2015 updated rule 29: At Your Seat -- and the impact to rule 34C: Misdeals

[BillM16]

In 2015 the At Your Seat rule was changed to:

A player must be at his seat when the last card is dealt on the initial deal in order to have a live hand. A player not then at his seat is dealt in, he may not look at his cards, and the hand is immediately killed after the initial deal. ... etc.

Does this necessitate a change to the Misdeals rule?

...
C: In a misdeal, the re-deal is an exact re-play: the button does not move, no new players are seated, and limits stay the same. Cards are dealt to players on penalty or who were not at their seats for the original deal, then their hands are killed. ... etc.

Will a player be allowed to play the re-deal hand if they:

• were not at their seat when the misdeal occurred, but were at their seat before the last card of the re-deal was dealt

What if the misdeal occurred:

• After the last card of the initial deal
• Before the last card of the initial deal

See also:  http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1340.0

[chet]

No.

The deal is redone under the EXACT SAME conditions as applied to the original deal.  Any player not eligible to play the original deal is again NOT ELIGIBLE to play the redeal.

Chet

[Nick C]

Chet,

What if the player were not on penalty but returned prior to the redeal ? You seem to indicate you would still deal him out, or at least deal him in but kill the hand...if so, why?

This is getting very repetitive with the same confusing replies. Who said anything about the absent player being on a penalty?

[Dave Miller]

Who said anything about the absent player being on a penalty?

I did.

In that other thread, I suggested that an absent player IS on a one-hand penalty. I.E. Even if he returns before it's his turn to act, he is penalized and not allowed to play his hand.

On that note, he is on penalty in that if he returns before the start of a re-deal, he is still not allowed to play the hand.

[Nick C]

Dave,

In a tournament the absent player would be dealt in, then his cards would be killed...correct? Why then would you not allow him to play, after dealing him in on the next hand? It's not a penalty hand, and he returned in time to play after a misdeal. I don't understand your logic on this one. Why would it be different than a cash game? You would surely deal him in then, wouldn't you?

[Dave Miller]

Dave,

In a tournament the absent player would be dealt in, then his cards would be killed...correct? Why then would you not allow him to play, after dealing him in on the next hand?

Whoa. Next hand? It's a re-deal after a mis-deal. This is the SAME hand.

It's not a penalty hand, and he returned in time to play after a misdeal.

Technically, it IS a penalty. Since he wasn't at his seat at the start of the deal, he cannot play in the hand. A re-deal due to a mis-deal does not negate this.

Why would it be different than a cash game? You would surely deal him in then, wouldn't you?

Of course it's not the same in a cash game. In a tournament, a player is dealt in even if he's missing. Not so in a cash game. Furthermore, in a cash game, dealers will look around and deal in a player that is nearby.

Would you like me to explain WHY the rules are different?

[Nick C]

Dave,

I doubt you'd be able to explain anything to me that I'd agree with, and seeing non of the experts on the board of directors want to get involved in this one...I'll  give up on trying to convince you you're wrong.

You do it your way...and I'll do it mine.

[Steff0111]

...
You do it your way...and I'll do it mine.

Breaking rule 34c!

[Nick C]

Steff0111,

If we remove "on penalty" from 34c...I would agree. That player was not on a penalty.

[Steff0111]

Hi Nick,

I´m a german guy. So here could be a mistake in my understanding of the sentence (english is not my native language):

Rule 34 c:
"In a misdeal, the re-deal is an exact re-play: ... . Cards are dealt to players on penalty or who were not at their seats for the original deal, then their hands are killed..."

For my understanding it is not important, whether he is on penalty or not.
It is important, that he was absent at the first deal (bold part of the sentence)

Player was absent, cards were mucked, misdeal was declared, hand will be replayed -> so card have to be mucked again.

See post #6 of the original post:
http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?topic=1340.0

[BillM16]

Hey folks,

My original post here is an attempt to focus on the fact that a player must be at his seat when the last card is dealt.  Many misdeals occur before the last card is dealt.  Therefore, can you penalize that player who was not at his seat when the misdeal occurred?  I don't think so.  Most misdeals occur and are caught long before the button is dealt his last down card.  Sometimes it is the very first card off the deck that was exposed causing the misdeal.  If Daniel Negreanu is the button and returns to his seat as you gather in the exposed card and start your re-deal riffle, are you going to kill his hand?

Regards,
B~
p.s. For those unaware ... Daniel spoke at the 2015 Summit which lead to the rule change from first card to last card.

[Nick C]

Steff0111,

There's nothing wrong with your english comprehension...after reading 34c again, I have to agree with you. I don't consider it a penalty, but it clearly confirms what everyone is saying.

On another note: Take a look at BillM16's last post and tell me what you would do: "If Daniel Negreanu is the button and returns to his seat as you gather in the exposed card and start your re-deal riffle, are you going to kill his hand?

Bottom line: Just another TDA rule I don't like.

[Steff0111]

...
On another note: Take a look at BillM16's last post and tell me what you would do: "If Daniel Negreanu is the button and returns to his seat as you gather in the exposed card and start your re-deal riffle, are you going to kill his hand?
...

Of course you need nerves of steel and a very good floor man behind you! 

...
Bottom line: Just another TDA rule I don't like.

But it is one of these rules, which is crystal claer, easy to understand and comprehensible in my point of view.
Replay of the hand -> So nothing will be changed at the second deal!

[Nick C]

Steff0111,

I don't know about "crystal clear." Perhaps this might help: 34 c...In a misdeal, the re-deal is an exact re-play: the button does not move, no new players are seated, and limits stay the same. Cards are dealt to players on penalty or who were not at their seats for the original deal, even if they return in time for the re-deal, then their hands are killed. The original deal and re-deal count as one hand for a player on penalty, not two.

[Max D]

Steff0111,

I don't know about "crystal clear." Perhaps this might help: 34 c...In a misdeal, the re-deal is an exact re-play: the button does not move, no new players are seated, and limits stay the same. Cards are dealt to players on penalty or who were not at their seats for the original deal, even if they return in time for the re-deal, then their hands are killed. The original deal and re-deal count as one hand for a player on penalty, not two.

I understand the rules a Nick C described, In a misdeal, the re-deal is an exact re-play.

Hey folks,

My original post here is an attempt to focus on the fact that a player must be at his seat when the last card is dealt.  Many misdeals occur before the last card is dealt.  Therefore, can you penalize that player who was not at his seat when the misdeal occurred?  I don't think so.  Most misdeals occur and are caught long before the button is dealt his last down card.  Sometimes it is the very first card off the deck that was exposed causing the misdeal.  If Daniel Negreanu is the button and returns to his seat as you gather in the exposed card and start your re-deal riffle, are you going to kill his hand?

Regards,
B~
p.s. For those unaware ... Daniel spoke at the 2015 Summit which lead to the rule change from first card to last card.

As for Bill comment/question on a player must be at his seat when the last card is dealt, in the case of the misdeal the last card is the last card of the misdeal, not the last card going to the button...  I think that works if read that way.
The rule is pretty clear (no matter if you like it or not), and it requires dealers that pay attention to people seating in and out.