Well I said there had been contraversial rulings that I didn't agree with, but as at the time I was
only dealing so not in any position to overrule anything
Ruling one, 2 big players in a hand Omaha pot limit player1 goes all in, gets called
player two reveals his trips, player 1 was about to turn over his cards but all cards ended up being face down and then one card fell into the muck but was easy to tell which it was. The ruling was Player 1's hand is dead , give chips to player 2 and don't deal the turn or river, hand over.
I thought this was harsh, although it is the players responsibility to open up cards when in an all in situation. I would have ruled differently for one because players are all in and the card was easy to tell as it didn't actually land on any card just touched another card. That hand lost the tournament for player 1, but for certain they won't make that same mistake again
How do other people think about this ruling? Can you comment about it. Basically I would have asked the player his 4 hole cards, if he can tell me exactly what they were then I would have ruled the hand live. But if he couldn't tell me his hand then would have been dead. I just think that it needed a tiny bit of common sense b4 ruling it dead thats all. Who agrees/disagrees?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I would have done the same as you Mel, but I would also ask if it was OK with the other player and taken his opinion into consideration too. If there was any disagreement, then there is no option but to call it a dead hand imho.
But I have never TD'd so I am certainly no expert.
The players hand should be dead. The player has one responsibility at the end of the hand and that is to turn his cards over to be read.
Like you said he will never do that again, I'm sure.
Hi Mel !
I agree with you 100%. It's the fairest way, and nobody could argue about it, unless they are complete morons.
Cheers.
Post a Comment