you were next to act and your cards were over the line. I thought you folded and I mucked the cards. The hand is dead. Continue the hand”.
MP says “No, that’s a misdeal” and calls for the floor.
Floor comes over and says only one player had acted, there wasn’t significant action, and declared a misdeal.

I thought the floor was wrong as hell and I blame the player for not protecting his hand. I thought his hand was dead since it touched the muck. Thoughts?

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

It was not a misdeal. The guy should've capped his cards.

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

Sounds like significant action to me. Regardless, this was not a misdeal, just a dead hand.

Regards,

T

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

I generally agree that its his fault for not protecting his cards but with one caveat. Were his cards still lying where they were dealt and had he just been a little slow in picking them up? In that case I have some sympathy and I dont think the dealer can claim the hand was mucked because theyre over the line if he hadnt touched them yet.

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

What if the hadn't noticed that the player picked them up? Are you saying the dealer has to ask each player if they are folding when their cards are over the commitment line?

Player raises, it's definately "significant action", the mucked hand stays mucked, and the hand goes on. Since the other player hadn't even seen the cards, he should just STFU and go onto the next hand. What's the difference if the player gets it called a missdeal or not, he's still not playing this hand, so as I said, he should STFU and let the others finish the hand they are on.

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I dont think the dealer can claim the hand was mucked because theyre over the line if he hadnt touched them yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

The OP seems to be saying the guy was about to call UTG+1's pre-flop raise when he noticed his cards were gone. He *could* be cold-calling a raise blind, but more likely he's looked at his cards and failed to protect them.

Seems hard to call it a misdeal when everybody got the two cards they were supposed to have. Awfully nitty move, considering he hadn't put any money in the pot. Shrug it off, let the hand play out, move on. Who gains anything from wasting time arguing with the floor?

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

I agree with you - I was just asking whether the cards had been touched yet. If he'd picked them up then put them down over the line and allowed them to be mucked then I have no sympathy at all. But sometimes you might be stacking chips from winning a pot or tipping a cocktail waitress and the action might get to you a little quicker than expected.

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

My reasoning for my post was that the OP did say the player said he wanted to call. If the player wanted to call, why were his cards over the line then? That's why it's called a commitment line. Commit chips or cards over it and they go to the middle. This clearly falls in line with protecting your cards. If there was a chip or something else on the card, I'm sure 99% of the dealers would stop and not touch them.

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

[ QUOTE ]
just a dead hand.



[/ QUOTE ]

Re: MGM - misdeal or dead hand?
 

Floor messed that up big-time.

First, MP had no money in, so declaring his hand dead has no consequences to him, whereas a misdeal obviously has consequences for the raiser - he loses cards that were presumably good, so even by "customer is always right" standards the hand should continue. It's just a hand MP isn't playing. (OTOH, for some nits, every hand that isn't a blind is gold, so that might have been his reasoning.)

Second, as has been pointed out, that's why the line is there.

Third, he looked like he was about to call, meaning he had looked at his cards before UTG+1 raised. I don't expect a 4/8 player to be especially smart, but if he's smart enough to declare a misdeal, you'd think he'd be smart enough to look at his cards in turn. (And how much time was he taking for the cards to get mucked before he even noticed he had no cards? Dealer was grabbing folded cards in turn, right?)

Am I the only one who's trying to figure out what kind of angle MP might have been shooting?