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

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
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

[/ QUOTE ]

Describing a player throwing their hand into the muck is far different thatn a card merely touching the muck. If they truly kill hands for just touching the muck I would never play there because there is no way to know what other rules and procedures they don't understand until it happens.

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 ]

Except that if a hand is solidly in the muck (or even just on top of it), there will always be some question as to which cards are his. If there's any doubt, the hand should be declared dead.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

I wouldn't want my cards back. But if a bet or raise makes me fold, it must stay in the pot b/c it prompted me to act in a certain way. The time for the guy to object would have been at the point the bet was made...once he allows action to actually proceed, he has accepted the bet as legitimate and cannot now question its validity. IMO.

Jeff

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Except that if a hand is solidly in the muck (or even just on top of it), there will always be some question as to which cards are his. If there's any doubt, the hand should be declared dead.

[/ QUOTE ]

If the hand is in the muck there is no way to retrieve it so it isn't a matter of the hand be declared dead as much as their being no hand to make a ruling on. Nothing should ever be placed on top of the muck, when a player gives up their cards they should be mucked so they are not retrievable. If someone's hand merely touches the muck their is no reason to make it ineligible for the pot (there may have been something that occurred just before it touched the muck that makes it dead, but the muck itself has no magical powers).

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

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


[/ QUOTE ]

Straight from Roberts Rules:
Cards thrown into the muck may be ruled dead. However, a hand that is clearly identifiable may be retrieved at management's discretion if doing so is in the best interest of the game.

The key word in the rule is MAY. It just depends on the situation. The key word in your post is INSTANT, which is just a bad rule if that's the rule where you play.

[ QUOTE ]
Even if player can correctly identify or name both cards, the hand is dead.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just naming what the hand was doesn't make it "identifiable". I interpret this rule to mean that the cards haven't been totally mixed into the muck in such a manner as to make it impossible to distinguish which ones they are. This is exactly why a dealer should never place cards on top of the muck or let mucked cards linger on the table - any discarded cards should immediately be swept into the muck so they cannot be considered retrievable and there can be no dispute later.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
Dealer then turns to me. I think for a moment [snip]...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.

[/ QUOTE ]

I know of at least two other So Cal casinos where the rule enforced is that action by two or more players after a mistake locks in that mistake.

Is it possible the floorman at HP made his decision because only you had acted behind the hand-waver-dude? That is, only a single person had acted making the wave/bet action still fixable. And unfortunately at that point your hand is dead since it is in the muck.

Sparks

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know of at least two other So Cal casinos where the rule enforced is that action by two or more players after a mistake locks in that mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be significant action after dealing in the wrong order scting out of turn etc. This case is (or should be) treated differently as the player made a motion that apparently the table took as nothign ans allowed him to bet and later a player complained that he checked and should not be allowed to bet. I can see how a floorman that has not been trained properly could confuse these two situations as they look similiar.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]


.. then bets.

Dealer then turns to me. ....

The dealer thinks this is reasonable and says, "Okay, sir, you checked so take your bet back."

[/ QUOTE ]

Forget the ruling. The Dealer here is the joke. A bad joke. Sees the "hand wave", sees the bet, lets the bet stand, indicates it is your turn, lets you muck...and then finds it "reasonable" that the button checked? And I am sure his explination to the floor was just as "reasonable". Wonder if the MP 'complainer' was a 'regular' and a George.

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ 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 ]

Oh, come on, Randy. The muck is magic. Just like the magic that happens when you expose your hand. The dead hand fairy appears and sticks a knife in your cards. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Honestly, why do people keep repeating this junk about hands being dead?

Regards,

T

Re: Horrific Hollywood Park ruling
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ 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 ]

Oh, come on, Randy. The muck is magic. Just like the magic that happens when you expose your hand. The dead hand fairy appears and sticks a knife in your cards. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Honestly, why do people keep repeating this junk about hands being dead?

Regards,

T

[/ QUOTE ]

Then I think the dead hand fairy lives in Albuquerque.

ScottieK