Tourney Need a Ruling (plus a Devil's Advocate hypothetical) (3 Viewers)

[Frogzilla]

So I would rule it as follows...

Note, I have no clue how a floor person at a tournament would or should do this, but this makes sense to me.

Since everyone saw the 66s, yet nobody can recall the suits, I'd give the player 2 random 66s. At this point as far as everyone is concerned, this player could have had any of the 66s. So random 66s won't make a difference to anyone. And if you want to argue, "but what if he makes a flush?" then you're missing the point of randomness. You could just as easily have given him random 66s that wouldn't make a flush.

One of the very last rules in the TDA says that the floor can use randomness...

View attachment 816951

So if I’m dominated pair v pair, see my suits are both covered, and someone announces they folded the set outs, is the +EV move to quickly table, then muck? Giving myself a 83% chance to improve the suit situation

Probably doesn’t offset the penalty but that’s the nice thing about angles when you’re all in and dominated…rarely do you have to serve said penalty (bc you’re busto)

 

[Moxie Mike]

So if I’m dominated pair v pair, see my suits are both covered, and someone announces they folded the set outs, is the +EV move to quickly table, then muck? Giving myself a 83% chance to improve the suit situation

Probably doesn’t offset the penalty but that’s the nice thing about angles when you’re all in and dominated…rarely do you have to serve said penalty (bc you’re busto)

Sorry man, I appreciate you chiming in but I really don't want to have a discussion about the EV of breaking rules or various etiquette breaches.

 

[Moxie Mike]

Thanks to everyone and especially @Legend5555 for chiming in with the most helpful information. You have officially been declared Prince of PCF for the day. Message @Tommy to claim your prize*

While I know this is an odd situation unique to the dynamic of the 'player/dealer' aspect, if this were to happen again I would pull the 4 sixes from the muck and randomly distribute two of them to Player A and that would be his hand. The board would then be dealt normally. Player A would receive a warning for the rule breach.

*Don't actually do this.

 

[Legend5555]

So if I’m dominated pair v pair, see my suits are both covered, and someone announces they folded the set outs, is the +EV move to quickly table, then muck? Giving myself a 83% chance to improve the suit situation

Probably doesn’t offset the penalty but that’s the nice thing about angles when you’re all in and dominated…rarely do you have to serve said penalty (bc you’re busto)

The first time sure. The second time I'm going to think you are angling given that the situation is unbelievably rare.

 

[IamMattDamon]

If the hand was tabled it can’t be killed. Otherwise players could use this move to dump chips.

100% agree with this!

The hand was shown down until the player got the bad news. I would find the pair in the muck, table them face up and run the hand, explaining the reasoning for it is chip dumping. You cannot muck an all-in preflop hand, as it raises integrity issues for the game. Set a presedence that all showdowns should have both players cards face up - then run the board. Both players had shown their cards, so just run the board after locating the 6s in the muck.

Now, if the other player would not have shown his cards and mucked them, I would have called a penalty for the player and explained why. The intent is not to be mean spirited, but to make them understand that this type of behaviour doesn't fly. Start with 1 round penalty -> DQ if they keep doing it. They'll learn quickly. If you would declare the hand dead as many are saying here, you are sort of blinded by one rule alone. Let's put up another example, but this time in a cash game setting:

$1/$2 blinds with a mandatory $4 UTG straddle.

Player A is UTG+1, and for some reason decides to shove for $550. Action folds around to the straddler who is going to look at his cards, but still has not. Player A thinks everyone has folded, and mucks his hand. The hand is not retrievable as the dealer places it in the muck. The straddler gets mad and claims he would have called with KJos. Floor gets called to make a decision regarding the hand - what's the right call here?

With the logic of "the hand is dead, straddler has the right to call and win the entire stack of UTG +1", then you open up for chip dumping. The correct call is to declare the hand a misdeal. Keep blinds where they were at, shuffle up and deal. Also, warn the UTG player to pay better attention, and tell the straddler to calm down as he is not entitled to anything here. You cannot play an all-in versus a dead hand. This is by far the best decision for the game, and shuts down chip dumping possibilities.

We are all humans and make mistakes. Don't be that guy who greedily feels entitled to anything here. In all honesty, do you really want to win like this anyways?

 

[LotsOfChips]

100% agree with this!

The hand was shown down until the player got the bad news. I would find the pair in the muck, table them face up and run the hand, explaining the reasoning for it is chip dumping. You cannot muck an all-in preflop hand, as it raises integrity issues for the game. Set a presedence that all showdowns should have both players cards face up - then run the board. Both players had shown their cards, so just run the board after locating the 6s in the muck.

Now, if the other player would not have shown his cards and mucked them, I would have called a penalty for the player and explained why. The intent is not to be mean spirited, but to make them understand that this type of behaviour doesn't fly. Start with 1 round penalty -> DQ if they keep doing it. They'll learn quickly. If you would declare the hand dead as many are saying here, you are sort of blinded by one rule alone. Let's put up another example, but this time in a cash game setting:

$1/$2 blinds with a mandatory $4 UTG straddle.

Player A is UTG+1, and for some reason decides to shove for $550. Action folds around to the straddler who is going to look at his cards, but still has not. Player A thinks everyone has folded, and mucks his hand. The hand is not retrievable as the dealer places it in the muck. The straddler gets mad and claims he would have called with KJos. Floor gets called to make a decision regarding the hand - what's the right call here?

With the logic of "the hand is dead, straddler has the right to call and win the entire stack of UTG +1", then you open up for chip dumping. The correct call is to declare the hand a misdeal. Keep blinds where they were at, shuffle up and deal. Also, warn the UTG player to pay better attention, and tell the straddler to calm down as he is not entitled to anything here. You cannot play an all-in versus a dead hand. This is by far the best decision for the game, and shuts down chip dumping possibilities.

We are all humans and make mistakes. Don't be that guy who greedily feels entitled to anything here. In all honesty, do you really want to win like this anyways?

Why would someone chip dump heads up in a cash game? Tournament, sure, it gives their buddy a better chance to go deeper into the tourney, but what advantage in a cash game?

Plus in a cash game there’s no rules that say a player has to show at showdown. Quite the opposite, RROP states that a player can muck if he decides not to contest the pot.

 

[IamMattDamon]

Why would someone chip dump heads up in a cash game? Tournament, sure, it gives their buddy a better chance to go deeper into the tourney, but what advantage in a cash game?

Plus in a cash game there’s no rules that say a player has to show at showdown. Quite the opposite, RROP states that a player can muck if he decides not to contest the pot.

Reasons for dumping in cash games can be anything from money laundering, evening stacks out between two colluding players (taking down variance), or going south if a colluding player is leaving the game (taking money off the table). As for a players right to muck, that's all good. However RROP states:

"Any player who has been dealt in may request to see any hand that was eligible to participate in the showdown, even if the opponent's hand or the winning hand has been mucked."

Meaning, if you are in a game and notice some weird reoccurring spots where you feel it might be a pattern, you are allowed ask the dealer to hold the mucked cards and call for the floor. Obviously, you have to be really sure to ask for a ruling in these spots, as it might bring a really bad vibe at the table.

The point remains the same though in the situation I referred to. It's mostly about protecting game integrity, while keeping the best interest of the game in mind. Forcing a player all-in with no cards preflop in a cash game is not really doing that.

 

[bergs]

If I’m TD, I throw up my hands and declare that tournaments are stupid, and immediately start dealing 6 card drabadugha with a 6 card board and unlimited draws.

If I’m forced to make a ruling because yay tournament nerds, then I ask if he tabled it. If so, work to figure out which 6s he hand because the hand is live. If he tabled the hand and then threw himself, and the chips, into a fully operating woodchipper, his hand is still live, even if he is most decidedly not.

See if anyone remembers the cards or even the color. Ask the other player with 6s what he had. Find where the cards went into the muck and try to find 2 6s together. There aren’t that many permutations of 6s.

Absolute worst case if you can’t determine any of the suits is I’d give him blank suited 6s. He’s eligible to chop if the board plays or win if a straight comes with the 6. Otherwise he loses but I still run the board out.

If he didn’t table, hand is dead and give him a warning. Then I’d playfully ridicule him so he remembers not to do it again. (He tabled the nuts in the cash game “wait, are you playing that, or do you want to fire it into the muck with the rest of your hopes and dreams?”)

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

not that this is news to anyone but you dont have to follow TDA in your own tournament.

i'd be inclined to declare the hand dead if they can't be clearly identified mostly because that's what people expect to happen. randomly selecting from 4 discarded 6's to make his hand seems sketchy.

the only time i'd think otherwise is if i had good reason to believe the person with 66 was trying to dump chips as the big stack to a small stack near a pay bubble.

 

[buzzmonkey]

not that this is news to anyone but you dont have to follow TDA in your own tournament.

i'd be inclined to declare the hand dead if they can't be clearly identified mostly because that's what people expect to happen. randomly selecting from 4 discarded 6's to make his hand seems sketchy.

the only time i'd think otherwise is if i had good reason to believe the person with 66 was trying to dump chips as the big stack to a small stack near a pay bubble.

You're also taking away an opportunity for other players to advance. If the 66 hand would have sucked out and eliminated the other player with KK you've robbed everyone else in the tournament from an opportunity to improve their overall position.

 

[WedgeRock]

You cannot muck an all-in preflop hand

I actually recall this occurring at the WSOP within the last 10 years (maybe more...but if definitely wasn't within the last 5). It wasn't on a broadcast; I read it in a hand blurb on WSOP.com.

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

You're also taking away an opportunity for other players to advance. If the 66 hand would have sucked out and eliminated the other player with KK you've robbed everyone else in the tournament from an opportunity to improve their overall position.

This falls under the subheading of being a spot where the big stack could be dumping to the small stack and so I’d be more inclined to dig for the 6s.

IMO the possibility of two people colluding hurts the integrity of the game more than digging for unknown cards, so I dig. but if it’s the other way around and the 6s are the short stack, digging seems worse.

It also depends why he threw them to the muck.
If the dealer pushed the pot to the guy with 66 not realizing the other player was still in and he then threw them in the muck, they need to be retrieved. imo.

This is all assuming there has been no precedence set in previous similar situations and nothing is in writing.

 

[IamMattDamon]

I actually recall this occurring at the WSOP within the last 10 years (maybe more...but if definitely wasn't within the last 5). It wasn't on a broadcast; I read it in a hand blurb on WSOP.com.

They might get 99% of calls correct, but they do fuck up like everyone else. <

One of the worst calls I've ever seen live was made in a €10k EPT tournament. Floor enforced all-ins of two players, where player A after a 5-bet had flipped his hand up for no reason. Player B was a new player to the game, he got confused and tabled his hand as well. KK vs AJ. They both got forced all-in after a 5-bet to 30 BBs, stacks were at 120 BBs effective.

The floors opinion was that they both indicated they wanted to go all-in pre by showing their cards. Player A who had KK created this situation did not go all-in, he just faced a 5-bet with KK and responded by flipping his cards face up, so player B did the same. Player A did not even get penalized for showing his cards during a hand.

 

[bergs]

If I lost to a 4 flush because 2 random 6s were assigned to a player because they were so cow-ass stupid as to table and muck pre, I’d lose my mind.

If you really can’t identify either suit, he has 2 6s and can’t win with a 4 flush. If the board 5 flushes, and the other player doesn’t have a better hole card of the same suir, it’s a chop. Idiot player can’t scoop any hand except a straight (since we know he has 6s).

 

[bergs]

* by “lose my mind” I mean I’d go play the cash game and feel a sense of relief for not having to play a tournament anymore.

 

[Legend5555]

If I lost to a 4 flush because 2 random 6s were assigned to a player because they were so cow-ass stupid as to table and muck pre, I’d lose my mind.

That makes no sense. They are random. His original 66s could have made a flush just as well as the new ones, which could even still be the old ones. Given that no one remembers the suits, the 66s ability to make a 4 flush never changes no matter which 66s they are.

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

It may make no sense but it’s a likely response. Even if suits aren’t relevant and they hit a straight you’re likely to get people freaking out because it’s such an unusual ruling that no one is familiar with / most expect the hand to be killed. They may also question how we can we really be sure he had 66 at all.

If I didn’t specify that were using tda before the tournament started My goal wouldn’t be to perfectly mirror tda, it would be to keep the rules as close to what people expect them to be. Unless the kk hand was very short and the two players were friends. Then we go fishing for cards because it’s too likely to be collusion.

 

[Hornet]

My goal wouldn’t be to perfectly mirror tda, it would be to keep the rules as close to what people expect them to be.

Sounds like a terrible way to run a tournament with casual players who don’t understand the rules.

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

To each their own. The thought of issuing a warning/penalty for someone folding out of turn in a small stakes tournament at a friends house to get a beer from the fridge is pretty funny I will say. Or refusing to allow deal making and having players congregate in the garage to discuss the chop. Or calling the floor over someone dropping an f bomb.

 

[IamMattDamon]

Sounds like a terrible way to run a tournament with casual players who don’t understand the rules.

Yeah, as floor in a tourney your first rule is to keep the best interest of the game in mind. It acts as a basis for all decisions you make.

Protect the integrity of the game first of all, gather the information you need, educate the players, but also let them have their fun. This seems like an honest mistake to me. The hand was shown, so I would retrieve it from the muck if the dealer or other players could confirm it. The board cards are still random, if you lose to a 4 flush that's just unlucky. The odds remains exactly the same no matter which of the 6s you bring from the muck.

I would also ensure that the guy with the 6s understands what he did wrong, and warn him that if this occurs he will be penalized.

 

[IamMattDamon]

To each their own. The thought of issuing a warning/penalty for someone folding out of turn in a small stakes tournament at a friends house to get a beer from the fridge is pretty funny I will say. Or refusing to allow deal making and having players congregate in the garage to discuss the chop. Or calling the floor over someone dropping an f bomb.

Not really comparable imo. Home games are more friendly in terms of following rules etc, but in some spots you have to at least have some guidelines. If not you have mayhem on your hands and people would never learn from it. Think of it as educating players for whenever they end up playing at a real casino. That's at least my view on it.

Refusing players to make a deal, or calling floor for dropping an f bomb - who does that? It has to be more meaty to bother the floor imo. They actually have shit to do when running a tournament.

 

[bergs]

That makes no sense. They are random. His original 66s could have made a flush just as well as the new ones, which could even still be the old ones. Given that no one remembers the suits, the 66s ability to make a 4 flush never changes no matter which 66s they are.

If I were ruling on it, his penalty for mucking is that he effectively can’t make a flush now (unless we can track down his exact 2 cards somehow). He should be happy that he has any outs at all given that it would be an easy friendly home game ruling to just call his head dead (clearly he was OK with it given the power muck).

 

[Rhodeman77]

if the exact two 6’s are impossible to determine I would prefer to give him the same suites as the player with the kings and a punishment for throwing his hand into the muck. Denying him that small chance of a 4 flush seems appropriate. It could even be used as an angle shoot by someone to get random cards if he actually had the same suites as the over pair. I realize it is highly unlikely, but absolutely no benefit should be gained for breaking the rules.

 

[Legend5555]

if the exact two 6’s are impossible to determine I would prefer to give him the same suites as the player with the kings and a punishment for throwing his hand into the muck. Denying him that small chance of a 4 flush seems appropriate. It could even be used as an angle shoot by someone to get random cards if he actually had the same suites as the over pair. I realize it is highly unlikely, but absolutely no benefit should be gained for breaking the rules.

But no one knows if giving him random 66s is a benefit or not.

 

[Stufflymcstuff]

Yeah, as floor in a tourney your first rule is to keep the best interest of the game in mind. It acts as a basis for all decisions you make.

Protect the integrity of the game first of all, gather the information you need, educate the players, but also let them have their fun. This seems like an honest mistake to me. The hand was shown, so I would retrieve it from the muck if the dealer or other players could confirm it. The board cards are still random, if you lose to a 4 flush that's just unlucky. The odds remains exactly the same no matter which of the 6s you bring from the muck.

I would also ensure that the guy with the 6s understands what he did wrong, and warn him that if this occurs he will be penalized.

I mostly agree it just depends how easily retrieved they are and how many people confirm what they are. I’m under the impression that they are not identifiable in the muck and that not everyone can corroborate what they were. Big difference between one person seeing the hand and the whole table seeing it. Not sure exactly what was the case here.

 

[WedgeRock]

That makes no sense. They are random. His original 66s could have made a flush just as well as the new ones, which could even still be the old ones. Given that no one remembers the suits, the 66s ability to make a 4 flush never changes no matter which 66s they are.

Schrodinger's Flush

 

[bergs]

But no one knows if giving him random 66s is a benefit or not.

If one or both are different suits than the kings it’s literally the biggest benefit he can reap with that hand.

You can’t give him 2 random 6s and let him bink a fourflush. It’s going to create a really horrible vibe in what is probably otherwise a fun home game.

People get too wrapped around the axle with the rules. The first rule of any home game oughta be have fun and make it enjoyable for everyone (else just go to the casino and play against strangers and make it all about money).

Giving this guy a chance to win with what may or may not have been his actual hand is just terrible for the game.

 

[Rhodeman77]

But no one knows if giving him random 66s is a benefit or not.

That is why I would penalize him by giving him the same suites as the player with the Kings so that he can’t have a potential gain if there is no way to know for certain what suites he had.

Hypothetically if he knew his suites and saw they were both covered by the other players Kings he could gain an advantage if he was given back a 6 (or 2) that is no longer the same suite as the Kings. There should be zero chance of a potential advantage from his actions.

 

[Budha]

if the exact two 6’s are impossible to determine I would prefer to give him the same suites as the player with the kings and a punishment for throwing his hand into the muck. Denying him that small chance of a 4 flush seems appropriate. It could even be used as an angle shoot by someone to get random cards if he actually had the same suites as the over pair. I realize it is highly unlikely, but absolutely no benefit should be gained for breaking the rules.

Hmm - that’s actually an interesting solution….

 

[Budha]

If one or both are different suits than the kings it’s literally the biggest benefit he can reap with that hand.

You can’t give him 2 random 6s and let him bink a fourflush. It’s going to create a really horrible vibe in what is probably otherwise a fun home game.

People get too wrapped around the axle with the rules. The first rule of any home game oughta be have fun and make it enjoyable for everyone (else just go to the casino and play against strangers and make it all about money).

Giving this guy a chance to win with what may or may not have been his actual hand is just terrible for the game.

I think this captures the essence very succinctly - Well put. All things considered, this seems a very reasonable solution