Cards live till literally touching the Muck?

[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) This is the FARTHEST thing from an angle if the play went as written. He said "pair of 7s", which is precisely what he had. The moron who folded his 10s instead of showing them deserved to lose the pot if he mucked without being sure of what he had.

2) Someone didn't ask to see the hand. They said "you can't beat 7s?" Had the dealer been doing their job, when the 10s got tossed to them, they would have scooped them in, and the guy would have learned a valuable lesson about paying attention.

[jedi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is different from the hand in question. The OP was the last agressor, and has to show his cards first. He did, and said "pair of 7s" at the same time. "Villain" then mucked and at that point, the cards should be dead. There was no other player asking to see the cards, but one asking another player directly if he could have beaten the OP. Completely different.

That having been said, it was low limit, you did the right thing by not making a big stink of it, but you should have won the pot because he conceded it.

[Iron Tigran]

[ QUOTE ]

You don't. If he had thrown his cards into the muck, and then tried to retrieve them, you still would have lost. Cards can still be played from the muck when they are "easily retrievable", and it's in the best interests of the game.

If the dealer mucks the cards, then they are dead. If the player mucks, they sometimes still can play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retreive cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
[It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retrieve cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Here's an example where cards should be retrieved from the muck under the supervision of a floorman.

Stud river action is bet-call. Little old lady with bad eyesight turns over 9-9-7-6-5-Q-J and says straight. Opponent pushes hand to wards dealer who starts to muck it touching edge of muck. Player or dealer finally notices that LOL does not have straight so about to be mucked cards are protected as much as possible. Floorman called. Everyone agrees that the opponents cards are clearly discernible. Floorman knows this lady probably overcalled hand due to bad eyesight, she's not an angler. LOL's opponent has two pair. He should get the pot.

~ Rick

[newhizzle]

i was playing 8/16 kill at viejas the other night and missed a flush draw and thought i hit a pair on the river, i called a bet and said i got a 4, the guy mucked his cards and i flipped mine over showing J2s (small blind) and said oh sorry i thought i had J4, i won the pot but the dealer said it would be nice for me to give some money back to the guy, i offered him a big bet and he wouldnt take it, later on i called the guy down with A high at least like 4 or 5 times and won, as soon as id call hed muck his cards, i could have called with the board and got the same results, i love habitual bluffers

[deacsoft]

I'm in favor of rules that support "binding action".

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Next time, if possible, wait until his cards are mucked before showing. You did not overrepresent your hand and he willingly mucked. His mistake.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think verbally inducing your opponent to muck would be considered an "angle" play. The best hand must win the pot wherever possible, and the player who spoke up asking to see the cards was simply excercising her right to see all hands involved in a showdown.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is different from the hand in question. The OP was the last agressor, and has to show his cards first. He did, and said "pair of 7s" at the same time. "Villain" then mucked and at that point, the cards should be dead. There was no other player asking to see the cards, but one asking another player directly if he could have beaten the OP. Completely different.

That having been said, it was low limit, you did the right thing by not making a big stink of it, but you should have won the pot because he conceded it.

[/ QUOTE ]

This hand was just an honest mistake. But if you say a false hand intentionally in an attempt to have your opponent muck her hand, that would be an angle play. Of course, the floorperson doesn't know your intentions...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You don't. If he had thrown his cards into the muck, and then tried to retrieve them, you still would have lost. Cards can still be played from the muck when they are "easily retrievable", and it's in the best interests of the game.

If the dealer mucks the cards, then they are dead. If the player mucks, they sometimes still can play.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be a terrible ruling to allow a player to retreive cards from the muck. Adding "sometimes" makes it even worse.

Opening up the game to that kind of chaso seems very much against the best interests of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Last night, 5-10 at Brantford, I held QT in the SB and called while three players saw the flop. The final board was 8-4-T-T-K and I lost to the button's 88. I mucked my cards after seeing his hand and they were definately in the muck and practically mixed in with the other dead cards when somebody asked to see my hand (not the button). The dealer (who seemed inexperienced) went looking for my cards and in frusteration asked me to announce my hand to the table, which I did, because I wasn't sure of the ruling, after which she flipped up my cards. It didn't cost me the pot but it's just an example of exactly how live "dead" cards can be.

EDIT: if anyone knows if the dealer can ask what my hand was, let me know.

[Rick Nebiolo]

[ QUOTE ]
if anyone knows if the dealer can ask what my hand was, let me know.

[/ QUOTE ]

Usually procedure and training would have the dealer tell the other player that the hand is already mucked. The dealer should never ask you what your hand is.

~ Rick