PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Stuart Murray on October 20, 2011, 08:42:30 AM
-
Hi all,
this happened last night, I thought you would like to hear about it! I will reply with what ruling I made on friday.
8 handed self dealt table and after several raises the action is heads up to the flop, NLHE blinds 50-100 around 1,200 in the middle, ready for the flop and the dealer catches the stub on the bumper of the table resulting in half of the remaining stub being flipped over and around 15-20 cards being exposed on the table from the top of the stub (ie the board cards are now exposed), it was feasable that the order was still correct, as they fell in a fashion similar to spreading a deck on the felt, at this point I am called to the table. My guys are good, they tell me what has happened and await my ruling........
Stuart
-
Stuart,
Based on the fact that you were certain the deck could be reconstructed properly; I would have allowed the dealer to burn and turn the remaining board cards with no further betting.
-
Stuart,
according to your description, I would rule this as following:
1) take the deck, re-shuffling it keeping the flop and the burn cards live.
2) burn and turn the 4th street with action going on.
I think that this could be the best ruling because the deck was half exposed, so nobody knew the other half one: this manner nobody can reconstruct an opponent's hand and the best interest of the game is fulfilled
These are my 2 cents
-
I would say that if the flop cards are clearly distinguishable (so the top 4 cards are definitely identifiable and they are definitely in the correct order) that placing the burn and the flop cards out and reshuffling the rest of the stub and then proceeding from there would be in the best interest of the game. It would keep as many of the original board cards as possible, doesn't change any action that would have occurred on the flop and seems like the best choice.
-
Sorry,
I don't think it is the best interest of the game if 15 or 20 cards have been exposed. I would rather suspend any further betting as I suggested earlier. I'd even consider a re-deal as opposed to continue as if nothing happened.
-
okay, good input folks, I do like jasper & linker's posts re re-shuffling in order to try and get some action post-flop, however, heres the rub for me, 15-20 cards being exposed, gives way too much information to the players remaining in the hand, if we take it as being 18 cards exposed, we can say that the players have gained information asto 38% of the deck (20 cards including their hole cards.) Substantial action has occurred, therefore in some way shape or form this hand has to play out, you can't call a misdeal etc. RROP also gives consideration to the board being as fair and as intact as possible.
Therefore for me, I froze the action pre-flop and then ran the board as it would have been all the way to the river and let the best hand claim the pot. It does go somewhat against the best interests of the tournament as it is possible one of those players would have been eliminated during the hand, but then the best interests of the tournament do not preclude players seeing 38% of the deck in hold'em.
Thanks for the input!
Regards
Stuart
-
Stuart,
That is exactly what I said on my first reply to your post. Good call.
-
okay, good input folks, I do like jasper & linker's posts re re-shuffling in order to try and get some action post-flop, however, heres the rub for me, 15-20 cards being exposed, gives way too much information to the players remaining in the hand, if we take it as being 18 cards exposed, we can say that the players have gained information asto 38% of the deck (20 cards including their hole cards.) Substantial action has occurred, therefore in some way shape or form this hand has to play out, you can't call a misdeal etc. RROP also gives consideration to the board being as fair and as intact as possible.
Therefore for me, I froze the action pre-flop and then ran the board as it would have been all the way to the river and let the best hand claim the pot. It does go somewhat against the best interests of the tournament as it is possible one of those players would have been eliminated during the hand, but then the best interests of the tournament do not preclude players seeing 38% of the deck in hold'em.
Thanks for the input!
Regards
Stuart
Stuart,
nice analysis.
I have a question for you now: when can we consider the hand still good to be played?
You said that 38% ca. of the deck was exposed (of course) and then it was not possible to continue.
1) What about the 15% of the cards exposed? does it matter?
2)doas the number of players in play matter?
What you guys think about these situations I've imagined?
-
Hi Linker,
1) I don't think there is a reasonable amount of cards that can be exposed other than prescribed in RROP's dealing errors section that should allow a hand to continue normally, even if it is 15% of cards exposed, that would be 6 cards, therefore the flop, and turn have been pematurely exposed, it may be possible to have some action on the river but for me it would be unlikely, as the flop and turn being exposed has drastically altered the outcome of the hand.
2) I don't feel the number of players should be a correlating fact for a decision on an exposed stub, whether it's 2 players or 10.
Regards
Stu
-
Stuart,
One exposed card could be enough to alter betting or even suspend it for that hand. How does the number of exposed cards make a difference? If a player sits with a King high flush and gets a look at the only card that could beat him in the exposed cards. How much do you think that could cost other players at the table? No more betting and the hand gets played out.
If the deck stub was intact, why would you reshuffle?
-
Nick are you really saying that you would freeze all betting every time a single card is exposed? Isn't that getting just a bit extreme?
-
Chet,
How often do your dealers, or players expose cards with action pending? To answer your question, damn right, I'll stop the action, call the floor and make sure that every player in the hand knows the identity of the exposed or flashed card. Any further action might depend on how far along we are in the hand, if players are all-in or the number of players in the hand.
-
I don't like the fact that the players would not be allowed to bet each other out of the hand. Whether or not they have information they ALL have it so there is no advantage of one player over the other at this point. The only advantage would be in creating some semblance of a hand and allow them to continue doing their best to out play each other. Running the board and having the best hand open is not in the best interest of the game at all in my opinion. In fact it goes against any fundamental of poker that I can think of. Players must have the chance to act on their hands. I am in agreement with JasperToo and Linker_Split that we shuold try to preserve as many board cards as possible so the flop should stand but reshuffle for betting on the turn and river is the only way to preserve the players rights.
-
Spence,
You really think it's fair, if a player holding the second nuts sees the only card in the deck that can beat him exposed? I really don't think that's in the best interest of the game. That is a player that might not bet, but because he knows he can't lose, the opposing players are not protected and are at risk when they shouldn't be.
-
Nick, He may see that he has the nuts on the flop but by still having the betting rounds continue he has less of a chance to lose the hand then simply run the board. What if he can't bet out the running full house? (Flop one pair, turn and river hits his hand) Not very fair to that player. What about the player who flops a set and a running flush draw gets to see all cards, then makes his hand? Just doesn't seem like poker to me...
-
Spence,
What about the player that can't be beat because all the board cards are out and the cards are exposed before the final round of betting?
The original post, pre-flop, makes more sence for your argument. After the flop, turn, or river, I would rather rule no more betting. I honestly don't remember the last time I saw a dealer drop the deck stub during a deal but, I'm sure it's happened plenty of times.
-
Nick, I'm still more interested in protecting the right to bet than anything else. The only way that works is to reshuffle. If there is no betting then there is no poker being played.