Dealer Error (1 Viewer)

[haslettworm]

Had this situation in our home game. Three players see the flop. First to act puts in a bet and second to act calls. Before the third player can act, the dealer exposes the turn card. The third player says he intended to fold before seeing the card and mucks. The hand plays out without further incident. Afterwards, the third player revealed to me that he had a small pocket pair. With a significant bet and a call on an uncoordinated board of overcards, he said that he had intended to fold. The prematurely exposed turn card would have given him a set. I assume the proper way to handle this situation would be to declare a miss deal and return everyone's chips. Anyone know if that is correct?

 

[CdnBeerLover]

I can't see it as being a misdeal since you are post-flop.

There are a few ways to handle this. I believe one procedure would be
- set aside the improper turn card
- complete the post-flop betting
- burn and deal a new turn (this would have originally been the river card)
- complete the turn betting
- insert the improper turn card into the stub and re-shuffle the stub
- immediately deal the river (no burn required)

The end result should be a board that is as close as you can get to the original board in this situation.

 

[WedgeRock]

I would leave the turn burn, then burn and turn a new turn (keeps the river burn as a burn card). Bet as normal.

Then, when turn betting is complete, shuffle the stub and exposed card, and deal a river without a burn.

EDIT:. What @CdnBeerLover said...

 

[Poker Zombie]

I will also add that it would be good to start teaching some proper dealing etiquette, if it's not already in play. Typically knocking the table before a burn and turn, but in most home games, declaring "Pot's Good" is adequate to get a player still pondering their decision to panic-shout "NO"!

Otherwise, CdnBeerLover has the proper procedure. Everyone knows what might be the river card, nobody knows what the turn is, stub remains protected. The slow to act player has a very slight advantage of knowing that the turn is not the exposed card, but that information is nearly useless to act on.

 

[haslettworm]

Really no perfect solution. In my example, 3rd to act now knows he has only one out instead of two, at least on the turn. A define advantage in deciding to call, raise or fold. On the other hand, this is no different than someone inadvertently exposing one of 3rd to act's set cards while mucking their hand. Discarding the exposed turn and proceeding with the hand makes more sense than my miss deal approach. Not sure about reintroducing the exposed card into the deck and reshuffeling. I would probably treat it the same as an exposed card during the initial deal. Thanks!

 

[haslettworm]

Ever try hearding cats?

 

[Poker Zombie]

Cdn's example isn't just an idea, it's the TDA rule.

 

[Seeking Alpha Social Club]

Not a misdeal IMO. Significant action already happened with the bet and the call. Here's what we do.

1. We do not impact the river card. Burn one more card, and place the river card face down where the river card would be dealt.

2. Put the exposed turn card back into the deck, shuffle and cut the deck, and proceed with the action.

 

[BGinGA]

Cdn's example isn't just an idea, it's the TDA rule.

Correct. The board cards are given every possible opportunity to end up as designed had there been no dealer error.

Not a misdeal IMO. Significant action already happened with the bet and the call. Here's what we do.

1. We do not impact the river card. Burn one more card, and place the river card face down where the river card would be dealt.

2. Put the exposed turn card back into the deck, shuffle and cut the deck, and proceed with the action.

Same thing, provided you don't burn prior to dealing the fifth board card.

But yeah, a hand is never a misdeal when there has already been substantial action.

 

[haslettworm]

Thanks all!

 

[DoubleEagle]

I will also add that it would be good to start teaching some proper dealing etiquette, if it's not already in play. Typically knocking the table before a burn and turn, but in most home games, declaring "Pot's Good" is adequate to get a player still pondering their decision to panic-shout "NO"!

^That. Helps solve problems before they happen. I have a buddy that says, "Is everyone in that want's to be?" if he is not sure where the action is (yes, pay attention when dealing).

 

[moose]

The latest version of Roberts rules says to reshuffle and and redeal the turn so that the prematurely exposed card has two chances to turn up, since that is the card that everyone knows is in the deck and there is nothing magical about an preserving an unexposed river card. And when I say latest version, it has been in there since version 11, issued in 2012.

The present method for handling a premature dealing on the turn is used to have what would
have been the last board-card used on the turn, and not reshuffling the deck until just before
the last card is dealt. This method has four-fifths of the boardcards remaining the same, albeit
in a different order. It would be better to reshuffle before the turn, preserving the chance of
receiving the prematurely dealt card on either of the last two cards, as opposed to cutting that
chance in half. The superiority of reshuffling right away is illustrated if the prematurely dealt
card makes a gutshot straight-flush for a player.

 

[BGinGA]

The alternate rule is also in RROP v11.

 

[upNdown]

The latest version of Roberts rules says to reshuffle and and redeal the turn so that the prematurely exposed card has two chances to turn up, since that is the card that everyone knows is in the deck and there is nothing magical about an preserving an unexposed river card. And when I say latest version, it has been in there since version 11, issued in 2012.

That makes much more sense to me.

 

[JustinInMN]

I assume the proper way to handle this situation would be to declare a miss deal and return everyone's chips. Anyone know if that is correct?

This would actually be a terrible decision. This opens the game up to misdeals after seeing board cards enabling dealer's to deliberately cause a misdeal if they are at a disadvantage or to spite the player that may have an advantage.

The action should be corrected and some form of a reshuffle performed.

Not sure about reintroducing the exposed card into the deck and reshuffeling. I would probably treat it the same as an exposed card during the initial deal. Thanks!

Every card that could've appeared on the turn should have the same chance to appear after a reshuffle which is why the inadvertantly exposed card goes back in. Otherwise the player that needs to correct his action has an extra benefit of knowing a card is dead when deciding what to do that the other players didn't.

(Fun fact, the first time this happened in my game at a casino, the same card came up.)

I will also add that it would be good to start teaching some proper dealing etiquette, if it's not already in play. Typically knocking the table before a burn and turn, but in most home games, declaring "Pot's Good" is adequate to get a player still pondering their decision to panic-shout "NO"!

100 percent this!

And to take it further, if someone misses their chance to act when the dealer takes this step the onus should be on that player and their hand ruled dead instead of a reshuffle.

(Also, another reason why people that burn cards before action is closed are bad.)

Of the answers here I prefer @moose 's because it's the simplest and reinforces the notion that the stub is all the same face down. There's nothing sacred about card positions until they're dealt. You could change the procedure to burn 4 cards before the turn and river and the odds are the same, the game is the same.

 

[DoubleEagle]

The alternate rule is also in RROP v11.

Not a fan of this solution as it changes two cards instead of one.

IMO, I would be surprised if there were any card rooms in the country that follow RROP.

 

[moose]

Not a fan of this solution as it changes two cards instead of one.

IMO, I would be surprised if there were any card rooms in the country that follow RROP.

You must be one of those blackjack players who gets upset when someone in front of you doesn't use proper strategy and changes the card you 'would have' received.

There is nothing magical about unexposed cards.

 

[DoubleEagle]

You must be one of those blackjack players who gets upset when someone in front of you doesn't use proper strategy and changes the card you 'would have' received.

There is nothing magical about unexposed cards.

I don’t play casino table games.

 

[davin]

if it was my house what i do is , burn again and put the river card on the table but not exposed, then take that exposed turn card put it back in the deck and shuffle it in then burn again and put the next card face up as the new turn card ....... the reason u burn and place the river card out is it would have been the original river card.

 

[haslettworm]

Keeps the integrity of the original shuffle as much as possible. Of course, as previously mentioned, the original shuffle or a new shuffle both have the same probability of any given card being in any position in the deck.

 

[Beakertwang]

if it was my house what i do is , burn again and put the river card on the table but not exposed, then take that exposed turn card put it back in the deck and shuffle it in then burn again and put the next card face up as the new turn card ....... the reason u burn and place the river card out is it would have been the original river card.

The purpose of the burn card is to protect the identity of community cards, not the order of the cards. That’s why we don’t deal all five community cards at the beginning of the hand.

Just deal the original river as the turn, and replace, shuffle, burn, and deal the river card.

 

[upNdown]

Count me in the “there’s nothing magical about unexposed cards” camp. Same thing with rabbit hunting, by the way. Whatever the next card might have been 100% doesn’t matter, because it never came.
This talk about the integrity of the original shuffle is bushwah. The only way that would matter is if you’d stacked the deck. A shuffle is supposed to be random, so throw that exposed card back in the stub, shuffle it some more, and keep it random.

 

[CraigT78]

You must be one of those blackjack players who gets upset when someone in front of you doesn't use proper strategy and changes the card you 'would have' received.

There is nothing magical about unexposed cards.

Isn't this EVERY blackjack player??

 

[JustinInMN]

This talk about the integrity of the original shuffle is bushwah. The only way that would matter is if you’d stacked the deck.

Truth bomb!