Questionable hand at my home game (4 Viewers)

[upNdown]

I have a rule in my House Rules covering this scenario...

• Cards touching or touched by mucked cards are not automatically killed.
  
  • Mistakenly discarded hole cards may be retrieved provided that they can be clearly identified by at least two different players

It's a home game - I'm willing to relax the stricter Casino rules a little bit in this case in order to keep the game friendly. Others may disagree.

I appreciate house rules. But I have to ask - how does one mistakenly discard their hole cards? And for whatever it's worth, that's not what happened here. Here the player intentionally threw in their hole cards and then changed their mind.

 

[Tjislost]

That reminds me of a WSOP incident with French journalist Estelle Denis : she went all in with (alleged) pocketed Aces, but the dealer mucked her unprotected cards by mistake. She asked the dealer to find the cards, to no avail, floor came in and ruled that since the cards couldn't be retrieved, her hand was dead. However she was given back her bet and was later compensated by WSOP.
Wow, nowadays everything is on yt :

Her hand was in front of her with no chips to protect the cards, the dealer should’ve been fired on the spot for that egregious mistake

 

[twosevenbluff]

i guess i've always thought that in the event of a showdown, and there is no more action possible, both hands should be live and the only reason to not show is to limit information going out to the rest of the table about how you played with what cards. if it had taken longer to catch the mistake, all cards collected and chips pulled in, then no question the lesser hand would keep the win. but since it's supposed to be a "friendly game" and we could identify the cards and correct the player error, 9X wins.

now if this was a repeat behavior and the player continuously tries to protect their cards at showdown and then wants to take it back if they realize the mistake, i would start to take a harder stance against it. basically turn it into a warning and let the cards talk but that slack runs out if it becomes a pattern

 

[softchewy]

I appreciate house rules. But I have to ask - how does one mistakenly discard their hole cards? And for whatever it's worth, that's not what happened here. Here the player intentionally threw in their hole cards and then changed their mind.

From the info above from the OP, Player A didn’t change their mind, it was changed for them.

 

[chippitydoodah]

Borgata Floor gives it to the 9x.
View attachment 1633326

So what you're saying is that @twosevenbluff owns Borgata?

 

[odorf]

Obligation to Help: It is the duty of all players to ensure the pot is awarded correctly.
If there is still possibility to check A hand pot should be awarded to her

 

[dizzyChipper]

Obligation to Help: It is the duty of all players to ensure the pot is awarded correctly.
If there is still possibility to check A hand pot should be awarded to her

My understanding isn’t this. If a hand is tabled then yes. This hand was folded and the player made it clear they misread their hand. In this case, in my understanding, the obligation is to be quiet.

 

[dizzyChipper]

@twosevenbluff
Whoops. I had an update for you.

Parx dealer:

All right... Discussing the scenario with one of the better floor people of Parx would’ve ruled the nines live because the dealers are schmuck and left the Hand out there, but as discussed, we both agreed it is discretionary from casino to casino myself would’ve killed the hand, too many variables, forward motion, face down and three other players at the table telling him you had the winning hand takes it to one player to hand rule. I don’t think that’s fair and I would’ve awarded it to the fours full.

So now it's:
@twosevenbluff: 9
@dizzyChipper: 9
Borgata Floor: 9
Parx Floor: 9
Parx Dealer: 4

I realize the people I'm asking expect you to have a dedicated pro dealer and your game may be self dealt. I didn't get into that with them and realistically it doesn't change the ruling. The change is only you can't be annoyed at a non-pro dealer for not dragging the folded hand into the muck.

Thanks. Glad to have a better understanding of the ruling here before it happens to me.

--Diz

 

[twosevenbluff]

Seems to be a more complex problem than I had originally thought, with really the only clear answer being: house rules.

But thanks for all the feedback! Should help me be more prepared if I find this situation at my game in the future.

 

[dizzyChipper]

Seems to be a more complex problem than I had originally thought, with really the only clear answer being: house rules.

But thanks for all the feedback! Should help me be more prepared if I find this situation at my game in the future.

IMO it's worth addressing:

• The players should not discuss a hand that isn't tabled - cards speak. The players shouldn't.
• The dealers, even self dealt, should pull folded cards into the muck.

--Diz

 

[Rakrul]

[...]
Mistake 2) When the player says “my 9 didn’t get there” nobody should’ve said anything. It’s that players job to read their un-tabled hand. The dealer should’ve still taken the folded hand and shoved it in the muck (note: Shoved into. Not placed on top). If player tables hand and says “Bummer I only had trip 9’s” then it’s the tables job to speak up.
[...]

Disagree.
It's in everyone's interest to award the pot to the winning hand, we're not playing "gotcha!" here.
There is one exception here though in RRoP (don't know if it's in TDA);
3-GENERAL POKER RULES
THE SHOWDOWN
5. 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. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

(Also, some people think that the muck is some sort of pixie dust where the cards magically change if one atom of the cards are right next to an atom of the muck. Stop practising that voodoo rule.)

The rules we have are trying to prevent angle shooters while protecting the noobs. There's obviously no angle shoot here, apart from a super risky slowroll, so allowing this will very much help noobs and not open any doors for angeling.
I think everyone here would've ruled the pot to Player A if it was a noob so why complicate stuff by practising different sets of rules, based on experience? (My presumption might be wrong though.)

 

[upNdown]

Disagree.
It's in everyone's interest to award the pot to the winning hand, we're not playing "gotcha!" here.
There is one exception here though in RRoP (don't know if it's in TDA);
3-GENERAL POKER RULES
THE SHOWDOWN
5. 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. However, this is a privilege that may be revoked if abused. If a player other than the pot winner asks to see a hand that has been folded, that hand is dead. If the winning player asks to see a losing player’s hand, both hands are live, and the best hand wins.

(Also, some people think that the muck is some sort of pixie dust where the cards magically change if one atom of the cards are right next to an atom of the muck. Stop practising that voodoo rule.)

The rules we have are trying to prevent angle shooters while protecting the noobs. There's obviously no angle shoot here, apart from a super risky slowroll, so allowing this will very much help noobs and not open any doors for angeling.
I think everyone here would've ruled the pot to Player A if it was a noob so why complicate stuff by practising different sets of rules, based on experience? (My presumption might be wrong though.)

I disagree. This isn’t any sort of gotcha or voodoo. A hand that hasn’t been tabled cannot win. And folding is a binding action. If you want to teach people, noobs or otherwise, teach them to table their hand.

 

[Rakrul]

I disagree. This isn’t any sort of gotcha or voodoo. A hand that hasn’t been tabled cannot win. And folding is a binding action. If you want to teach people, noobs or otherwise, teach them to table their hand.

Folding isn't an available action when you're already all in.

 

[upNdown]

Folding isn't an available action when you're already all in.

Great point. This was a muck, not a fold. Hmm.
I like the tournament rule that all-ins and callers have to show their hands. I realize that rule exists for different reasons. But maybe we should use that rule for cash games too. Because it seems to me that once you’re all in, you’re entitled to win if you have the best hand.

 

[Rakrul]

Great point. This was a muck, not a fold. Hmm.
I like the tournament rule that all-ins and callers have to show their hands. I realize that rule exists for different reasons. But maybe we should use that rule for cash games too. Because it seems to me that once you’re all in, you’re entitled to win if you have the best hand.

Yeah, I'm all for that. It's a lot more entertaining for the rest as well. However there are some people that get very loud about having to show their hands when it's not to have the pot pushed to you. It's usually the same type of people that would object to photography back in the day, because the camera steals your soul.

 

[grahamplayscards]

Looking to get some guidance on how a hand was played out at my home game recently. I'll preface this with my game is played with a close group of friends and we ultimately solved the problem amicably. But, i want to know the PCF thoughts on how it was vs. should have been handled.

The hand went heads up on the river. player A held 9,X, while player B held pocket 4s. Board ran out 4, 9, A, 9, A. both players shoved all-in. now at this point in the game, it was late, we'd all had drinks and were winding down for the night. After both players bet, player B had lead the all in so they showed 4,4 for the 4,4,4,A,A full house. Player A then says, "you go it" and throws his cards in face down. player B starts pulling in chips and player A says their "trip 9s didn't get there, good hand". the rest of the table realizes Player A in fact held a full house of 9,9,9,A,A, which would clearly win the hand. IF they had laid it down. discussion ensued and ultimately player A was given the pot, which they decided to concede half of the pot to player B on the count of not catching their own winning hand.

my question is: since the discovery of the winning hand came verbally, and then all cards were turned up: should player A have been awarded the win? or does it go to player B because player A tossed in the cards without showing at first? I think technically because the cards were tossed in face down, player B should have won with the lesser hand. but curious to get feedback so i can be a better host and know how to deal with any similar situations in the future.

Player B (Pocket 4s) wins this every time at a casino (assuming dealer kills mucked cards appropriately). If this happened at a home game, I wouldn’t give anything back as player B and I wouldn’t expect any part of the pot if I was player A.

 

[grahamplayscards]

I'm surprised people vote for B. If player A cards can be retrieved from the muck and proved to be 9X, then cards speak - since this is showdown - and A wins. Even in the muck, they're not dead until they can't be retrieved. It's not uncommon to see tired players conceding winning hands after showdown, In this case, all players noticing the mistake must call it (per TDA rules iirc). This is well summed up in this r_poker post:
View attachment 1633137

Not at all how “cards speak” works at all. Any casino would tell you the same.

 

[Rakrul]

Not at all how “cards speak” works at all. Any casino would tell you the same.

Well, while I appreciate that "casino standard" is useful, there's plenty of examples where they showcase their broken compass. Also to be fair, they don't really care about the game, they care about revenue and protecting themselves so let's not pretend that they're a shiny example.

What we strive is fairness and consistency, meaning you can follow a rule in most, if not all situations. While I appreciate the consistency of "mucked is lost", we all practice some leeway here. My argument is that it is in "the interest of the game" to award the pot to Player A/highest hand, and I don't really see any downsides to it nor a way to angleshoot it.

That being said, I do immediatly collect a hand that is folded/mucked to avoid these discussions and I always scoop them into the muckpile so they're unindentifiable. Also to be said, I wouldn't go to war on this issue and it is covered by RRoP;
2. You must protect your own hand at all times. Your cards may be protected with your hands, a chip, or other object placed on top of them. If you fail to protect your hand, you will have no redress if it becomes fouled or the dealer accidentally kills it.
So it's not like I'm saying this is black and white, I'm saying that this is a situation where we can use discression as it is the fairest option to let the best hand win when you have the opportunity to.

 

[maxim_666666]

Player B wins. Player A mucked his cards.

No! And it's perfectly obvious why. Player A wins the pot. Many people intuitively give the win to Player B, but that's as impossible as a river flowing uphill. You can't make two different moves at once. When you go all-in, the player with the best hand wins. It's impossible to go all-in and fold at the same time. Just as it's impossible to fold and raise, or call and fold. No matter what the player says, no matter where they place their cards, face up or down, or even sideways. As long as they can be distinguished from others, all hands will be checked after the river, and the strongest hand wins.

 

[Jimulacrum]

Throwing your hand in the middle face-down at showdown is a universally understood concession.

Player B wins. Player A hopefully learns to table his hand at showdown.

Tabling your hand is free. It costs literally nothing. You've already paid all the bets.

Just table your hand. Not after your opponent shows his. Not later in the evening. Not next weekend. Table it immediately.

If you don't want to table it, you are entitled to that. Just know that you're taking a chance of conceding with a winner for no real benefit, and if that happens, the other guy gets the pot and no one owes you anything. Not a dollar, not a cent, not even a shoulder to cry on.

I have zero sympathy for people who lose money because they refuse to table their cards.

Table your hand.

Table your hand.

Table your hand.

If you fail to do so, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Spoiler: TLDR

Table your fucking hand.

 

[grahamplayscards]

No! And it's perfectly obvious why. Player A wins the pot. Many people intuitively give the win to Player B, but that's as impossible as a river flowing uphill. You can't make two different moves at once. When you go all-in, the player with the best hand wins. It's impossible to go all-in and fold at the same time. Just as it's impossible to fold and raise, or call and fold. No matter what the player says, no matter where they place their cards, face up or down, or even sideways. As long as they can be distinguished from others, all hands will be checked after the river, and the strongest hand wins.

Do you actually play poker? At showdown, when a player mucks (which is what this was), they forfeit any claim to the pot once the cards have been killed. Mucking is 100% allowable in a cash game at showdown.

 

[grahamplayscards]

Well, while I appreciate that "casino standard" is useful, there's plenty of examples where they showcase their broken compass. Also to be fair, they don't really care about the game, they care about revenue and protecting themselves so let's not pretend that they're a shiny example.

What we strive is fairness and consistency, meaning you can follow a rule in most, if not all situations. While I appreciate the consistency of "mucked is lost", we all practice some leeway here. My argument is that it is in "the interest of the game" to award the pot to Player A/highest hand, and I don't really see any downsides to it nor a way to angleshoot it.

That being said, I do immediatly collect a hand that is folded/mucked to avoid these discussions and I always scoop them into the muckpile so they're unindentifiable. Also to be said, I wouldn't go to war on this issue and it is covered by RRoP;
2. You must protect your own hand at all times. Your cards may be protected with your hands, a chip, or other object placed on top of them. If you fail to protect your hand, you will have no redress if it becomes fouled or the dealer accidentally kills it.
So it's not like I'm saying this is black and white, I'm saying that this is a situation where we can use discression as it is the fairest option to let the best hand win when you have the opportunity to.

It’s not in the interest of the game to award the pot to a player who didn’t realize they had won and did not table their hand. Just part of the game to understand what your hand is. Poker is not about “having the best hand”, it’s way more nuanced than that.

 

[Jimulacrum]

No! And it's perfectly obvious why. Player A wins the pot. Many people intuitively give the win to Player B, but that's as impossible as a river flowing uphill. You can't make two different moves at once. When you go all-in, the player with the best hand wins. It's impossible to go all-in and fold at the same time. Just as it's impossible to fold and raise, or call and fold. No matter what the player says, no matter where they place their cards, face up or down, or even sideways. As long as they can be distinguished from others, all hands will be checked after the river, and the strongest hand wins.

This is the standard in tournaments, where showing your hand is mandatory for reasons that are beyond the scope of this discussion.

In a cash game, you can always concede without showing your hand. Being all-in doesn't invoke any special rules in this area.

 

[maxim_666666]

Do you actually play poker? At showdown, when a player mucks (which is what this was), they forfeit any claim to the pot once the cards have been killed. Mucking is 100% allowable in a cash game at showdown.

I understand your logic and how it works for many, but it's completely illogical, wrong, and impossible. In fact, it's the dealer's fault, as they should be making these decisions, monitoring the cards and bets, and should have checked both hands at showdown. Player A can't fold their hand at all. They automatically go to showdown, and everyone can see their hand, no matter what they say. (And that's exactly what happens in online games.)

Of course, in a home game there are no professional dealers, and things like this happen quite often. But in these cases, a fundamental principle of the game is being violated.
Let’s look at this example more simply. It is impossible to “call” someone’s bet and then immediately “raise” it without waiting for your opponent’s action. You either call or you raise — it has to be one or the other.
In the case of an “all-in,” you either made a call or you raised, but you can no longer fold.

In this situation, it is essentially the same as a player saying in the same move: “I raise, I call, and I fold.”
In this example, it sounded like: “I’m all-in and I fold.”
How is that even possible????

 

[grahamplayscards]

I understand your logic and how it works for many, but it's completely illogical, wrong, and impossible. In fact, it's the dealer's fault, as they should be making these decisions, monitoring the cards and bets, and should have checked both hands at showdown. Player A can't fold their hand at all. They automatically go to showdown, and everyone can see their hand, no matter what they say. (And that's exactly what happens in online games.)

Of course, in a home game there are no professional dealers, and things like this happen quite often. But in these cases, a fundamental principle of the game is being violated.
Let’s look at this example more simply. It is impossible to “call” someone’s bet and then immediately “raise” it without waiting for your opponent’s action. You either call or you raise — it has to be one or the other.
In the case of an “all-in,” you either made a call or you raised, but you can no longer fold.

In this situation, it is essentially the same as a player saying in the same move: “I raise, I call, and I fold.”
In this example, it sounded like: “I’m all-in and I fold.”
How is that even possible????

Folding and mucking are not the same thing. Maybe this explains your confusion?

 

[maxim_666666]

I fully understand the difference. If the players go all-in (and the hands can still be clearly identified), then at showdown the cards must be turned face up and the best hand wins. No matter what the players say after the words “I’m all-in” — they can drink beer, eat, call, raise, call again, fold, dance… it doesn’t matter at all. The hand is played out, and the cards are turned over.
If a player throws his “winning” hand into the muck without showing it to anyone, that’s his problem. You could call it a technical mistake that cannot be corrected. He cannot prove what he actually had. It’s just “blah blah blah.”
In reality, it’s a very simple situation, yet many people handle it incorrectly.

 

[grahamplayscards]

I fully understand the difference. If the players go all-in (and the hands can still be clearly identified), then at showdown the cards must be turned face up and the best hand wins. No matter what the players say after the words “I’m all-in” — they can drink beer, eat, call, raise, call again, fold, dance… it doesn’t matter at all. The hand is played out, and the cards are turned over.
If a player throws his “winning” hand into the muck without showing it to anyone, that’s his problem. You could call it a technical mistake that cannot be corrected. He cannot prove what he actually had. It’s just “blah blah blah.”
In reality, it’s a very simple situation, yet many people handle it incorrectly.

Not in cash. Clearly I won’t change your mind, so I won’t bother going back and forth

 

[maxim_666666]

Not in cash. Clearly I won’t change your mind, so I won’t bother going back and forth

Can you give any reason why this rule doesn't work in a cash game when players go all-in?

 

[grahamplayscards]

Can you give any reason why this rule doesn't work in a cash game when players go all-in?

What “rule”? Please cite your source

 

[LotsOfChips]

cite your source

TDA Rule Book

Meant to prevent chip dumping/collusion