Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

I know this is my second floor ruling post of the weekend, but whereas the AK vs. "flush" one was more just a curiosity (I wasn't upset with the floor, just asking what was going on), this one I knew I got shafted.

There are 4 players on the flop and I'm first to act. I check, 2 more guys check, and the button looks around sort of dumbly and makes sure it's on him, sweeping his hand at the other players in an incoherent gesture, then bets.

Dealer then turns to me. I think for a moment, and decide that although I'd like to see a turn card, there's a good chance of a LAGgy guy in MP checkraising the button's bet (button was a preflop raiser), and I may not have the odds to peel here. So I fold.

After my cards are in the muck, the LAGgy guy in MP decides to object to the bet in the first place. He stops the action and tells the dealer that the button pointed and waved his hand, which indicates a "check" and thus shouldn't be allowed to bet. The dealer thinks this is reasonable and says, "Okay, sir, you checked so take your bet back."

Well this pisses me off. A free turn card and I'm already in the muck? I call the floorman over. First of all, the guy wasn't checking, he was just being a dumba$s and making sure he could bet. But even if he was checking, THERE WAS ACTION AFTER HE BET, i.e. my fold. That goddam bet belongs in the pot, doesn't it?

I protested to the floor that I acted on the button's bet, which was not objected to by the dealer or any player when I made my decision to fold, and if the ruling is a check, then I need my cards back. If my hand is dead, then I want that bet in the pot. Floorman says "sorry" and declares that a player pointing and waving means he is checking, and can't bet after that.

Argh.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

You did get shafted but I wouldn't have called the floor because there is no way in hell you're getting your cards back. A wave is usually considered a check, so if you wanted the flop checked through you could have pointed that out to the dealer when it happened.

So yea, the ruling sucks but I still wouldn't have complained because it's only going to slow things down.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

This is a bad ruling but instead of calling floor I would have just politely asked the dealer to give my cards back- they usually will if its a good-natured bunch

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
You did get shafted but I wouldn't have called the floor because there is no way in hell you're getting your cards back. A wave is usually considered a check, so if you wanted the flop checked through you could have pointed that out to the dealer when it happened.

So yea, the ruling sucks but I still wouldn't have complained because it's only going to slow things down.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to look beyond just your own self interests. Your hand is mucked. You're not expecting to get it back.

The reason you complain is to aprise the offending player about his checking/betting motion. It makes quite an impression when the floor says it.

The ruling sucks if the dealer allowed you to act accordingly after the bet. The way I've always seen it is after there's action afterward, in this case a fold, then the action stands but the player is warned to watch his mannerisms.

Imo, this one is worth slowing the game for a hand. It makes it less likely to happen in a later hand.

b

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

Whwn I play live it's largely just for entertainment. I don't play live that much as a result. You're right that it's less likley to happen with this dealer again, but to me that's not that big of a deal since I'm unlikely to see this dealer again for months. To me it's not worth slowing the game down and making enemies of people.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Whwn I play live it's largely just for entertainment. I don't play live that much as a result. You're right that it's less likley to happen with this dealer again, but to me that's not that big of a deal since I'm unlikely to see this dealer again for months. To me it's not worth slowing the game down and making enemies of people.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're not doing it for the dealer, you're doing it for the player who makes the waving motion.

This clarification doesn't make enemies of players, it helps the game run smoother. Again, you do it for the table, not just yourself. Other players actually appreciate it.

Just because you're not a regular, doesn't mean you can't help make the game better and smoother running. If you don't step up, you can't blame anyone else for when it happens again, over and over, essentially, slowing down the game even more overall when you're not willing to say something yourself.

b

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
This is a bad ruling but instead of calling floor I would have just politely asked the dealer to give my cards back- they usually will if its a good-natured bunch

[/ QUOTE ]

...or if he's a terrible dealer. The instant cards hit the muck, they're dead. Doesn't matter if they're both easily identifiable. Giving the OP his cards back would have been the worst thing to do in this situation.

OP did kinda get screwed over, but dealer should have stuck with his decision to allow the bet and warned the "waver" what his hand motion indicates. I'd have to see this wave to determine if it was a check or not. Usually the only hand action recognized as a check at my B&M is patting the table or rapping knuckles on the table.

ScottieK

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
The instant cards hit the muck, they're dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I repeat myself a lot on this, but people keep saying it. The muck has no magical powers that kills anything it touches. There simply is no rule that a hand is dead for touching the muck.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
and the button looks around sort of dumbly and makes sure it's on him, sweeping his hand at the other players in an incoherent gesture, then bets.

[/ QUOTE ]

At this point this can probably be ruled a check. After you fold and a player now objects he is shooting an angle. He accepted the action of bet by not objecting so it is now too late to object.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The instant cards hit the muck, they're dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know I repeat myself a lot on this, but people keep saying it. The muck has no magical powers that kills anything it touches. There simply is no rule that a hand is dead for touching the muck.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not where I play. Real life example: Villain is all-in against guy. River shows up (four to a flush), and villain disgustedly slams his hand face down on the felt. One card from villain's hand skips across the table and lands on top of the muck. Guy turns over crap. Villain turns over his remaining card for a winning pair. Dealer declares hand dead because villain's second card is in the muck through no fault of dealer - need two live cards to declare the pot. Floor is called, they back up the dealer - even though seats 1, 10, and the villain easily identified the dead card. No tolerance for players who don't protect their hand.

I've seen dealers sweep live cards into the muck from seats 1 and 10 who don't protect their cards. Even if player can correctly identify or name both cards, the hand is dead.

Who wants to get into this game of "that's my card right there" in the muck?

ScottieK