New procedure for premature turn cards (2 Viewers)

[rustycheerio]

I've been told that instead of seeing an original river and then shuffling the turn card back in, now if there is a premature turn card the card will immediately get shuffled back into the deck changing both the turn and river.
Does anyone know why this change has happened, and what's your opinion on it?

 

[BGinGA]

Re: random is random. No need for burn cards, just shuffle and deal -- every street.

 

[TudiscoKid]

This happened at a Casino table I was at.

The dealer put the premature river card in the deck, and reshuffled it, as per the Casino's conditions.

Of course the outcome was not to the satisfaction of one player who lost due to this (and a pretty big pot).

 

[rustycheerio]

This happened at a Casino table I was at.

The dealer put the premature river card in the deck, and reshuffled it, as per the Casino's conditions.

Of course the outcome was not to the satisfaction of one player who lost due to this (and a pretty big pot).

this is a new procedure where I am at, just curious if its been in effect elsewhere for a while? or is this relatively new?

 

[Jimulacrum]

It's fairly new, but I don't know exactly how new. Maybe updated in the past year or two.

I prefer this solution by leaps and bounds. If there's a dealing or handling error, re-roll everything. Dealer could not have known what the cards would be in advance, so there's no concern about dealers casually abusing this to benefit anyone. It's fair and it doesn't offer angle-shooting opportunities.

Any undealt card is essentially Schrödinger's card. It exists within the deck, but we don't and can't know what it is until it comes off. In other words, it's any random card from among the remaining cards.

Trying to preserve the Sacred Order of the Cards—especially when there can't be a misdeal because action has happened—is a lot of work and potential confusion for no real benefit. And even when you preserve that order as much as possible, people still come away mad because they didn't make that straight or the other player filled up, and they lack the poker maturity to be adults about it.

So why bother? The "random is random" procedure is easier to carry out, easier to justify than the hybrid approach, and less confusing to normal players.

 

[TudiscoKid]

It's fairly new, but I don't know exactly how new. Maybe updated in the past year or two.

I prefer this solution by leaps and bounds. If there's a dealing or handling error, re-roll everything. Dealer could not have known what the cards would be in advance, so there's no concern about dealers casually abusing this to benefit anyone. It's fair and it doesn't offer angle-shooting opportunities.

Any undealt card is essentially Schrödinger's card. It exists within the deck, but we don't and can't know what it is until it comes off. In other words, it's any random card from among the remaining cards.

Trying to preserve the Sacred Order of the Cards—especially when there can't be a misdeal because action has happened—is a lot of work and potential confusion for no real benefit. And even when you preserve that order as much as possible, people still come away mad because they didn't make that straight or the other player filled up, and they lack the poker maturity to be adults about it.

So why bother? The "random is random" procedure is easier to carry out, easier to justify than the hybrid approach, and less confusing to normal players.

I host games and I got to say, I don't really know what to do in the event that a card is shown prematurely. It happened before and what we'd do is consider it a second burn.

It feels like reshuffling it all has a more frustrating effect, I don't know why.

If the premature card is a blank, then it's likely to have no to little consequences on the outcome of the game. But if it's not a blank...

 

[chippitydoodah]

I totally understand "random is random" and I abide by whatever the house rule is. My personal hang-up is I believe that after the cards are cut they are in a specific order. So when there's an exposed card necessitating a reshuffle, that original order of events has been altered. Also, nobody can say they wouldn't be steaming or on tilt if that exposed card made their hand had it come out as intended.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I host games and I got to say, I don't really know what to do in the event that a card is shown prematurely. It happened before and what we'd do is consider it a second burn.

This option isn't the worst thing that could happen, but I don't prefer it because it makes it impossible for the premature card to have any chance to come up, i.e., it materially changes the odds for that round.

It feels like reshuffling it all has a more frustrating effect, I don't know why.

Because it's a bunch of work you shouldn't have had to do—usually because whoever was dealing wasn't paying attention or was too eager to deal the next card. And no matter how well you do it, someone's probably going to get pissed and want to gripe about it.

It's also physically harder to shuffle a half-deck of cards than a full deck.

But you should still do it.

If the premature card is a blank, then it's likely to have no to little consequences on the outcome of the game. But if it's not a blank...

Thing is, you can't really know what is a blank and what's not until the cards are all turned up. We should never make decisions like this on the basis of, "Ah, whatever, it probably wouldn't matter." It always matters. It's a card in everyone's hand.

The rule should be strictly enforced in all cases, and it should be a rule you can defend regardless of which card(s) are affected.

 

[Jimulacrum]

I totally understand "random is random" and I abide by whatever the house rule is. My personal hang-up is I believe that after the cards are cut they are in a specific order. So when there's an exposed card necessitating a reshuffle, that original order of events has been altered.

Okay, but then what?

Suppose the turn card was exposed in the middle of flop betting, and everyone saw it—including 2 players who hadn't acted yet.

We can't let the card stand unless we're going to accept that those 2 players get a huge advantage no one else got. We also can't take any bets back or otherwise rob players of their betting opportunities either. What solution do you think could get past this error while maintaining the Sacred Order of the Cards?

Also, nobody can say they wouldn't be steaming or on tilt if that exposed card made their hand had it come out as intended.

I can absolutely say that. Sometimes unorthodox stuff happens, and you have to roll with it. As long as everything is handled by the established rules, that's poker.

 

[Lord_Foldemort]

I host games and I got to say, I don't really know what to do in the event that a card is shown prematurely. It happened before and what we'd do is consider it a second burn.

It feels like reshuffling it all has a more frustrating effect, I don't know why.

If the premature card is a blank, then it's likely to have no to little consequences on the outcome of the game. But if it's not a blank...

I agree, I hate that the solution involves changing the outcome of the hand. I understand the need to reset the turn card, but displacing the original river card can change the outcome because of a dealer mistake.

 

[BGinGA]

I repeat:

Re: random is random. No need for burn cards, just shuffle and deal -- every street.

If the 'sacred order' is inconsequential, then simply do away with the entire silly 'burn card' and 'preserve the board' traditions:

Shuffle the cards, cut, deal. Pre-flop betting, then shuffle, cut, and deal the flop. Flop betting, shuffle, cut, deal the turn. Turn betting, shuffle, cut, deal the river.

Any dealing errors no longer become an issue; a prematurely dealt card simply goes back in the deck stub.

Random is random.

 

[rustycheerio]

I host games and I got to say, I don't really know what to do in the event that a card is shown prematurely. It happened before and what we'd do is consider it a second burn.

It feels like reshuffling it all has a more frustrating effect, I don't know why.

If the premature card is a blank, then it's likely to have no too little consequences on the outcome of the game. But if it's not a blank...

the decision of what happens shouldn't be determined after the card is shown... blank or non blank

 

[Jimulacrum]

I repeat:



If the 'sacred order' is inconsequential, then simply do away with the entire silly 'burn card' and 'preserve the board' traditions:

Shuffle the cards, cut, deal. Pre-flop betting, then shuffle, cut, and deal the flop. Flop betting, shuffle, cut, deal the turn. Turn betting, shuffle, cut, deal the river.

Any dealing errors no longer become an issue; a prematurely dealt card simply goes back in the deck stub.

Random is random.

I hate how much extraneous shuffling this involves, but it's clean and it works.

 

[BGinGA]

I hate how much extraneous shuffling this involves, but it's clean and it works.

I also like how no cards are ever deemed as removed from play (the 'burn' cards). And since the stub gets shuffled, no need for a disposable protective burn card on top of the deck.

Don't need a really robust shuffle each time, either. A riffle, a strip, and cut.

Should be the standard for any game that can potentially run short of cards.

 

[Jimulacrum]

the decision of what happens shouldn't be determined after the card is shown... blank or non blank

Yup. This is why I don't entertain any arguments when this kind of thing comes up, even if people start bitching.

Frankly, it pisses me off when I start implementing the rule and someone complains or demands that it be done another way (or just whines about how I'm doing it, with no proposed solution). It's enough of a pain to do all of this, as well as explain it if players don't understand, without some know-it-all trying to fill everyone with doubt about whether I'm doing it right.

Sometimes all it takes to screw up a game is the appearance that something ain't right, even if everything is by the book.

 

[moose]

this is a new procedure where I am at, just curious if its been in effect elsewhere for a while? or is this relatively new?

It's been in Robert's rules (in the notes) for 15+ years.

The reason is, it gives two chances for the exposed card to return to the board. ie the most damaging aspect of the premature card is that everyone got to see that card. Changing the river card that no-one has seen is irrelevant.

 

[rustycheerio]

It's been in Robert's rules (in the notes) for 15+ years.

The reason is, it gives two chances for the exposed card to return to the board. ie the most damaging aspect of the premature card is that everyone got to see that card. Changing the river card that no-one has seen is irrelevant.

really? i wonder why the place i go has just changed the rule now, after it's been in RROP for all this time.

 

[Jimulacrum]

really? i wonder why the place i go has just changed the rule now, after it's been in RROP for all this time.

I believe TDA rules may have used the older rule for longer than RROP did.

 

[ekricket]

I think “burning a card” became a thing for house run gambling establishments that had shills and “favored” players. Dealers might be in on a con and this was a measure to help foil them.

What would be slightly better is a random “burn or no burn” event before each street. So cheaters never know if they can count on the top card or not.

What is much better is eliminating the burn card in casual home games, especially with rotating self deals. Most players can barely shuffle, let alone build a deck or maintain second dealing.

 

[rustycheerio]

I believe TDA rules may have used the older rule for longer than RROP did.

that would make the most sense. thank you

 

[moose]

Burn card protects the deck in case the top card is marked. It is essentially the same as putting a cut card on the top of the deck so that no-one has advance knowledge of the next card.

While shuffling every street would negate the fallacy of the importance of preserving the order of the deck, a marked card on top would still alert a cheater of the possibility of that card hitting the board.

 

[ArielVer18]

I repeat:



If the 'sacred order' is inconsequential, then simply do away with the entire silly 'burn card' and 'preserve the board' traditions:

Shuffle the cards, cut, deal. Pre-flop betting, then shuffle, cut, and deal the flop. Flop betting, shuffle, cut, deal the turn. Turn betting, shuffle, cut, deal the river.

Any dealing errors no longer become an issue; a prematurely dealt card simply goes back in the deck stub.

Random is random.

You’re likely exaggerating to make a point, but the premature flop/turn/river procedures exist to minimize the impact of a dealer error. All the extra shuffling as proposed will only increase the likelihood of dealer errors.

 

[glynn]

It's been in Robert's rules (in the notes) for 15+ years.

really? i wonder why the place i go has just changed the rule now, after it's been in RROP for all this time.

I believe TDA rules may have used the older rule for longer than RROP did.

No, RRoP uses (and was the influence for) the old rule:

A dealing error for the fourth boardcard is rectified in a manner to least influence the identity of the boardcards that would have been used without the error. The dealer burns and deals what would have been the fifth card in the fourth card’s place. After this round of betting, the dealer reshuffles the deck, including the card that was taken out of play, but not including the burncards or discards. The dealer then cuts the deck and deals the final card without burning a card.

RRoP stopped evolving years ago.

 

[moose]

No, RRoP uses (and was the influence for) the old rule:



RRoP stopped evolving years ago.

NO

I said "it's in the notes"

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.

Also Bob Ciaffone is dead. Hard to update when you are dead.

 

[glynn]

NO

I said "it's in the notes"

You are correct, but it is incorrect to say that RRoP uses the new rule. The document is and was always meant to be a descriptivist one — even if Ciaffone thought that "random is random" is the better rule, his Rules of Poker are restricted by what he perceived to be the common rules of that time.

Also Bob Ciaffone is dead. Hard to update when you are dead.

Yes. We should prefer a living specification written by living authors as our base.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

Any undealt card is essentially Schrödinger's card.

This is my take: the cards in the stub are unknown and unordered until they are exposed.

Also, sorry @BGinGA, but I think the idea of shuffling after every street is ludicrous, at least in a self-dealt home game. The benefits are avoiding burn cards and the occasional complaints of a steamy player whose draw came in on the early turn but bricked after a reshuffle and redeal.

The cost is slowing the game to a crawl. Some of my players are barely capable of shuffling the deck once, let alone for 4-5 times each hand. We would get half the hands in each night, and my players would get bored.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

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.

Out of habit more than anything else, I've used the old "original river as turn, then shuffle exposed card back into the stub" method for too long. I'm sold on the idea of immediately reshuffling an exposed card into the stub, and I plan to switch to that at my next game.

 

[KHarp1]

All this back and forth about shuffle, don't shuffle, burn, no burn...I think all of you are missing the true point. The dealer "F'd" up, he should be shot. This will send notice to all dealers to be better.

 

[DoubleEagle]

I believe the TDA modified their recommended procedure at the 2022 rules meeting.

B: A premature turn card: leave the turn burn card as the burn. Return the premature turn card to the deck stub and reshuffle the entire stub. Re-deal the turn (without another burn) from the newly shuffled stub.

 

[Taghkanic]

If the goal were to preserve the original shuffle order as much as possible, wouldn’t the river be burned and put out (face down) before shuffling any prematurely exposed turn back in?

IDGI