deck with 2 nine of spades

[The Hitman]

Hello,

in your opinion, what is the best decision for this case (tournament)?

2 players are involved in the hand, turn card is exposed, board is: As10s6s6h
player 1 goes all in, player 2 calls.
Player 1 shows AA for a full house, player 2 shows 9s6c for three of a kind.
River is: 9s so we have the two same cards in the deck.

Do we have to cancel the hand and give back the money to the players?

Or can we consider that this card does not affect the hand in progress?
I explain: player 1 has the best hand at the turn, player 2 is only playing for the last 6 in the deck, otherwise he's drawing dead.
Is it the interest of the game to refuse the maximum value to a player and refuse the chance to the other to draw his last out?
Can we envisage to kill the river and draw another one after re-shuffling the remaining cards of the deck (even if, Iagree, it's a professionnal fault from the satff members not to check the decks on the tables)?

Otherwise, I've thought about different options:
- give back the last bets to both players, draw another river, and give the remaining pot to the winner
- give back the last bets and give the pot to player 1 (seems unfair but why not...)

Can you give me some light? 

Thanks
Dogzy

PS: it's a real case, I've never faced it but a player saw it in a casino and asked me what to do (I don't know yet what was the decision of the floorstaff)

[Dave Lamb]

The best remedy for a fouled deck is to refund all bets and change decks. Regardless of the number of players, the amount of action that has occurred, or when it is discovered, it is a null and void hand. Some juridictions make that a mandatory remedy under the state gaming regulations.

[pineforest]

That hand is no good. bets should be backed up and all chips returned to all players for that hand.  Nothing can be done or the previous hands.

[Stuart Murray]

Hi there,

Ditto Dave's and Pine's responses, the following is taken from Robert's Rules of Poker (RROP) (Section 3 Sub Irregularities)

3. If a card with a different color back appears during a hand, all action is void and all chips in the pot are returned to the respective bettors. If a card with a different color back is discovered in the stub, all action stands.
4. If two cards of the same rank and suit are found, all action is void, and all chips in the pot are returned to the players who wagered them (subject to next rule).
5. A player who knows the deck is defective has an obligation to point this out. If such a player instead tries to win a pot by taking aggressive action (trying for a freeroll), the player may lose the right to a refund, and the chips may be required to stay in the pot for the next deal.
6. If there is extra money in the pot on a deal as a result of forfeited money from the previous deal (as per rule #5), or some similar reason, only a player dealt in on the previous deal is entitled to a hand.

Previous hands have expired, therefore irrespective of someone saying "That player won a huge hand 10minutes ago with a straight flush using the 9s, is irrelevant.  Only the current hand shall be null and void.

PS I am shocked that it happened in a casino, that casino must have some real lax procedures in the cardroom for dealing with decks. All I interact with proof their decks after use, spread decks open before use and the bank keeps a count of decks issued to the cardroom.

Regards
Stuart

[chet]

The ONLY acceptable remedy is to rule the deck fouled.  The hand is NULL and VOID,  ALL monies MUST be refunded and the deck removed from play.

You said, "Can we envisage to kill the river and draw another one after re-shuffling the remaining cards of the deck (even if, Iagree, it's a professionnal fault from the satff members not to check the decks on the tables)?"   I know of NO casino/cardroom that checks the deck after each and every hand.  It is just as possible the deck was fouled by a player as it is the deck was fouled as it came from the factory.  You cannot realistically expect staff members to check the deck after each and every hand, can you?  You would only be playing a half dozen hands per hour at best.

Every casino/cardroom I have played in, over the past years, ALWAYS spreads both decks face up and face down with at least two players at the table, when the table is opened.  Failure to do so I expect is a violation of state/tribal gaming regulations and could be cause for license revocation/penalty.

If this really happened in a casino, I would surely want to make sure casino management was aware.  If they don't subscribe to this remedy, then I don't think I would want to be associated with them or put my money into play at that location.

Hope this helps

[Nick C]

Dogzy,
 I agree with everyone. It's interesting that Dave mentions state gaming regulations. I usually don't consider that and I probably should. That could bring a powerful tool to the table that could add credibility to any TD's decision. "The State regs will not allow us to"...........Pineforest, Stuart and Chet all agree.
 Chet mentions that prior to dealing any cards, both decks are fanned on the table to confirm that each deck has the proper cards. This is true. Brand new unopened decks are not "spaded" in the order that we use them in poker. I remember the night before opening our new poker room, we began opening all of the decks to remove the jokers and put them in the proper order. I was shocked to discover two aces of spades in one new deck! I've never experienced that before, or since. I do recommend fanning the cards one deck at a time, by that I mean; keep one deck in the card well while fanning the deck to be used. This will reduce the chance of the decks becoming mixed together. When the next deck is brought into play, it will be fanned to confirm all cards are present.
 I would like to add a unique situation that might change your decision. Take a close look at the ruling that Stuart listed from RRoP; #5, If Player 2 were holding both 9's of spades, then the chips would not be returned to all players. The ruling is weak (in my opinion) because it says; the player MAY lose the right to a refund, and the chips MAY be required to stay in the pot for the next deal. Many rules for poker are written this way. I would prefer the word may be replaced by WILL, but it does give the TD the authority to make a number of different calls.