PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: Terence Bertault on August 12, 2016, 06:26:48 PM
-
Hi guys,
Remind me the rule for a card " flashed " by a dealer on the first or second turn to a player at seat 3 please ?
I obviously know the rule but one of my player wants to read it ... And strangely It s not in the 2015 rules ... it was in 2013 rules ...
Friendly regards.
Terence
-
Hi Terence
Not quite sure I'm going to address your question but I'll give it a try.
The first or second card (top of deck) dealt that is flashed or exposed would constitute a misdeal. I believe your question pertains to the third card dealt, (and beyond).
A flashed card to the third player, (their first or second down card) will be replaced at the end of the initial round of dealing by the card that would have been the first burn card, if no error had occurred.
The only problems that I've experienced with this rule is when a card "flutters" or it is questionable if the card were actually identifiable by any player. If this is not the rule you were looking for, let me know and I'll give it another shot! :)
-
Hi Nick,
Thanks for you answer my friend.
That just what I want to read.
For me here flashed = exposed and you understand it well.
For me :
- If the dealer flash it during the deal, we change the player card. The card becomes the flop burned card.
- If a player flash it by taking it, he has to keep it ... open and exposed.
I don't understand the meaning of your only problem you ve experienced ... " flutters " ??
Maybe I can give you my opinion and discuss about it ? But I ve got to understand first ! ahah
By the way, thanks for your time.
:)
-
Terrance,
Happy I could help. I will give you the meaning of "flutter" from The American Heritage Dictionary flutter:1) to wave or flap rapidly in an irregular manner....
It will be easier to understand what I was referring to once you understand the meaning. There were many times when a player would say that they saw an opponents card. What do you do? I was never in favor of exposing the card because most of the time the card was not identified correctly. "Hey, dealer, I just saw Adam's card" it was the 6 of hearts." You are so convinced, you turn it over only to discover it was the 9 of spades! So, unless the card was clearly exposed, I would just continue dealing...and besides, keep your eyes on your own hand.
Similar situations require other actions. When a second card is exposed on the initial deal, it calls for a "do-over" or redeal. This is more common in draw games or even flop games that require dealing more down cards than hold'em (i.e. Omaha). More cards dealt, the higher the probability that something will go wrong.
Every once in a while the dealers need to be warned about keeping the cards low to the table to avoid any exposure. Sometimes they don't realize that they are getting a little "sloppy" or careless while dealing. Remember, a misdeal should be the last resort in order to maintain the flow of the game.
-
When there is any question whatsoever as to whether a player saw a fluttering card, I always flip it. Sometimes a player will look at it before flipping it and say "No, it wasn't the 6 of clubs (or whatever), I can keep it." They can't. Even if it wasn't that card, everyone at the table now knows that that player does not have that card. A player could even lie and say that wasn't the card even if it was (if they show it at showdown, they could just say the card was the second one dealt to them, as unlikely that would be. Or they could be right about the value (or suit) but wrong about the other half. So, to avoid all question, if a player says he saw it, or I believe it could have been seen, the card is considered as exposed. I've never run across someone lying about seeing it. I don't see any reason to actually.
-
Hi guys
... strangely It s not in the 2015 rules ...
Check again.
Rule 34, Misdeals:6) In flop games, if either of the first 2 cards dealt off the deck or any other 2 downcards are exposed by dealer error.
-
Gregg,
I'm not insinuating the player that thought he saw the card had any malicious intent. I'm just saying that the majority of the time, they are mistaken, and I don't agree with you at all on this one. You can't turn cards over and take "proper cards" away from the rightful owner based on the word of one inebriated player. Players at the table should agree whether a card was exposed or flashed to the point it was seen. Any dealer that makes these mistakes too often should sit in the corner and pitch a thousand cards without flashing a single card before he returns to the table. ;D I'm kidding, of course.
How many players volunteer that information anyway? If you don't believe me, try it yourself. It's very difficult to identify a card that is flying across the table, unless it is clearly exposed.
While I was writing Dave Miller replied. However, I don't believe that the original question was about a misdeal.
It is not my intent to argue or debate every topic that pops up on this forum. I'd really like to think that my input will help others resolve some problem or issue they are having. I've sat here for about two weeks without posting anything, before I answered Mr Bertault's question. My advice to him, and others, is to use common sense and enforce a solid rule about flashed cards. In my opinion, always flipping the card in question over is not the answer.
GreggPath, If you'd like to continue this discussion, you can always send me a personal message. Thanks for joining in, and I'm sure there are others that might feel the way you do.
-
Hi guys
... strangely It s not in the 2015 rules ...
Check again.
Rule 34, Misdeals:6) In flop games, if either of the first 2 cards dealt off the deck or any other 2 downcards are exposed by dealer error.
Unfortunately you don t understand my question Dave, read again ... ^^
@Nick, it's a very interesting point. I m tired, big week-end, give you my opinion on Monday !
You re rulling to leave the card can be good I think and I completely understand why ... I think that all rullings on this point ve got avantages and disavantages ...
Have a nice sunday guys ! :)
-
Good morning Terence,
The rules that you wish to read on this matter are contained in Robert's Rules of Poker (RRoP) which you can find here
http://www.pokercoach.us/ (http://www.pokercoach.us/).
The TDA rule #34, which Dave mentioned, alludes to the well-known process for replacing exposed cards in part B: Players may be dealt 2 consecutive cards on the button.
This is another example of TDA members attempting to keep the TDA Rules brief. The TDA Rules often exclude or limit information that is either common knowledge or covered in RRoP.
As to the debate on the qualifications on exposed: I agree with those that replace any card that was exposed - either partially or fully. Players are entitled to the same information. Knowing that there is one less black card available still affects the odds of catching your black flush. Knowing that your opponent is holding one black card is also information that can be valuable when there are 3 hearts on the flop. Knowing whether or not a card was a face card ... etc., etc. A flashed card is an exposed card if someone saw some part of the face.
Regards,
B~
-
Bill,
It sounds like you're in favor of "turning" the partially exposed card over for all to see...because it was RED? The fact that in a 10 handed game of hold'em, even after the flop, turn and river...more than half of the deck is unseen by anyone! Wow, I'm not quite as versed as many others, but maybe you can explain the odds on your opponent holding the only card in the deck that you could lose to. I'll bet you've lost more than your share in those situations, just like the rest of us.
As far as Robert's Rules; They are primarily for cash games. If we keep looking to Robert's Rules...why don't we adopt them? I very often do question why we are different on some rules.
Back to the original question. In my opinion, we can not start turning cards over just because a player might have caught a glimpse. The good news is; the action taken occurs before any wagering has taken place. The bad news is; unless the card is unquestionably exposed, revealing it's identity to the table, and replacing it with the burn card, could seriously alter the action and the eventual winner.
I remember, years ago, a rule that would allow the rightful owner of a card to refuse the card as long as he did not accept the card into his hand. "I saw that card, and I don't want it!" The obvious theory here was based on the fact that no player would refuse his proper card, unless he knew it's identity.
-
It sounds like you're in favor of "turning" the partially exposed card over for all to see...because it was RED? The fact that in a 10 handed game of hold'em, even after the flop, turn and river...more than half of the deck is unseen by anyone!
I respectfully disagree. Knowing that a card is red can be very helpful in many situations. How would you like to be the person whose card color was seen and to have a flop of three red cards? If only one person saw the color, then that person has a big advantage over everyone else. It's just like when a card is dealt off the table. It doesn't matter if it is visible or not, you always declare that card exposed. No player should EVER have information about another player's hand due to dealer error. And, like I said in my first post, if player A says they saw that player B received a red card, and then player A looks and declares it is not a red card, the card still needs to be flipped since it is now obvious they have a black card. Same if you get more specific. The only fair way to do it is to expose the card to everyone, giving them all the same information, and then switching the card with the burn.
-
Gregg,
You insist on going back and forth on this, and it's quite apparent that you don't agree with me on anything. The poker games you run are your own house games so you can continue to impose any rules you want. As long as your players agree with you continue doing it your way. The players are our "bread and butter" not the rulemakers. If you have a successful game, you must be doing something right. I wish you continued success, even though we agree on very little.
I'm sure we'll hear from three or four of the usual suspects, while the other 1800+ members and the BOD remain silent.
-
You insist on going back and forth on this
This isn't a matter of insisting on going back and forth. We are having a discussion. I believe that I have every right to give my opinion.
The poker games you run are your own house games
I never brought up my home game in this situation. I am talking about poker games in general. I believe the rules should be fair to all players. Allowing one player to have information that everyone else doesn't have is unfair. I'm not sure how you can disagree with that.
-
Hi guys,
Remind me the rule for a card " flashed " by a dealer on the first or second turn to a player at seat 3 please ?
I obviously know the rule but one of my player wants to read it ... And strangely It s not in the 2015 rules ... it was in 2013 rules ...
Friendly regards.
Terence
Hi Terence: Can you please provide an example of the scenario above. I assume the game is hold'em.
Specifically:
1) By Seat 3 are you talking about the first player to the left of the BB? (i.e. the UTG seat)
2) By "first or second turn" are you talking about the 1st or 2nd downcard on the initial deal, or ?
3) I don't see any major difference between the 2013 and 2015 Rules on the subject of mis-dealing. Please indicate what part of the 2013 Rules you find language (that applies to this situation), that is not in the 2015 Rules.
Thanks for the cliarification
-
My 2 cents:
If there is ANY doubt whether any player saw a flashed card on the initial deal to any position, I will pull the card back, show it to the entire table, replace it in order and make it the burn card.
Chet
-
To all,
The original question was not about an exposed card...it was flashed. If it were obviously seen then of course all players should get to see the card. My answer applies when a single player thinks he caught a glimpse of a flashed card. "Hey dealer, I just saw Chet's card...it's the Jack of clubs." The dealer then turns over the card in question, only to discover it is a King of clubs. Not a problem, it will be replaced by what would be the burn card. Oh, I forgot to tell you, that King of clubs gave Chet pocket Kings! "Sorry, Chet..." ::) :D
-
Hey nick!!!
Pocket Kings SUCK so there
:D :D :D
-
That's funny...I don't like them either! ;D
-
Hi guys,
At first I just want to apologize again for my english ... I miss some vocabulary ....
1/ So in my first post, the card is exposed by the dealer in dealing to the UTG player ... First or second private cards is not important because the rule is the same ...
For me, I know that we have to change it by the flop burned card ... the exposed card become the flop burned card ...
I look in the TDA's 2013 rules and I was wrong it's not in ...
I think I ve learnt that in RROP in a old french version ...
It's obvious that for me TDA 2015 #34 rules by " two cards at the button " is refering to this point !
A long time ago in french casino and just for a bit of culture, we were taking the third card under the deck to replace the player card ... With this old rule, we didn't put the flop burned card in the game ...
2/ A card flashed by a player who clearly announced it
It's a big discussion guys and of course there can be a lot of point of view ...
I m agree with Nick that at 90% the player annoucing it is wrong ... from my experience ...
Obvious we can't check the player's card to look if he's right or wrong in his announcement ... because it's giving info to all players ... But leaving this card to a player can be a big disavantage for him ...
As I say before, I don t think there's a perfect rulling for this ... In all cases, there's will be avantage and disavantage in the game or for players ...
In the doubt for me, we ve got to change it to the player ...
3/ TDA's 2017 rules
I don't understand guys that if TDA wants to be a leader in poker rules; you don't written all the rules and all the rulling of litigations ... in English TDA's rules is 9 pages ... It's quite ridiculous don't you think for a game like poker ...
The rule for prematured turn card have to change in my opinion, you can't change the end of the deck my friends ... but it's not the subject of this thread ... :)
Make us a bible of 30 or 50 pages with all in it ! Work hard guys in 2017, we need it !
I think of new TDs in our industry ... and sometimes players have to read rules to understand and accept a rulling.
By the way, thanks to all of you guys for participating to this thread.
Friendly regards.
-
Make us a bible of 30 or 50 pages with all in it ! Work hard guys in 2017, we need it !
I think of new TDs in our industry ... and sometimes players have to read rules to understand and accept a rulling.
I was actually thinking the same thing last night. Why do we have to make the rulebook as concise as possible? I think the rulebook should be extensive as possible! Cover every possible scenario. If a rule is written down, it's less likely that the rule will be applied incorrectly.
-
I'll agree with less rules, but much, much lengthier explanations. Hundreds of pages with every possible scenario. Okay, sharpen your pencils!
-
My 2 cents:
If there is ANY doubt whether any player saw a flashed card on the initial deal to any position, I will pull the card back, show it to the entire table, replace it in order and make it the burn card.
Chet
I agree 100% and don't see why this isn't the common way of thinking. I was playing last Saturday night, sitting in seat 1 and the card dealt to me landed at a bad angle and flipped up and down quickly. The dealer tried to discretely ask me if I thought it flashed. I said "do you think it flashed?" she said "it might have but I don't know if anyone saw it." To which I responded, "If you think it may have flashed then you need to treat it as if it definitely did flash." She replaced it but then for some reason felt the need to add in "I really don't think it flashed."
I have no idea if it flashed or not, I was looking at my phone (don't judge me to harshly for that, just being honest). But the dealer was the one that suggested it may have been flashed so clearly there had to be a pretty decent possibility that it had. Whether anyone saw the flashed card is, in my opinion, irrelevant.
-
Just a good dealer I think with a great sense of professionnalism.
About puting more rules / all the rules and rullings, I'm happy to see that you are in favor of that.
Just want to hear in 2017/2018 :
" woww TDA has changed, they have worked hard, it's now the best and clear rules of poker "
I will obvious help by giving you my opinion on each rules.
You have well undertand that I can't write with my poor english ... be sure I will be your french translator for this !
Easy to make a short form to post-up in our rooms, a mid-form for basic rules and a long form with all in it.
-
My 2 cents:
If there is ANY doubt whether any player saw a flashed card on the initial deal to any position, I will pull the card back, show it to the entire table, replace it in order and make it the burn card.
Chet
I agree 100% and don't see why this isn't the common way of thinking. ... Whether anyone saw the flashed card is, in my opinion, irrelevant.
I also agree 100%.
-
To Bill, and Chet, and Brian:
How are you aware of the flashed card? Does the dealer call you over to the table? Or does the argument that ensues at the table draw you there? In a perfect world, you'd be watching the dealers every move and then you could make a sound decision as to whether the card were flashed or not. However, realistically, that's not what happens. So you go to a table where the dealer insists he did not flash a card, and a player insists he did. Do you ask him (the player) what the card was? Or do you just turn it over without further questioning? I'm curious and I'd really like to know.
-
Bill;
Nice thorough answer to Reply #24 ???
-
A properly trained dealer should replace a card being dealt when any part of the face was possibly exposed. There is no need to call the floor. See rule #34 for exceptions regarding misdeals.
-
Rule #34 has absolutely nothing to do with this post, or the original question.
-
Bill;
Nice thorough answer to Reply #24 ???
Really Nick? Can't someone agree without having to explain themselves. It seems like everytime someone disagrees with what you are saying, you take it as a personal attack. Everyone has a right to their opinion. The fact that most people disagree with many of your suggestions only says that you are in the minority, not that they have anything against you.
A properly trained dealer should replace a card being dealt when any part of the face was possibly exposed. There is no need to call the floor. See rule #34 for exceptions regarding misdeals.
I agree with you, Bill. Sure, if a player objects to the ruling and won't accept the dealer's explanation, then the floor should be called over and should agree with the dealer.
Rule #34 has absolutely nothing to do with this post, or the original question.
As for this one, Rule 34 absolutely has something to do with what we're talking about. Looks at subsection A-6. We are talking about exposed (or flashed) cards. That rule deals explicitly with that subject.
In my mind, it all comes down to fairness. One player possibly seeing a piece of a card has information that the rest of the table does not have, regardless of how little information they have (black vs red). The only way to be fair to everyone is to show the card to the whole table and replace it with the burn card. I've never heard about a player lying about seeing a card (that is, saying they saw it even though they didn't... obviously the reverse probably happens more often, but that's comes back around to the need for this rule). If you have to ask, "Did anyone see any bit of that card?", then you should be replacing the card anyways.
-
Really Gregg?
Terence asks a question. I wait one full day before I reply. I give him the answer he's looking for, and then you chime in. My recent reply was directed at Bill, and I'm sure he can speak for himself. If you have a problem with my replies, that's fine. I recently sent you two personal messages. The last one went unanswered. It's just another ruling we don't agree on.
Sorry every comment I make bothers you, and too bad you seem to take them personally. :o