Author Topic: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?  (Read 12622 times)

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #15 on: November 07, 2013, 02:05:59 PM »
Thanks to all for this interesting discussion. My thoughts on this situation are largely based on the expected skill of the dealer. I find it very difficult that so many TD's and floorpersons are having these problems. An adequate dealer should know who's bet it is, and should correct the OOT immediately.


 One more try: When are we going to recognize the dealer as part of Substantial Action? I can't count how many times I've asked that same question...come on...somebody, anybody?

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #16 on: November 08, 2013, 11:03:29 PM »
And even for members of the "lenient" or Ciaffone camp, there needs to be some point at which the skipped hand is dead on the current betting round. At Summit VI we kicked around: substantial action plus one, or SA occurs and the action returns to the skipped player... In the interest of consistent rulings, for the moment whatever the policy, it should be clearly stated in house rules, or the TD should definitely have it in mind if the house leaves it up to TDs discretion.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 12:03:59 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2013, 09:54:45 AM »
I'm going to try and ask a simple question, again...but in a different way. Three player's remain; dealer burns and turns before last to act player calls. In this scenario, the "skipped" player is skipped by the dealer. You're not going to kill his hand...are you? This is a basic procedure for every cardroom I've ever worked. The board can not stand and must be re-dealt according to the "street" in progress. I mention this because it would offer no support to killing a hand after substantial action, and certainly no possibility of SA + 1...

 The perfect scenario, (to get my point across) is; Multiple player's: First to act bets, next player calls, next player is skipped by last to act and the dealer burns and turns. In this case, only one player has acted after the skipped player. Do you feel the skipped player's hand should be killed? Or does the premature board get re-dealt?

 I've questioned this procedure for years... without a firm reply. I know how I would handle both situations but, I know others will proceed differently.

 I believe my examples point out the need for dealers to be recognized, as one of the persons included whenever we consider substantial action.

K-Lo

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 869
  • @AskTheTD on Twitter
    • Ask the Tournament Director
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2013, 11:25:51 AM »
I know what you are trying to get at ... Have the dealer's actions count as one action for the purpose of substantial action. 

Let me add one more scenario to consider,  a purely hypothetical situation... 4 players in the hand, first player bets, player 2 folds, and player 3 calls.  Player 4 has yet to act and is thinking.  Dealer forgets about him because he is in seat 1, but because the pot is so big, the dealer is taking his time.  Let's assume for the sake of argument, the dealer pauses and then says "we are now down to 2 players... The pot is right.. I am going to deal the turn card now..." He pauses, raps the table, pauses, burns a card, pauses... And then deals the turn.  It is only at this point that player 1 speaks up and says he hasn't acted yet. Would everyone apply the rule strictly here and redo the turn?


MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #19 on: November 09, 2013, 11:58:05 AM »
Three player's remain; dealer burns and turns before last to act player calls. In this scenario, the "skipped" player is skipped by the dealer. You're not going to kill his hand...are you?
No, because betting is not complete, see RRoP.

I mention this because it would offer no support to killing a hand after substantial action, and certainly no possibility of SA + 1...
Betting is not complete in your first scenario above. However, if SA or SA+1 had occurred prior to dealing the next card, betting would have been complete, and there is virtually 100% support expressed at Summit VI for killing the hand if SA has occurred PLUS the dealer deals the next card. The reason that wasn't written into the TDA 2013 Rules is that it might leave the impression that is the only situation in which a skipped hand is dead if there is SAOOT, and as previously discussed in this thread, there are two camps, one of which will kill the hand on the current betting round if SA occurs... and permutations that will kill it on the current round if SA plus some additional action occurs.

The perfect scenario, (to get my point across) is; Multiple player's: First to act bets, next player calls, next player is skipped by last to act and the dealer burns and turns. In this case, only one player has acted after the skipped player. Do you feel the skipped player's hand should be killed? Or does the premature board get re-dealt?
IMO the board is re-dealt b/c betting is not complete on the prior round. So in this case "dealer does not count as action".

I believe my examples point out the need for dealers to be recognized, as one of the persons included whenever we consider substantial action.
On the contrary, IMO your examples point out the need for the dealer not to be recognized as an acting player for SA (i.e. the dealer is not the "second player with chips" or the 3rd checker/folder"). What everyone agrees with is that if SAOOT occurs, those bets are binding. THEN if the dealer deals the next card, the skipped hand is dead. But in that situation the dealer is not counted as one of the actors to establish SA, he is in addition to SA.

This is a separate issue from whether (and if so when), a skipped hand is killed on the current round.

Back to dealing the next card counting as part of SA: personally I think including "dealer is part of SA" is just an unnecessary complication. RRoP clearly states in at least two places that "the card will be re-dealt if betting has not been completed". It's just easier to leave it there.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 12:03:28 PM by MikeB »

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #20 on: November 09, 2013, 12:01:48 PM »
I know what you are trying to get at ... Have the dealer's actions count as one action for the purpose of substantial action.  

Let me add one more scenario to consider,  a purely hypothetical situation... 4 players in the hand, first player bets, player 2 folds, and player 3 calls.  Player 4 has yet to act and is thinking.  Dealer forgets about him because he is in seat 1, but because the pot is so big, the dealer is taking his time.  Let's assume for the sake of argument, the dealer pauses and then says "we are now down to 2 players... The pot is right.. I am going to deal the turn card now..." He pauses, raps the table, pauses, burns a card, pauses... And then deals the turn.  It is only at this point that player 1 speaks up and says he hasn't acted yet. Would everyone apply the rule strictly here and redo the turn?

Ken: In general I would... however I recognize in your example this is egregious failure to follow the action, and TD has perfect latitude to declare the skipped hand dead under Rule 1 in the best interest of the game and under Rule 2 failure to follow action and protect your right to act, etc.. In general, just me, maintaining the sanctity of the rule sometimes requires some tolerance of outlier cases... it's a TD's discretionary call here...
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 12:06:09 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #21 on: November 09, 2013, 06:36:11 PM »
Ken,

 This is getting ridiculous, his hand is dead...no question about it. He was given every opportunity to act.

Mike,

 Your suggest that dealers should not count for substantial action...can you explain how substantial action would ever apply in head to head action? Or even three way action?
When do we re-deal for a premature deal? Can you explain?

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #22 on: November 09, 2013, 07:13:43 PM »
,Mike, Your suggest that dealers should not count for substantial action...can you explain how substantial action would ever apply in head to head action?
I don't think SA does apply in head-to-head action. What DOES apply in heads-up is new TDA Rule 37... if you make any gesture to call any bet heads-up, and you undercall, you must make a full call.

, Or even three way action?
In 3-way action you have Players A, B, and C. Post-flop, for example, action is first on Player A however B bets out of turn and C calls... you have two players with chips, so there is SA-OOT in that situation.

When do we re-deal for a premature deal? Can you explain?
I explained that before, but will repeat: we re-deal when the betting of the prior betting round is not complete.
« Last Edit: November 09, 2013, 07:15:08 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #23 on: November 09, 2013, 09:56:53 PM »
Mike,
 
 When a player is skipped and the dealer burns and turns, would you say the action was incomplete? If so, when would you re-deal? You've lost me again. ???

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #24 on: November 09, 2013, 10:45:37 PM »
Mike,
 
 When a player is skipped and the dealer burns and turns, would you say the action was incomplete? If so, when would you re-deal? You've lost me again. ???
Nick, sorry but these questions seem interminable and we're deviating from the original post. The OP does not involve a situation with any dealer action....

You say it is one of your favorite topics and you can't get an answer on it... that being "the dealer counts as action"... or doesn't count as action, I'm not clear which you support... So, why not start a thread on that topic and make the case for your position and what you advocate? Are you proposing a new rule, a change to a rule, or ... you could start a thread with a title such as "Does Dealer Count as Action in Substantial Action"... then everyone can focus on it.

As to your new example quoted above, IMO per 2 citations in RRoP, there's one question to ask, exactly the same as in my Replies 19 and 22 above..." is the betting on the prior round complete or not?"... if it isn't, then the card was dealt prematurely UNLESS substantial action had occurred on the prior round..... so, with that in mind, let's see, "player is skipped and dealer burns and turns"... seems pretty clear that the betting was not completed...

Now, if substantial action occurred then the dealer burned and turned, the hand is dead per widespread agreement on that subject at TDA Summit VI, but SA did not occur in this situation. That a skipped hand is dead if SAOOT occurs and the next card is dealt was not written into the rules because it could leave the impression that's the only case of SAOOT where a hand is killed, and there are two camps on that as discussed previously, so treatment of such skipped hands is left to TD discretion at this time.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2013, 02:20:36 AM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #25 on: November 10, 2013, 07:40:24 PM »
Mike,

 This is one of my posts from over a year ago. My feelings have not changed.

Re: Action out of turn
Reply #18 on: October 31, 2012, 09:47:22 AM
Tristan,

 I like the way your house rules give example's that cover specific situations. I still believe there are common occurrences that are still not covered. For example:
               a. The player that is skipped by the dealer when directing action.
               b. The player in the last position, that is skipped by the dealer.
I will say that the house dealer must always be counted, as one of the persons, when considering substantial action.


 This is also from the same thread: What is your definition of substantial action? Two or more players? Is the dealer one of those persons?


Here's another unanswered question from last year:  Can the OOT be backed-up to the proper bettor, thus correcting the action, or once a player bets OOT Rule #35 must be enforced.

On the subject of Substantial Action from over a year ago: "K-Lo What do you think of my suggestions?" K-Lo's response:
I like them actually.  It is clear that you have put a lot of thought into it.  It explicitly sets out situations that you might otherwise have to address using Rule 1.

What about your push to have the Dealer's action count as substantial action?  e.g. unless it is clear that the players have not yet had a reasonable chance to stop a board card(s) from being prematurely dealt, the dealer's rap & tap, burn, & dealing of the board cards should in itself constitute substantial action.

 
  There have been many times that we've discussed the dealer's involvement when considering substantial action.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2013, 07:46:34 PM by Nick C »

MikeB

  • Administrator
  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • *****
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #26 on: November 10, 2013, 08:08:39 PM »
Nick: Okay sounds like you're proposing that the dealer count as a player for purposes of SA, yes? (Curious, do you see them counting with same weight as a player with chips or as a checker / folder... and/or as Ken suggests, as SA unto themselves under certain circumstances?) Regardless, it's not currently a TDA rule so it's a suggestion for a new rule...  For suggesting new rules, it's advisable to start a thread in the new rules suggestion category here: http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?board=36.

...then you'll have one central place where the topic can be explored...

When setting up a suggestion for a new rule it is also useful to link to threads that might contain some incidental discussion of the proposal. So, you could set up a new suggestion on "Should dealer count as part of substantial action", and link to those excerpts you quoted, and to this thread.

Regards,
Mike.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 09:04:05 PM by MikeB »

Nick C

  • TDA Member & Veteran Poster
  • ***
  • Posts: 3324
    • http://www.pokertda.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=557;sa=forumProfile
Re: Substantial Action out of turn: How to treat the skipped hand?
« Reply #27 on: November 11, 2013, 08:08:33 AM »
Thanks, Mike. I'll think this through and submit my suggestion.