Ask a Tournament Director

From time to time, I see discussions of various tournament situations and procedural questions on various newsgroups. In this column and my next one, I am going to quote some of these situations and give some well-known tournament directors, as well as some players, a chance to provide their personal input on solutions.

The first situation occurred in a tournament run by Andrew Bryant. This is the way he described it: The following situation arose in a pot-limit hold'em tournament. Before the flop, Player B raised and was called by the big blind. The flop came Q-7-4. The big blind, Player A, bet all in for $5,500. Player B reluctantly called and showed a pair of tens. Player A exposed his cards, which were Q-J. These cards were seen by the whole table, as well as by the dealer and acting supervisor, and were then thrown in. They landed facedown and halfway entered the muck.

The dealer retrieved them and there was no dispute that they were the cards that were turned over by Player A. Player B immediately requested a ruling, demanding that Player A's hand be declared dead and the chips be awarded to him. I was called to make the ruling. Normally, I would agree with Player B, but upon considering all of the above, I ruled as follows: The hand was still live and the flop should be completed and the chips awarded accordingly. I based this on the following: I did not believe Player A intended to pass, since he was all in. The cardroom staff and all of the players, including Player B, had seen the hand when it was tabled, before it was thrown in. The cards were easily identified, having gone only partway into the muck before being extracted and turned faceup.

I believed that my ruling was in the best interests of the game and was correct due to the exact circumstances as described. If the hand had not been fully exposed to the whole table and seen by the cardroom staff, or if further action could take place, or if the cards had fully entered the muck, I would have declared the hand passed and awarded the chips accordingly.

Needless to say, Player B thinks it is the worst decision he has ever seen. What is the correct ruling in these circumstances?

Dave Lamb responds: Well done, Andrew! Player B took his best shot at winning the pot on a technicality and deserves an "atta boy" for trying to make a losing hand stand up. For all of the reasons you gave, the ruling is fair. Cards that are faceup and read by the dealer should be allowed to play, especially when ruling on unclear situations like this one.

Matt Savage responds: I agree with Andrew here. In situations like this, I always like to protect the players. TDA (Tournament Directors Association) rule No. 9 clearly states that when a player is all in and is heads up, cards must be turned faceup. It seems that Player B was trying his best to pull a shot and win this pot with the worst hand.

Jan Fisher responds: In the best interests of the game – and in particular, the tournament itself – it is always correct that the winning hand receive the chips. To allow the player with the tens to be awarded the pot on a technicality would undermine the integrity of the event. I think Andrew's decision was the only correct one, and applaud his making it in the middle of the battlefield.

So, it looks as though everyone would have ruled in favor of Player A. Would you?

Now, let's play poker!

Linda is available to host poker events and seminars. You can contact her through her website at www.cardplayercruises.com.