Horrific Hollywood Park ruling

[Randy_Refeld]

[ 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.

[phish]

[ 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.

[Jeffage]

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

[Randy_Refeld]

[ 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).

[juanez]

[ 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.

[Sparks]

[ 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

[Randy_Refeld]

[ 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.

[AngusThermopyle]

[ 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.

[SheridanCat]

[ 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 ]
[ 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