Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
Live Cash Game Rules Questions / Re: Dealer error: do we force player to pay?
« Last post by Dave Miller on December 02, 2023, 07:16:47 AM »
Twice you said “$100”. Other times you said “100” or “125”.

If you meant $100 cash chips, then I would have insisted it stay in the pot. After all, if you’re playing at those nose-bleed levels, you should be paying attention and know the rules. And at those levels, even a friendly private game should be playing by casino / Robert’s / TDA rules.

I’m pretty sure you meant 100 tournament chips. As such I would have handled it exactly as you did for a variety of reasons. Notably, keep it friendly, and you’ve made similar rulings in the past.
32
Live Cash Game Rules Questions / Dealer error: do we force player to pay?
« Last post by MisterD on December 01, 2023, 12:01:59 PM »
Interesting issue at a private game last night.

  • Player A bets 100 on the flop.(Edited to add: this is a typo. The bet amount was 125. This error led to some confusion in the first response, below.)
  • Dealer announces the bet as 125.
  • Action folds around to Player B, who says "I call," and pushes out 100.
  • Dealer corrects Player B, telling him the bet is 125. Player B says, "Oh, I thought it was only 100. I fold," and pulls back his chips and pushes out his cards.
  • Dealer mucks Player B's hand.

Action then folded back to Player A who insisted that the $100 should go into the pot. I was asked for a ruling.

--

On the one hand, I understand that, technically, the $100 belongs in the pot: there was forward motion and the chips crossed a clearly delineated betting line.

On the other hand, we are a private game and I honestly believe Player A: there was no angle-shot here; he honestly mis-heard the bet amount. I think it odd that he would call 100 and not 125, but that's his business. We generally have allowed players to withdraw bets under these circumstances, especially when no significant action has occurred behind them (which had not in this case).

Additionally, Player B's cards were mucked and not identifiable. If they were identifiable, I would have offered him the chance to pay the full bet amount and play his cards. Under the circumstances, forcing him to pay the $100 seemed only punitive, which I generally try to avoid.

Thoughts?
33
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Guillaume Gleize on November 29, 2023, 05:57:06 PM »
Wow. Self dealt or not, I can’t imagine a 4 card flop with action and nobody saying to call the floor or whatever.

FYI. Proper procedure would be to return post flop bets, then handle it like any other 4 card flop - Rule 39. And if anyone complains, they should have spoke up when they saw a 4 card flop. I mean, the entire table couldn’t be that inexperienced. Could they?
Yes they can! Winamax invest millions of euros each year for those HUGE COMMERCIAL tournaments around France to attract new players! So you open an account and you can qualify FOR FREE online first then second step live (which I manage) then final in casino with millions to win (for sure you can directly go to the final if you pay)! So some players never ever played live sessions before and some only played a few time online! So believe me: The TDA (which I love & support) don't always propose us solutions and we have to invent many rulings "in the best interest of the game". ;D
34
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Dave Miller on November 29, 2023, 03:35:20 PM »
Wow. Self dealt or not, I can’t imagine a 4 card flop with action and nobody saying to call the floor or whatever.

FYI. Proper procedure would be to return post flop bets, then handle it like any other 4 card flop - Rule 39. And if anyone complains, they should have spoke up when they saw a 4 card flop. I mean, the entire table couldn’t be that inexperienced. Could they?
35
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Guillaume Gleize on November 29, 2023, 06:46:12 AM »
To be said > My cases may seem strange but I manage with WINAMAX in France some huge SELF-DEALING tournaments up to 2500 PLAYERS in one single room while still qualifying for big finals with prize pools guaranteed at a minimum of ONE MILLION EUROS! So my rulings are numerous and looking like amateurs errors (which is normal) but the stakes remain enormous!

For example recently : A flop with 4 cards and still substantial action behind ... !?! ... Here I also stopped the hand and split the pot between the remaining players because I could'nt imagine a hand with only 2 streets! When you manage some self-dealing tournaments, you need imagination because the TDA rules are far from being enough LOOOL!
36
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Guillaume Gleize on November 28, 2023, 01:39:08 PM »
Partly because in other threads, there is a desire to avoid people winning based on a technicality. In other threads, random is random. 🤷‍♂️
OKTY Dave - So I'll write something in my rules to anticipate this kind of situation if it happens again!
I will let the board stand like you the next time in this (exact same) situation. GG 
37
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Dave Miller on November 28, 2023, 01:25:58 PM »
Partly because in other threads, there is a desire to avoid people winning based on a technicality. In other threads, random is random. 🤷‍♂️
38
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Guillaume Gleize on November 27, 2023, 06:50:06 PM »
... So, based on that, I'd take all nine cards, scramble them, and put out a new board with burns and one card left over.
Except in the no burn part of Rule 39, it says if there is any action, including a check, the flop stands

But the players were all in pre-flop. What 'action' could there have been?

...
In other words, the cards that were face up were just as randomly likely to be the actual board as the 'intended' board cards, and therefore the hand should stand. That's the way I would have ruled.
First TY Dave for your answer!
But sorry (for my poor English):
I don't understand here. Why don't you change the board (which is obviously wrong)?
1) because some action occurred before?
2) because no action can occur anymore?
3) for any other reason?
Be sure that I LOVE your easy solution but what is the clear reason please?
TY in advance! GG
39
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Dave Miller on November 27, 2023, 06:23:11 PM »
Buckle up. Long post coming.

I think cancelling the hand is not the right thing to do. Doing so is equivalent to a misdeal, which clearly did not happen. However, since both players were OK with it, so am I - assuming that the 'heads up' you mentioned meant the final two players in the tournament, not merely the only two players in the hand.

I also think your final idea of "Leave the first two cards of the flop and scramble the rest" is wrong for several reasons.

A solution you didn't mention, but might have considered, would be to take all nine cards, and reshuffle them into the stub and put out an entirely new board. I'm against that solution as well.


Several things to consider.

On a four card flop, in Rule 39, we ignore the possibility of 'knowing' which two are intended to be part of the flop, and scramble all four.

Similarly in Rule 39, a flop without a burn gets all three scrambled, with one card removed for the burn.

So, based on that, I'd take all nine cards, scramble them, and put out a new board with burns and one card left over.

Except in the no burn part of Rule 39, it says if there is any action, including a check, the flop stands.

But the players were all in pre-flop. What 'action' could there have been?

Last, Rule 38 and Procedure 14 says burn cards are to protect the stub, and NOT to 'preserve the order'. I.E. Random is random.


In other words, the cards that were face up were just as randomly likely to be the actual board as the 'intended' board cards, and therefore the hand should stand. That's the way I would have ruled.


OK. Maybe that long post wasn't as long as some of my other posts.   ;D
40
Poker TDA Rules & Procedures Questions, General / Re: 4 burn cards again!
« Last post by Guillaume Gleize on November 27, 2023, 12:29:20 PM »
It was the final heads-up of a qualifying tournament for a €500 place.
The 4 burned cards were located on the side, in their order of arrival, and the entire board (flop+turn+river) in front of the dealer.

The only sure thing was that the dealer had burned two cards instead of one at one point, but no one knew if that was before the flop, before the turn or before the river.
After some long reflections and having listened to a lot of people, it seem to me that reconstituting a board, even following the lines of the TDA, was too complex, "messy" and random and could have given rise to disagreements. I was also lucky that this "bad" board had not eliminated the short stack (it would have doubled). So my cancellation was better accepted.

But I have a second solution in mind (following the TDA rules as closely as possible): The only safe cards were the first two of the flop (whether the dealer burned 1 or 2 cards) and the only one to remove was the river (since it represented a 9th and last card which should never have arrived on the table).

So maybe I could have:
1) Leave the first two cards of the flop,
2) Remove the river,
3) Mix the other 6 cards together and reconstitute: burned, 3rd of the flop, burned, turn, burned and river.

 ::)
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10