Let's play - know your poker rulings. Question 1:

[Caleb]

This is something that an APL franchisee has been doing on FB for his players, although his are much easier. This is actually a question I posed to all 888PL and APL staff members on FB yesterday, and a few got it wrong.

Now I'll give some of you the chance to answer as well. Select your answer from the poll and include your reasonings below if you like.

No judgement. Most wouldn't know what to do here unless they've seen this situation before.

Disclaimer: This actually happened at a side event at the Caulfield 888PL GF in 2010. I was playing on this table when it happened.

Blinds 300/600, but not relevant.

Table folds around pre-flop to the SB, who raises, BB calls.
Flop: SB bets, BB calls.
Turn: SB bets, BB calls.
River: SB bets, BB calls.

The second that BB calls the river bet, SB instant mucks his hand. To be nice, BB agrees to show his cards, and proceeds to turn over 3 hole cards.

Who wins the pot?

[muzzington]

Me. I'm best friends with the TD.

[Caleb]

Me. I'm best friends with the TD.

You're my best friend???

[muzzington]

No, I hate you.

[Caleb]

No, I hate you.

Better

[trishan]

I would think that the BB still wins the hand. Even though the BB had three cards there has been "significant action" and so once the SB mucks, the BB wins. I'd also be interested to hear what happens if the SB didn't muck. I think the mucking is fatal in this situation.

[bennymacca]

this is a tough one.

the significant action dictates what happens to the bb's hand. i.e as soon as more than 2 people have acted the hand plays out and it cant be a misdeal anymore.

at that point however, i think the bb's hand is invalid.

so the rest of the hand plays out with the bb having an invalid hand

to be honest i think it is a split pot and money gets returned, because the bb never had a valid hand so the rest of the action is meaningless. its pretty unfair for the bb to be putting money into a pot without a hand. yes, he should have checked that he had 2 cards, but that means he has no right to win a pot, it doesnt mean that the sb gets his chips.

if there were limpers or something that folded when the sb raised, then the sb should be awarded that portion of the pot, but if it was only heads up action between sb and bb then the money should get returned imo.

i actually think that the blinds and antes (if any) should go to the small blind, i.e like it would if the sb made a raise and the bb just folded.

but for all the chips that went in postflop, i think they should be returned.

so i guess thats a mix between number 1 and number 4 but i guess its closer to number 4

such a weird spot though

[omnnumnumnum]

Monies returned to all those who put money in the hand.
Give Three Card Player a Orbit For Play,n Crazy Pineapple .

[Jav1000]

I think the SB should win cause BB's hand is dead once he has acted with 3 cards, so I don't think BB can win any part of any pot.

It's BB responsibility to know how many cards he's holding, so I can't see how the BB should receive anything.

The only question is whether SB should receive the preflop pot amount or showdown amount???

I would say the later.

[madali]

I agree with Jav I would give the pot to the small blind but depending on the situation would just give the pre flop pot. My understanding of the rules was that if a player has 3 cards it is a miss deal without significant action and if there has been significant action then it is declared dead. As it would appear that this was an honest mistake I would give the pre flop pot to the small blind with a warning to the big blind about the consequences if the situation occurred again. But on the flip side given that it was the players responsibility to check his cards which he has not properly done I suppose the full pot could go to the small blind. Very tricky