One card on the button

[Steven]

Normally a hand without 2 cards would be dead after substantial action occurs.

Would you treat a one card button the same preflop? At what point would ou allow the button to be dealt the second card?

A player at a recent table was recounting a story in which a player actually raised on the button and then asked for his second card. Since the order of the stub was still intact, the floor allowed the man to be dealt the top card. The man telling the story had called the raise and was livid with the decision!

The floor ruled that the player could get the card as he was actually at a disadvantage!

I really think there could be multiple integrity issues here that may rule that the hand should be dead!

Amazingly the button had raised with a lone 7, then completed his hand with another 7, giving him pocket sevens - then flopping a 7 for a set and eventual winner. The caller had put the button on an ace, having raised preflop on one card!

Btw the caller even requested that a count be done prior to the button getting the card to try to ensure that the button wasn't pulling any shenanigans!

[Nick C]

Steven,

 I have to agree with the ruling to allow the button to receive his "proper card." The main reason, in my opinion, is to assure the proper flop. Once the dealer burns and turns, it's too late for the button...his hand would be dead.

[chet]

Nick:  You have a raise and a call (Two actions involving chips) before the button player asks for the 2nd down card.

How is this not within the definition of "Substantial Action"? 

Furthermore, there is the issue of bringing the issue to the attention of the dealer in a timely manner.  He said nothing, as I understand the example, until the action went all the way around the table to his position on the button.  I believe that his failure to bring this to the attention of the dealer timely AND his action with an improper hand (raising w/only 1 down card) along with the issue of Substantial Action leave no option to allow him to raise. 

I can certainly support a ruling that his hand is dead and lacking that I would support a ruling that he can only call the BB.

Chet

[K-Lo]

I personally would not allow the button to receive another card after substantial action has occurred.

I do not want to open up the possible angle of the button handing off a card to the cutoff who then folds 3 cards into muck, allowing the button to draw another card.  Sure, we could always count the deck to make sure the button's second cards wasn't already folded or dropped on the floor, etc., but why punish the whole table for the button's delay in asking for his second card? He should be paying attention to see if he has enough cards as the deal completes.

[Nick C]

Chet,

 The card belongs to the button player. Why don't you want him to have it? Furthermore, if you do kill his hand, what do you do about the flop?

 Ken, you've got to be kidding about the button handing the card off to the cutoff...and how do you handle the upcoming burn and flop? It's the button players card and as long as the dealer has not yet burned and turned, the hand should play-out with the proper board. Substantial action has nothing to do with the original post.

[chet]

Nick:  He has a responsibility to timely notify the dealer of the error, he did not.  So, give him the 2nd down card and declare his hand dead.  Everything is solved and by the way, since substantial action has occurred, the chips stay i the pot.  Tough stance, yes!  But I bet you he learns a lesson.

Chet

[K-Lo]

"Passing" the card off to a neighbouring player does not even have to be intentional.  The card may have been dealt, but just not picked up by the player, and then it gets mixed into the muck.

I'm not making this up -- this used to be a known, documented issue.

In theory, I am not against giving him the 2nd card down, but you would have to know for sure that it really is his card, and that the card didn't somehow end up in the muck, or under the rail, or somewhere else.  You have to be sure that the card on the top of the deck actually does belong to the button player. Otherwise, you'd be giving him the burn card, and you'd be throwing everything off that way anyway.  Therefore, the only way to be sure of that is to count the deck, which is a huge time waster.  I believe that asking the player to speak up before action (or substantial action) has occurred after the deal is a reasonable compromise. 

The other issue is optics... the action goes around, there's a raise, re-raise, all-in, fold, fold, fold, and NOW the button says he wants his card.  You don't think this is going to look super-fishy to the players who have already acted?  There is going to be suspicion of foul play even if there was none. When so much action has occurred, if it's too late to call a misdeal, it should also be too late to "correct" a dealing error like this one.

[Nick C]

Ken and Chet:

 In the unusual situations that you mentioned, when the top card of the deck would not go to the button, I guess we would have to consider other options. However, the original question is based on the button player not getting his second card because the dealer forgot to give it to him. In that case, don't you think he is entitled to his card? Or are you still going to kill the player on the button's hand, even though it's pre-flop and he's in for all bets?

 If we know (with certainty) that a hand is fouled, or has too few or too many cards...of course the hand would be killed. However, when we know the top card belongs to the button, he should get it. Anyway...that's my ruling on the situation.

[Tristan]

Or are you still going to kill the player on the button's hand, even though it's pre-flop and he's in for all bets?

It's pre-flop and he is the button, so he is not in for all bets.  It is true that he raised, but he is not allowed to play with only one card so his action is not valid.

It's a pretty standard ruling, Nick, and it is designed with game protection in mind.  Like K-Lo pointed out, at the time when the error was pointed out we have no idea if the player was or was not dealt two cards.  He may have one in front of him, but that does not mean he was not dealt two.  The only way to verify, at this point, would be to count down the stub and wasting all of that time is not considerate to the other players.  Also, if you count down the stub at that point, you would have to go through the process twice to put the cards back in proper order...and there is a good margin for possible errors in all of that.

At this point, the button is treated the same as the cut-off would have been if they discovered they only got one card after substantial action has occurred.  Dead hand.

[Nick C]

You guys are brutal...I'm glad I'm not playing in your games.

 One more time...if you knew the button received his first downcard and before the flop only had one card, would you kill his hand or give him his proper card? That's the question.

[Tristan]

If I knew the button hadn't received a second card, I would have given it to him before the action got that far...so that's a moot point! 

[chet]

The button can get his 2nd down card (top card off the deck) as soon as it is brought to the dealer's attention that the dealer missed dealing the 2nd card, PROVIDED, substantial action had not occurred.  For this subject, and only for this subject, would I hold that substantial action has to include 2 actions involving chips.  In other words, if it is folded around to the button and at that time he says, "Hey, I only have 1 card", I would give him the top card and the hand is live, he can fold, call or raise.  However, if there had been two or more calls or a raise and at least 1 call, and the button said nothing, I would hold the hand dead.

Chet

[Nick C]

Chet,

 If you kill the button's hand...how do you deal the flop? Do you burn the extra card - that should have gone to the button hand- or do you just proceed as normal?

 I still don't understand how any floorperson can kill the button's hand in this situation. He is entitled to the top card of the deck. Giving him his proper card is the only logical solution.

[K-Lo]

Nick:

I'm curious to know what you would do in this situation...  same as before, but the button waits until there has been a lot of action before saying something. 

Button says he is missing a card, you rule that he should be given the card at the top of the deck. We do that. Action continues, the flop is dealt, and then a player (either the button or the player beside him) finds the card tucked underneath the padding of the rail, or somewhere else nearby.  Now the flop is wrong... What are you going to do now... would you redeal the flop? What if there has been substantial action on the flop?  Will the player who found the card have a dead hand if he is still in the hand (since he now has three cards)?  What if the turn has been dealt?

[chet]

As far as I am concerned, all players (the button in this case) are 100% responsible to ensure their hand is valid, it is not the guy next door or the dealer or anyone other than the individual.  Failure to do so and notify the dealer in a timely manner may result in a dead hand.  Taking any action, agressive (ie. raise) or not (ie. call) with an invalid hand is not right and the hand should be dead.