Tourney Ruling needed: All-in hands exposed before all players have acted (1 Viewer)

[Mesnik44]

At my larger year end tournament I always assign a secondary TD to handle decisions I am involved in. Doesn't hurt to setup in advance.

There was an A.D. in this tournament, that was sitting at this table.

 

[grantc54]

There was an A.D. in this tournament, that was sitting at this table.

Ah, now that I re-read your post I see that.

 

[JustinInMN]

IIRC, the Dealer called for a re-do, SB didn't care, the A.D. said play on, UTG+2 was embarrassed, and didn't say much, C/O said re-do.
The UTG+2 shows QJh and calls. He wins the pot.

Bear in mind, the UTG+2 is also the TD, so any controversy involving himself, he could not make any decision on the had.

Dealer is super wrong, AD is thankfully correct.

 

[PlayerADK]

I would say definitely #1, but more like this:

1. The hand continues, and UTG+2 can act freely, using the knowledge of his opponents' cards to his full advantage. (Cutoff and SB -- sucks to be you/pay better attention to the hand next time. Hijack -- next time, STFU.)

It is just as much Cutoff/SB's fault that they flipped, regardless of any direction from another player. UTG+2 100% use it to their advantage and play the hand as is

 

[Dix]

OK... I completely agree with the ruling here. UTG+2 gets the proverbial "catbird seat award" for the bone-headedness of his opponents. Talk about hitting the lottery. "Thanks for the donations gents."

My question however, is this...

Who in Hades has the gonads enough to play "table captain" when you have the TD sitting at your table?

My ruling: Same as all of the above with one addition. Hijack must serve a Megalomaniac Penalty of playing until the next break with piece of duct tape over his mouth.

 

[clapton77]

I agree it's clearly got to be #1 and the reasons have been pretty well covered. As an additional point, declaring the hand dead would set a bad precedent. If Cutoff didn't like the fact that SB called his all-in, for example, he could expose his cards prior to UTG +2 acting, knowing that it would kill the hand and therefore get out of his all-in being called.

 

[Poker Zombie]

OK... I completely agree with the ruling here. UTG+2 gets the proverbial "catbird seat award" for the bone-headedness of his opponents. Talk about hitting the lottery. "Thanks for the donations gents."

My question however, is this...

Who in Hades has the gonads enough to play "table captain" when you have the TD sitting at your table?

My ruling: Same as all of the above with one addition. Hijack must serve a Megalomaniac Penalty of playing until the next break with piece of duct tape over his mouth.

It happens. It's not megalomania, or acting as a table captain. Some people just get a little excited, that's all. I can't envision any sort of penalty being issued, unless it became a repeated offence.

I've seen people prematurely declare "turn them up" before, and I'm sure I'll hear it again. I don't think I've ever seen a reveal, and definitely never seen a double reveal though - at least one of the three players in the hand is usually aware that it's not time, and they snap back with "Not Yet!" Since nobody noticed immediately, I'm guessing that this was a super-chill, casual game.

Also, it was played by Canadians. At least 4 people must have said "Sorry" following the incident.

 

[nomadland]

1. The hand continues, and UTG+2 can act freely, using the knowledge of his opponents' cards to his full advantage. (Cutoff and SB -- sucks to be you. Hijack -- next time, STFU.)

This is how I would proceed and how we've handled similar situations. Sucks to be them but Hijack needs to STFU for sure.

 

[Gobbs]

I’m not even bothering to read the posts. The answer is: Nothing

Do absolutely nothing. Carry on. It’s the remaining player’s turn to act. (NOTE: Could be some warnings here for various infractions, but nothing changes the action and definitely nothing voids the whole hand or kills hands.)

 

[Gear]

Alright, enough piling-on for Hijack. We all know he shouldn't have said what he said, but that wasn't the point of this post.

I probably overstated things by describing him as "table captaining" ... as Dr Strange said, he was just trying to keep the game moving and got caught up in the excitement of multiple all-ins. No malice or ego involved, just enthusiasm. And believe me, he was sincerely apologetic and humbled afterwards.