Called hand face up touches community cards... Muck???

[Ron*Maryland]

I run holdem tournaments and I would like the play and rules to be as close to the way most casinos would rule.  Here is Question:

Playing holdem no limit tournament... nobody is all in.  Player A bets on River and Player B makes the call.  Player A shows his cards face up on table but they touch the community cards (they do not touch the burn cards or other folded face down cards... they only touch the face up community cards).  How would most casinos rule?  Would they say it is fine?  Would they say hand is dead?  Would they ask player not to do that?  Also how would they rule if the tabled face up called hand touched some face down mucked cards?

Thanks for the feedback!!!     - Ron

[Martini]

I would rule the hand live since cards speak and tell the player to be more careful when tabling his hand.

If the cards touched the muck then I would still rule them live since they are obviously clearly identifiable as the player's cards.

[holdemholmes]

I say as long as they dont mix in to the point they're confused with the board they're live. Be more careful next time indeed.

[William]

Hand is live. No doubt about it.

Casino's probably wouldn't say anything. This sort of thing happens all the time.

The hand is over. The hand has been tabled. Cards speak.

[Nerre]

It doesn't make sense to call the hand dead. Why would it be?

The rules about touching other cards are there to make sure nobody switches cards or that cards are mixed up. But if all the cards are face up they are clearly identifiable. The board cards have been there the whole hand, if one of them was swapped everybody on the table would notice.

Now, if all the cards involved are face down we have a completely different situation.

Also if it's the cards of two players we have a different situation (because there might be collusion). But one players cards accidentally touching the boards cards when turned face up? No, that's no problem.

[steve5k]

I have seen issues come up at a home game from this. I wasn't there that night, but this is what I heard...
A player tossed his cards right into the middle of the board cards at showdown, calling a hand (let's say two pair). Another player, also in at the showdown, tosses his hand near/into the board cards and says 'ha!, trips!' and expects to collect the pot. After a few short seconds, mr. two pair says 'oh wait, I have a flush! look, there it is!' Big fireworks ensue. It got so bad that one of the players left the game; left the house for the night.

Moral: it takes two to tango. Why do some players feel the need to show their cards into or even right up next to the board? We'll figure out what your hand is, don't worry, that's what the 'cards speak' rule is for. But some habits are tough to break, especially when fueled by an emotional rush.

So it was decided that any hand tossed into the board cards is dead on the spot. At least 2 times after that night players did it again. They learned the hard way (because they were winning hands and the players were very excited) and the bad behaviors eventually ended. It still stands as a house rule just to be safe, but now there's just warnings issued and a reminder of what happened that night.

Anytime it gets so bad that a player gets up and walks away for the night, drastic measures may be necessary.

[William]

If it's a house rule it should be enforced. Not just arbitrarily, but consistently.

If you let one player get away with it you can't penalize another for doing the same thing.

[Wedge Rock]

This house rule makes no sense to me.  Why would a winning hand be killed solely because of where it lies on the table when collusion and cheating are not an issue and it wasn't a slow roll?

Just so a losing hand doesn't get butt hurt?

[steve5k]

Like I said, I wasn't there, just told about what happened and that all the players, and they were all regular players, needed something done and done right away. So this has nothing to do with calling your hand, who won the pot, or who lost. When the board becomes a mix of 9, sometimes 11 cards, repeatedly, something big has to be done.

Usually warnings are given first, and if a particular rule continues to be broken then penalties are handed out. In this case, all players were made fully aware of the incident and what was going to be done to stop it. When the cost is losing one of the regulars (and she hasn't returned...at all) it's time for a big wake up call.

Now it's back to the usual 'warning first offense, penalty for subsequent offenses' method. Very unusual, yes, but absolutely needed. It was getting that far out of control.

[bigstu]

This house rule makes no sense to me.  Why would a winning hand be killed solely because of where it lies on the table when collusion and cheating are not an issue and it wasn't a slow roll?

Just so a losing hand doesn't get butt hurt?
[/quote

This a house rule not a casino,.... I can see multiple hands going into the flop where people confuse what the community cards are.... hence the house rule......

Personally if this is a problem I would not let it get that far.... but it can be an innocent accident or it can be angle shooting.
 

[rumackay]

This has been happening more and more frequently at our tournament games as well. Several players have the bad habit of flinging their hole cards face up onto the board cards and when two or more of them do it at the same time things get chaotic and there's always the potential of collusion.

I don't necessarilly agree with the killing of the hand but I'm at the stage where repeated warnings aren't making any difference so I'm also about to start taking action to get the offenders to stop.

I've decided to give a general warning to all players the next time it happens and then implement missed hand penalties for future infringements. We've never had penalties for infringements before so I'm hopeful that the shock of being forced to leave the table for an orbit or three will make the offenders and everyone else start to take notice and do the right thing.

[Wedge Rock]

Rail penalties are one thing...  but killing a hand (again, when collusion/cheating/slowrolling are not issues)?

[Martini]

If people have already been repeatedly warned and told that their hand is at risk of being mucked I have no problem with killing their hand since they clearly aren't getting the message. Having seen it in action I am a firm believer in killing hands as a very effective way to get people to change their behavior.

[William]

Killing a hand is a very serious penalty. You're basically giving him a fine (and a substatial one most of the time) for a single poor action in a hand where he acted properly for the most part. The only time killing a hand that is clearly the winner should be used is if you catch the player cheating, and right after that you should escort him to the door and tell him not to come back.

[Wedge Rock]

I respect Martini's position, but my thinking is more in line with William's. Most notably because the only time this infraction could happen is after the river when betting is compelete.  If there is no issue with cheating, collusion and slow rolling, then killing the winning hand is basically a monetary penalty.

I understand the need to reign in poor behavior/ettiquette, but for me, it would need to be a very serious infraction to kill a hand.

In a home game, what if you're the other player in the hand?  Killing the winning hand puts money in your pocket.  And not killing it creates an inconsistent application of a penalty...  Its a tough situation to put yourself in.

[Martini]

I respect Wedge Rock's and William's position. However, I would hesitate to call it "a single poor action" since by that time the player would had to have done it multiple times and been specifically warned that his hand would be killed. If a player is not going to respond to explicit warning then as far as I'm concerned he is just begging to have his hand killed and I would be willing to oblige. It is a player's responsibility to protect his hand and if throwing them into the board cards can constitute a dead hand by house rule then the player would be wise to not throw his hand into the board cards. It would be no different than killing a hand after someone let his face down cards touch the muck. Personally I couldn't imagine a game getting to the point where the dealer couldn't control the game enough to keep players hands out of the board cards but if it's that bad then I don't mind strong medicine being administered.

As for being involved in the hand, I understand what Wedge Rock is saying but that is part of the game when you have a dealer/player. As long as the rules are clear then it doesn't matter if the dealer/player is involved.