A Clusterf.....

Geremie

Full House
Joined
May 27, 2016
Messages
2,820
Reaction score
3,612
Location
Toronto, Canada
Another interesting ruling / issue. Looking to get some feedback.

8-handed. Blinds 0.50/1.00. NLHE.

Hero folds UTG.

UTG+1 raises to $3
UTG+2 Fold
HJ Fold
CO reraises $7
D Fold
SB Fold
BB Fold

UTG+1 calls.

Pot $15.50

Flop: 4 7 9 (pretty sure rainbow)

UTG+1 bets $15
CO calls

Pot $45.50

Turn: 2

UTG+1 bets $40
CO reraises $150 (only $10 left)
UTG+1 goes all in
CO calls

Both players table their cards but they were both dealt three cards (UTG+1 AAJ; CO AAK).

I have never seen something like this before - especially this far into the action. I don’t think I’ve ever seen two people get dealt an extra card.

Dealer claims that both hands are dead. Host is called.

Big blind claims that he should be award the pot since he had the last live hand.
 
Last edited:

RadicusScout

3 of a Kind
Joined
Feb 15, 2021
Messages
636
Reaction score
957
Location
Chicago
Wild! Neither of the players realized they were dealt 3 cards?


So what happened?
 

TheDuke

Flush
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2017
Messages
1,485
Reaction score
2,507
Location
Out of position
Just refund everyone their money. Including the blinds. Reshuffle and deal a new hand.

Slap BB across his forehead for such a dumb claim. And then slap the dealer and both players.

Ridiculous it got to that point. Unless you were playing some kind of 3 card variant like pineapple.
 

CdnBeerLover

Full House
Joined
Apr 29, 2013
Messages
4,252
Reaction score
2,290
Location
Ottawa, ON Canada
I'm assuming BB is claiming the pot based on showdown order, so his hand is only techinically live because it's tabled second, assuming they were actually tabled in order? Bloody hell.

If it were me, I'd invoke the "best interest of the game" clause, and rule a chop pot, as they both had the same hand (AA).
 

Bluegrass Poker

Straight
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
763
Reaction score
1,431
Location
Lexington, KY
I'm assuming BB is claiming the pot based on showdown order, so his hand is only techinically live because it's tabled second, assuming they were actually tabled in order? Bloody hell.

If it were me, I'd invoke the "best interest of the game" clause, and rule a chop pot, as they both had the same hand (AA).
No. BB folded preflop
 

chicubs1988

Two Pair
Joined
Aug 27, 2017
Messages
490
Reaction score
826
Location
San Diego
I'd say chop pot, then give the dealer the stinkeye, and then warn both players to bring up the issue earlier next time and/or pay closer attention. If they push back I'd politely remind them its a friendly home game and that invitations back aren't guaranteed. Were they really both oblivious that they had 3 cards until noticing at showdown?
 

Natskule

Two Pair
Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2016
Messages
317
Reaction score
486
Location
Belgrade, Nebraska
WTF? Chew everybody's ass! Refund the bets and start over, then chew their asses again. Played all the way to showdown with 3 cards, the the BB who didn't even play wants the pot! WTF! makes me mad just reading about it. Is this a friendly game? If it's friendly then refunding shouldn't even be an issue and BB needs to shut up. Sure doesn't sound like a game among friends.
 

Schmendr1ck

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2014
Messages
5,076
Reaction score
11,395
Location
Orlando, FL
tenor.gif


So yeah, what kind of edibles is the host serving at this game that both players don't realize they have three cards? And can I get some?

If I'm the host:
1) Dead hand, give everybody including the blinds their money back.
2) Both players get the stink eye from me for another orbit or so, because there's no way in hell they both didn't realize they had three cards. They were both obviously trying to freeroll with AAx.

I'm going to remind them that three cards in Hold'em is a dead hand, and if a situation like this happens again, the Host (me) is going to use that pot to buy a nice bottle of whiskey for the rest of the crew, and the offenders will get to take a few weeks off from the game.

Big blind claims that he should be award the pot since he had the last live hand.
tenor.gif
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
25,396
Reaction score
38,954
Location
Atlanta
I'd give the blinds back to SB and BB (with a bitch slap for inappropriate greediness), then deduct a 10% stupidity/angleshoot penalty before chopping the remainder of the pot with the two 3-card holders. Buy something for the group with the tax money.
 

Geremie

Full House
Joined
May 27, 2016
Messages
2,820
Reaction score
3,612
Location
Toronto, Canada
I’m presuming that either one or both knew what they were doing but, if so, why would you continue to bet knowing your hand would be dead against an alive hand. The one person tabled his hand showing only the aces and when the dealer moved the cardsthe additional card was noticed.

The host awarded $3.50 to the BB ($0.50 + 1 + 1 + 1).

The rest of the pot was split (even though the person with AAK said they should play the hand out as super hold’em).

Both were warned that any misdials must be declared immediately.
 

CrazyEddie

Flush
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
1,691
Reaction score
2,346
Location
Georgia
Not sure what RRoP or TDA would say. My rule would be:
  • Each hand is dead as soon as anyone notices it has three cards.
  • This applies even immediately prior to awarding the pot, so that, for example, B doesn’t win the pot simply because A’s hand was revealed first leaving B the only live hand thus ending the hand and claiming the pot.
  • Consequently, the hand ends with no live hands and a pot with no one who can claim it.
What happens when a hand ends with a pot and no live hands? Well, if you play kitchen table games you may have already needed to consider this situation, as some games kill hands for various reasons during the normal course of play, and in some rare cases might kill all the remaining hands simultaneously.

There are several options. The one that I prefer is that the pot is split between all players that were dealt a hand.

Applying that ruling here: Both players made bets with illegal hands and forfeited their bets and any other claims on the pot as soon as the illegal hands were discovered. But they are still entitled to a share of the unowned pot, as are all the other players who were dealt into the hand.

If there are odd chips left over, they get distributed one by one in player order starting to the left of the button.

And chew out the two players for being careless.
 

CrazyEddie

Flush
Joined
Jul 25, 2020
Messages
1,691
Reaction score
2,346
Location
Georgia
Big blind claims that he should be award the pot since he had the last live hand.
Not unreasonable, and if the illegal hands had been discovered prior to the BB folding, he’d have been right; having the only live hand, the pot would have been his, including the unmatched bets already placed in the pot by the illegal hands.

BUT he folded first. His hand was dead as soon as he did, and having been alive earlier doesn’t give his dead hand any claim to the pot.
 

DoubleEagle

Full House
Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2015
Messages
4,308
Reaction score
6,086
Location
Salina, KS
Since both hands should be ruled dead due to having too many cards after significant action, I would void the hand and refund everyone's money. No one should be a winner here for not paying attention.
 
Top Bottom