Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Phosphorous, post: 1642599, member: 58226"] In a casino tournament, the following happened... Background: ~190 person tournament, down to final 3 tables. Casino has a rule that cards must be shown for All-In showdowns. Player A is cheap leader, Player B has a stack about 2/3 that size. After the river, Player B goes All-In, Player A says 'call.' Player B shows a flush, Player A tosses his cards face down onto the middle of the table in front of him (seat position 1), not close to any other cards or chips. Dealer (asian) picks up cards, turns them toward the player such that others could see the pocket pair, and asks, "did you muck?" (or similar), Player A answers yes. Player A does not realize that he made a full house (think he only had trips). Dealer starts to count out chips for the payoff, and Player A realizes he had a full house and asks for a call from the floor. The floor rules Player A's hand dead when it hit "the muck" and Player B was awarded the pot. Do you agree with the call? Points of discussion: 1. Player should not be allowed to muck. The purpose of the "show your cards on an all-in" rule is to prevent collusion and an unfair or pre-arranged chip transfer. Allowing a player to muck his cards rather than show avoids the intent of the rule and would essentially allow a chip transfer to occur if players were indeed colluding. 2. The dealer probably should have enforced the "show your cards" rule and the whole thing would have been avoided - or - the dealer should NOT have had his cards exposed. It seems to me that the dealer really screwed player A because neither did she enforce the "show" rule nor did the player actually get the "benefit" of mucking his cards which is to keep them from being revealed to the table. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us