Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Floor Ruling after the fact?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Floor Ruling after the fact?

    A situation similar to this came up over the weekend at the Norwegian Open in Citywest.

    After some raising and shoving in a plo game 1 player ends up all in for €400 with 2 callers.

    I caller has €125 behind and the other caller has more than that.

    They both check a random rainbow flop

    The turn makes the possibility of a straight and also puts a flush draw out there, this is where it gets interesting....

    The first caller moves all in for his €125 and says something in Norwegian, the second player says something back in Norwegian and the dealer presumes that he called and turns the river which fills the flush.

    The second caller then complains that he has not called yet and a ruling is called where it is ruled that the river card is to be put back in the pack reshuffled and the second caller has the option to call or fold.

    The second caller now elects to call and the dealer re deals the river which is a complete brick.

    The second caller now turns over his hand which is the nut straight.

    I realise that there should be no other language other than English used and I also know that the dealer should have not dealt the river until he had created the side pot so there is need for loads of serial posters to post about that.

    The question is after seeing that the second caller had the nuts on the turn and was obviously going to call the €125 should some action have been taken on him retrospectively?
    twitter
    moneybookers

    #2
    Angle shooting at it's finest. He should keep looking over his shoulder waiting for a chair shot to the back of the head. I know you don't want anyone banging on about it, but the dealer is definetly at fault here and allowed it to happen. As for the way if played out, you can't punish the 2nd caller in this instance. It's 'possible' he didn't realise he had the nut straight. Hopefully though he's reminded that he's an angleshooting cunt every time he sits at a poker table from now though

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Flushdraw View Post
      Angle shooting at it's finest. He should keep looking over his shoulder waiting for a chair shot to the back of the head. I know you don't want anyone banging on about it, but the dealer is definetly at fault here and allowed it to happen. As for the way if played out, you can't punish the 2nd caller in this instance. It's 'possible' he didn't realise he had the nut straight. Hopefully though he's reminded that he's an angleshooting cunt every time he sits at a poker table from now though
      Pffft, there's always two ways to win a hand. I like it

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Flushdraw View Post
        Angle shooting at it's finest. He should keep looking over his shoulder waiting for a chair shot to the back of the head. I know you don't want anyone banging on about it, but the dealer is definetly at fault here and allowed it to happen. As for the way if played out, you can't punish the 2nd caller in this instance. It's 'possible' he didn't realise he had the nut straight. Hopefully though he's reminded that he's an angleshooting cunt every time he sits at a poker table from now though
        Originally posted by Dice75 View Post
        Pffft, there's always two ways to win a hand. I like it
        While I would agree that violence is nearly always the solution to any problems involving money what I'm asking is in light of the information the floor staff have after the cards are turned over can the pot be taken from the player?

        If it was a tournament I don't this scenario could arise as the players have to declare the hands before turning the river.
        twitter
        moneybookers

        Comment


          #5
          What did the 1st allin player have here. He would be very upset it the river card was giving him the nut flush. As the 3rd player had the nut straight he was always calling the 2nd player's allin and there is definitely an argument for allowing the original river card to stand. As it turned out he got a second chance to avoid the flush card on the river.

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by carlinrose View Post
            What did the 1st allin player have here. He would be very upset it the river card was giving him the nut flush. As the 3rd player had the nut straight he was always calling the 2nd player's allin and there is definitely an argument for allowing the original river card to stand. As it turned out he got a second chance to avoid the flush card on the river.
            The 1st all in player, who was irish, declared the nuts immediately when the first river was dealt

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by bops View Post
              The 1st all in player, who was irish, declared the nuts immediately when the first river was dealt
              If the 1st allin player had hit the nuts on the river I would certainly let it stand. He is going to be punished by losing a 1200+ pot because of a dealer error in dealing a premature river card, and also by a possible angle-shoot by the 3rd player who had turned the nut straight and was always calling the 2nd players allin, but now realises he can only win the much smaller side pot if the original river card stands.

              Comment


                #8
                did the Norweigan betting the €125 make any comment? If he said that norweigan #2 actually did say call in norweigan, I'd rule it that it was a call.

                It's a really crap spot and definitely an angle shoot. I've seen hands similar to this where there might 1k or 2k in the middle and players have had 100 or so behind. Often hands are exposed and rivers dealt prematurely, but it's usually a case of 'oh yeah, sure I'm obviously calling that aswell' and the hand is dealt as normal. That said, there's no doubt that if the Norweigan didn't call, and the dealer dealt the river before the Norweigan calls, the standard protocol of premature rivers has to be applied.
                Poker Podcast Playlist

                Comment


                  #9
                  Also, if there's any ambiguity as to whether or not the Norweigan made the call, I'd rule it a call (based on the fact that he has the nuts). If there's arguing and the floorman has to make a judgement, judging it a call is fair imo.

                  However, as stated, it would seem that when the dealer dealt the river, the Norweigan genuinely had not actually called (despite the fact he was 100% going to call).
                  Poker Podcast Playlist

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by carlinrose View Post
                    If the 1st allin player had hit the nuts on the river I would certainly let it stand. He is going to be punished by losing a 1200+ pot because of a dealer error in dealing a premature river card, and also by a possible angle-shoot by the 3rd player who had turned the nut straight and was always calling the 2nd players allin, but now realises he can only win the much smaller side pot if the original river card stands.
                    This

                    seems a terrible ruling the way it played out

                    Comment


                      #11
                      yep i agree with that no reason 4 any other ruling

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Guys just to be clear it seemed like the second player had not called when the dealer turned the first river card even though he had the nuts and also had plenty of time to do so.

                        The floor had no option but to re deal the original river card. (they had no idea what he had and if he had a decision at all)

                        The question is after seeing the the player was just taking advantage of a technicality can any action be taken retrospectively?
                        twitter
                        moneybookers

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Fairest way....

                          Since all the betting was complete for main pot the original river should be used to decide the winner of that pot.
                          Then it should be explained to the two remaining players that the 125 bet stands, caller two has an option to call or fold and that the original river will be shuffled back into the deck and a new river dealt to decide the side pot.

                          .... maybe

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X