Turningstone Ruling Question
 

NL cash game (200 max buy-in). I'm on the BB in seat 1. Seat 3 raises to 12. Seat 6 calls. Little blind (seat 10) calls. I call with pocket 4's.

Flop comes Q-J-4 (two clubs). I bet 17. Seat 3 folds. Seat 6 folds. Dealer grabs my cards (I didn't have a chip on them), mucks them, and begins pushing the pot my way. Seat 10 says "Whoa, whoa."

Dealer realizes his mistake, apologizes, calls floor over. Their ruling was to give me my 17 back, then give all 4 players their 12 back. This seemed a bit odd to me, seeing as seats 3 and 6 had folded to my bet. I thought maybe my 17 would come back then seat 10 and I would split the 48 in there.

I didn't complain or protest since it was an honest mistake on the dealer's part; I didn't protect my hand; also not a ton of money....I don't know what, if anything the rules say about a situation like this. Is it addressed in the rules, or is it a house to house policy?

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
Their ruling was to give me my 17 back, then give all 4 players their 12 back. This seemed a bit odd to me, seeing as seats 3 and 6 had folded to my bet. I thought maybe my 17 would come back then seat 10 and I would split the 48 in there.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems odd to me too.

You get your 17 back regardless. That's a no-brainer.

After that, splitting the rest of the money between you and Seat 10 comes the closest to making a fair decision. Why would Seat 3 or Seat 6 get the money? It's clear that after they intentionally and knowingly folded, they had a 0% chance of winning the pot... why should they get any chips back?

I don't know about the rules on the books, but I've often heard that the floorpeople are supposed to make decisions that best reflect the integrity of the game, and giving chips to someone who had no chance of winning them doesn't seem to do that.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

You get your bet back, seat 10 takes the pot. Seat 10 is the only player with living hand.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
You get your bet back, seat 10 takes the pot. Seat 10 is the only player with living hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

And you get a lesson in protecting your hand.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
You get your bet back, seat 10 takes the pot. Seat 10 is the only player with living hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is unfortunately the correct decision assuming your cards were not clearly discernible and therefore retrievable.

~ Rick

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
And you get a lesson in protecting your hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

I had warned my girlfriend at least a hundred times to protect her hand, especially in the seats closest to the dealer. Quick story:

A few years ago she calls me while playing 20/40 holdem in a big card club. Naturally I ask if she's in a hand. She says she is so I say play it first. I listen on my cell to what seems to be an increasing degree of commotion. Apparently she was in the one seat in the BB and flopped a nut straight. All sorts of bets go in on the flop, ditto on the turn, and a couple on the river. She still *has* the nuts. When she reaches over her stacks to turn over her hand there were no cards! The club loves her as a customer but there was nothing they could do. The cards were brought into the muck on the flop.

Lesson learned: Girlfriends and wife's just don't listen to men.

~ Rick

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

I had a similar situation once -- dealer took my bet then my cards.

I nicely called for the floor, who gave me a look as if asking me for what I wanted.

I said: "I think he either has to give me my cards back or give me my bet back, but he can't take both."

Floor told the dealer to give me the bet, correctly warned me to protect my hand, and the rest of he hand played with me folding.

At the time, and now, I thought this was the only think they could do.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You get your bet back, seat 10 takes the pot. Seat 10 is the only player with living hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is unfortunately the correct decision assuming your cards were not clearly discernible and therefore retrievable.

~ Rick

[/ QUOTE ]

I've always considered the return of the bet in this situation to be a courtesy which is appropriate the first the time it happens, but not necessarily required.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've always considered the return of the bet in this situation to be a courtesy which is appropriate the first the time it happens, but not necessarily required.

[/ QUOTE ]

I confess to not knowing the rule, but ....

I never blame a dealer for mucking an unprotected hand ... and anyone who does has a tough time criticizing a dealer who doesn't keep things moving.

However, I do expect the dealer to pay attention. S/he should remember when they've taken chips and not muck that hand.

Re: Turningstone Ruling Question
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've always considered the return of the bet in this situation to be a courtesy which is appropriate the first the time it happens, but not necessarily required.


[/ QUOTE ]

In this situation anyone hasnt called the bet, so it isnt in the pot. Things would be different if there had been a call before dealer took the cards.