PokerTDA
POKER TOURNAMENT RULES QUESTIONS & DISCUSSIONS => Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General => Topic started by: W0lfster on January 24, 2011, 06:51:18 AM
-
Playing a tournament down my local pub, I was told that you can call, raise or go all in before the cards are even dealt providing its in betting order. A player said, the UTG is the first person that can do this, no other player can cos its out of betting order. He then said the player directly to the left can do this also providing the UTG has done this first and it can carry on until for as long as the players want providing its in betting order.
Any thoughts?
Thanks
Andy. :)
-
true enough...as long as it is all in betting order...but unless your sitting in on an absolute donkfest or perhaps say two or three super short stacks sitting in a row there would just be no reason to ever do it.
If the conversation was just about what's within the rules then ok, it is.
-
Andy,
You say that this is a tournament. We could use a little more information. I will assume that it is no limit hold'em. Any UTG player, pre-flop, can raise before he gets his cards. It is not live, meaning that if no other player raises, the betting for that round will stop at the BB. What you describe is a "blind raise." If players continue to raise blind, raising may continue until they run out of chips or a raise limit, or cap is met first.
-
well I'm not that confortable with this situation.
I mean, when cards are dealt I allow players to raise/all-in without having seen the cards.
When only one card has been dealt (deaer is still giving the second card) or the dealer is still shuffling I don't consider speech binding.
-
well I'm not that confortable with this situation.
I mean, when cards are dealt I allow players to raise/all-in without having seen the cards.
When only one card has been dealt (deaer is still giving the second card) or the dealer is still shuffling I don't consider speech binding.
Some players like to "check in the dark" or "bet in the dark," which is acting on a hand when it is a player's turn before the flop, turn, or river card is dealt.
Calling or raising in the dark, preflop, is a similar concept.
The potential problem is in the case of a misdeal or if the player who is first to act who pushes all in preflop without having been dealt cards distracts the dealer by doing so, causing this player to be dealt only one card, and when the next player calls, binding the first player's action, what does he do then?
-
When a dealer skips a player, it is usually the button. The proper procedure would be to give that player a card off the top of the deck. This would be his "proper card." If for some strange reason, the dealer proceeded to burn and put the flop out, before it was discovered that the player was not dealt a second card, then a decision would have to be made. This becomes interesting because the incorrect cards would be on the flop (one card different), and I'm not certain that the player with only one card would be disqualified from play.
-
Nick: I believe that once the flop has been laid, it is too late for any player to complain about the number of cards. Isn't it up to the player to ascertain the accuracy of their hole cards before there is any substantial action? From RRoP, V.11, C 3, Sub 2:
MISDEALS
1. Once action begins, a misdeal cannot be called. The deal will be played, and no money will be returned to any player whose hand is fouled. In button games, action is considered to occur when two players after the blinds have acted on their hands. In stud games, action is considered to occur when two players after the forced bet have acted on their hands.
2. The following circumstances cause a misdeal, provided attention is called to the error before two players have acted on their hands.
(a) The first or second card of the hand has been exposed by a dealer error.
(b) Two or more cards have been exposed by the dealer.
(c) Two or more boxed cards (improperly faced cards) are found.
(d) Two or more extra cards have been dealt in the starting hands of a game.
(e) An incorrect number of cards has been dealt to a player, except the top card may be dealt if it goes to the player in proper sequence.
Based on the above, the resolution depends upon whether there has been 'substantial action', which RRoP appears to define as "two players have acted on their hands." In my opinion, if 'substantial action' has not occurred, it is a misdeal (this would have to be PRE-FLOP) unless the card(s) to subsequent players have not been looked at and can be backed up. If there has been 'substantial action', the hand of the player with the incorrect number of hole cards is dead and play continues.
Hope this helps!
-
Chet,
I agree with most of what is written regarding the misdeals. I do have a problem with the wording. Why don't they specifically say less cards. They don't. It is just another vague ruling. I'm not so sure that a player can be eliminated with one hole card. As far as substantial action, if the dealer burns and turns the flop, that's enough for me. I know that you are referring to aPre-flop. I guess my question would be; If there were substantial action, could the player with only one card play if he wanted to?
-
Nick: What is the difference if a player is dealt too many or too few? The result is the same that player has an incorrect number of hole cards and any players following also have hole cards different from what they would have had if not for the error. The player is responsible for making sure the hole cards are correct. What would you do if all the players have the correct number of cards, but during the course of the hand one of a players hole cards turns out to be a joker or some other card that may be included with a new deck, but not one of the 52 correct cards (calendar or whatever)?
As to making it voluntary whether a player with only one hole card wants to continue playing, that is already covered in RRoPv.10, C 3, Sub 3.3:
'DEAD HANDS
1. Your hand is declared dead if:
(a) You fold or announce that you are folding when facing a bet or a raise.
(b) You throw your hand away in a forward motion causing another player to act behind you (even if not facing a bet).
(c) In stud, when facing a bet, you pick your upcards off the table, turn your upcards facedown, or mix your upcards and downcards together.
(d) The hand does not contain the proper number of cards for that particular game (except at stud a hand missing the final card may be ruled live, and at lowball and draw high a hand with too few cards before the draw is live). [See Section 16 - “Explanations,” discussion #4, for more information on the stud portion of this rule.]
-
Chet,
The rules that you've listed only confirm the possibility of a hand, one card short, still competing for the pot. The player holding too many cards, has a dead hand. Period. There is a huge advantage to having an extra card. I also like what you wrote about making the choice voluntary, to the player one card short.
If a player on the BB were dealt in, and three players called before anyone noticed the BB only had one card, how would you handle the situation? Would you give the BB the top card off the deck? Would you give him his BB back? Would you kill his hand and blame him for not speaking soon enough? Would you call for a misdeal? What if the player wants to compete with only one card?
-
My ruling, based on what I have previously quoted from RRoP, is that the Big Blind's hand would be DEAD!! No if's, and's or but's.
My last quote from RRoP addresses the thought of letting the player with only one card voluntarily continue in the hand, since that players hand has an incorrect number of cards it is DEAD.
RRoP is very clear, in my opinion, EACH individual player is responsible for ensuring he has the correct number of hole cards AND that those cards are valid (no joker, calendar or whatever). Failure to do so before substantial action has occurred makes that hand DEAD.
Sorry if this appears to you to be too harsh, but if you are not going to enforce simple rules why bother having those rules.
-
Chet,
I'm not disagreeing with all that you say. I am offering some situations that could be handled differently. I don't want to get too far off the initial question but, how would you handle this. At the showdown, the initial bettor has a card accidently scooped into the muck by the dealer. The board reads Ks 9s 5s 2s 4c. The player with one card is holding the Ace of spades. What is your ruling?
-
Chet,
I'm not disagreeing with all that you say. I am offering some situations that could be handled differently. I don't want to get too far off the initial question but, how would you handle this. At the showdown, the initial bettor has a card accidently scooped into the muck by the dealer. The board reads Ks 9s 5s 2s 4c. The player with one card is holding the Ace of spades. What is your ruling?
The player didn't protect his hand, all hole cards are necessary to have a hand at showdown, player with one hole card loses the hand.
Hopefully, this player will learn from the experience and always protect his hand in the future.
In my first poker tournament as a player, sitting in the one seat, the dealer recommended that I protect my hand because she almost mucked my hand. fifteen minutes later, she accidentally mucked my hand. Since then, I have never played a hand without a silver dollar as a card protector.
-
DCJ,
I can understand that rule. Write it like that. Why then, have TD's tried to dig hands from the muck, or worse yet, asked the player what their cards were so they could confirm that they were the correct cards and allow them to continue. It's simple, just tell the players that having only one hole card disqualifies you from competing for that pot. Some poker games allow players to compete with less cards. We initially started talking about a blind raise. What about the BB, it's not a raise but it is blind? If one of the blinds discovers that they only have one card after two people have called, should their hand be dead?
-
Nick: Sorry for the delay, but I was playing most of the day and not at home.
1. The player did not protect his hand, that said, if this was a new player and inexperienced, I would try to retrieve his "lost" card. To do that he would have to tell me what the missing card was both in terms of value and suit and I would have to find that missing card in the muck. One chance only. If this was an experienced player, sorry, but your hand is dead.
2. Same answer. To have a valid hand the player MUST have two hole cards. Again I would take into consideration the experience of the player etc., as I said above. Remember this player gets "One chance only". This doesn't mean one chance per event. Had that player not protected his hand previously and 'used his one chance', the hand is dead!!
Finally, while I totally understand what you are trying to do (at least I think I understand) with the rather detailed changes you have suggested to different rules, I think it is more than what the TDA is comfortable with. In my opinion, and I am not speaking for the TDA BOD in any way, shape or form, one of the desires of the TDA BOD is to resolve the most difficult and confusing situations with brevity in mind. There is a reason for that part of TDA Rule #1 which says, "...Unusual circumstances can on occasion dictate that decisions in the interest of fairness take priority over the technical rules..."
What is important, in my opinion, is that consistent decisions are made. It is just unacceptable to me that floor persons in the same house will take identical situations and make different rulings. I can accept different rulings from one house to another, but NEVER within the same house.
-
What is important, in my opinion, is that consistent decisions are made. It is just unacceptable to me that floor persons in the same house will take identical situations and make different rulings. I can accept different rulings from one house to another, but NEVER within the same house.
Chet.
When you say that you like to make exceptions for new players, but apply the rules strictly with experienced players, you are speaking in contradiction to the fundamental ideal that you have stated in the end of your post that consistent application of the rules is paramount. It's my opinion that, when consistency is lost, credibility and respect are lost for those in supervisory capacities.
It's also my opinion that, when new players pay their entry fees for tournaments or buy into cash games, they have the responsibility of understanding and playing by the rules. If new players make mistakes, the rules should be applied correctly and consistently. And, if new player's don't learn from their mistakes, they have the option of learning at some point or quitting due to losing or frustration.
You also said that you expect consistency within the same room. But if the room's entire staff is advised to make a one time exception for new player's, and a new player makes the same mistake three times with three different dealers that is ruled upon by three different floor people who each make an exception to the rules as a one time courtesy, there's a problem.
You seem to understand some important principles, but you appear to be conflicted in your approach, in my opinion.
-
DCJ001: I respectfully disagree. My desire to make an exception is to have a "vehicle" for educating a new player while at the same time doing as much as I can to keep that player an active participant in my house. I don't see it much different than having two identical instances of a player showing cards to their neighbor where in one instance the player is totally inexperienced in the tournament/casino environment and in the second the player is well known and very experienced. In the first case, I would be inclined to give a warning or maybe at best a one hand penalty while I explained the rules. In the second case there is no way I would give any thing less than a one round penalty.
I see our job as a TD to include at least two areas, one to ensure each and every participant feels comfortable that the event is being run on the up and up, and two to do all I can to bring new players into the 'fold', ie., ensuring they have a pleasant experience and want to come back again.
If I need to invoke TDA Rule #1 to ensure the latter from time to time, so be it.
As to your example of three instances of exceptions to a rule for the same player. I think there must be a communication problem within that room. I would expect that ANY Floor that makes an exception for a player to ensure that the persons following albeit a dealer, floor or whomever, know that an exception was make for "X". Good communication and record keeping should minimize, if not eliminate that problem. Communication was exactly the reason that the WSOP went to electronic recordkeeping for rules violations a couple of years back. It eliminates this problem. Any dealer, floor or for that matter player knows who the individuals are that tend to 'bend the rules' regularly. They get NO room from me.
-
DCJ,
I will quote one of your earlier posts on this topic:
"The potential problem is in the case of a misdeal or if the player who is first to act who pushes all in preflop without having been dealt cards distracts the dealer by doing so, causing this player to be dealt only one card, and when the next player calls, binding the first player's action, what does he do then?"
I don't know how that distracts the dealer. If any player is short a card it would almost never be a player UTG. The most probable will be the last card dealt before the burn and flop, which is the button's second card. This is usually not a problem because the button will draw attention to it before play resumes. If some strange event occurs, where the button continues play without realizing that he is short one card, then he has to suffer the consiquences. All of the board cards would be altered and it would be too late to call for a misdeal. My question is; would this player be allowed to participate and compete for the pot, one card short? Does anyone think that he should be given a second card? I understand that a player looking at one card and continuing to play without looking at his second hole card could be in trouble if he discovers the other card to be a joker. Yikes! Would you kill his hand even if he realized his mistake, but still wanted to compete?
I know these are unusual situations but, it's always good to play them out like this so we can prepare ourselves when they occur.
-
Nick,
I agree with you that the situation DCJ outlines would unlikely result in the UTG player not receiving his second card but I have seen it happen. Sadly, I have to say that he would be responsible and it would not be declared a misdeal but rather that his hand would be dead. Which is what I think DCJ was talking about, perhaps we shouldn't allow betting in the dark preflop which is currently legal.
And as to your question, if the button player didn't notice he had one card before the flop I think he could call attention to it before the action gets too far, say if he says something as the second player is taking action, and get his second card. If the flop is out and he discovers it then that is just a bummer, he needs to pay attention. Hopefully, he notices it before he has to put money in the pot preflop and just discard his "hand". But anyway you look at it the rules say it's a dead hand and he is responsible for the consequences. No player that has a single card and knows it can compete for a pot in holdem. And if he competes for a pot without two cards he won't win at the end either.
-
Jasper,
I will quote you:
"No player that has a single card and knows it can compete for a pot in holdem. And if he competes for a pot without two cards he won't win at the end either." So show me the rule, or write it like that. No problem.
-
RROP 3:3.1d
Dead Hands
1. Your hand is declared dead if:
a.
b.
c.
d. the hand does not contain the proper number of cards cards for that particular game.