Shuffle Ahead/Behind Poll (1 Viewer)

[dkersey]

I believe I saw a similar discussion a few years ago on here (or perhaps that other site), where all this was described and debated. I hadn't played much at that time, nor thought about it much. From the discussion/debate then, "behind" seemed to be the preferred by most then too. I thought about each in my head, and with the experience of the debaters, I concluded "behind" was the best.

Since then, I've played in a lot of different home games, where some dealt behind and some ahead. With experience in both, I've changed my mind/vote for "ahead" to be the best. And here's why...

1) While the dealer has most of the cards in his hand already, he also has a higher percentage of winning the pot because position being so important in NLHE. He is more interested in collecting and stacking the chips he just won, than shuffling. On many occasions the cards don't get shuffled timely because the winner is totally pre-occupied with the winnings and how he did it. Also, even if he realizes he needs to shuffle, there is no room because of all the chips that are in a pile.

2) Once the cards are shuffled timely, he hands it to who? The guy who is now dealing. Now the dealer has to play, deal the hand, AND negotiate 2 decks of cards!. Cutting the cards for the next hand is of lower importance than dealing, so he isn't going to cut the deck until everything else is done. Furthermore, he is likely to win the pot as well (see #1), so now he is dealing with chips, and 2 decks of cards.

3) Even if he didn't win, he has to put down the deck he just dealt, pick up the other deck and cut it, and carry across from right to left, then start his shuffling duty.

In summary, behind has a lot of clutter and congestion.

**********

When dealing ahead, the dealer pushes the board, muck, and his remaining cards to the next BB. The BB picks up the cards and most likely has not won the pot. He just needs to put his BB out there, shuffle, and place the cards to his immediate right. The next hand the SB, which is the dealer for the next hand, and also has most likely not won the pot, picks up the deck, carries the deck from his left to the right, asks the former dealer (who has released all the cards) to cut. The cut occurs, and he picks them up and deals.

Using ahead, nobody deals with 2 decks of cards, and most likely is not dealing with chips being in the way.

 

[Ronoh]

I believe I saw a similar discussion a few years ago on here (or perhaps that other site), where all this was described and debated. I hadn't played much at that time, nor thought about it much. From the discussion/debate then, "behind" seemed to be the preferred by most then too. I thought about each in my head, and with the experience of the debaters, I concluded "behind" was the best.

Since then, I've played in a lot of different home games, where some dealt behind and some ahead. With experience in both, I've changed my mind/vote for "ahead" to be the best. And here's why...

1) While the dealer has most of the cards in his hand already, he also has a higher percentage of winning the pot because position being so important in NLHE. He is more interested in collecting and stacking the chips he just won, than shuffling. On many occasions the cards don't get shuffled timely because the winner is totally pre-occupied with the winnings and how he did it. Also, even if he realizes he needs to shuffle, there is no room because of all the chips that are in a pile.

2) Once the cards are shuffled timely, he hands it to who? The guy who is now dealing. Now the dealer has to play, deal the hand, AND negotiate 2 decks of cards!. Cutting the cards for the next hand is of lower importance than dealing, so he isn't going to cut the deck until everything else is done. Furthermore, he is likely to win the pot as well (see #1), so now he is dealing with chips, and 2 decks of cards.

3) Even if he didn't win, he has to put down the deck he just dealt, pick up the other deck and cut it, and carry across from right to left, then start his shuffling duty.

In summary, behind has a lot of clutter and congestion.

**********

When dealing ahead, the dealer pushes the board, muck, and his remaining cards to the next BB. The BB picks up the cards and most likely has not won the pot. He just needs to put his BB out there, shuffle, and place the cards to his immediate right. The next hand the SB, which is the dealer for the next hand, and also has most likely not won the pot, picks up the deck, carries the deck from his left to the right, asks the former dealer (who has released all the cards) to cut. The cut occurs, and he picks them up and deals.

Using ahead, nobody deals with 2 decks of cards, and most likely is not dealing with chips being in the way.

That's why I said when it's done "properly".

1- if the dealer wins pull the chips in and spend a few seconds dealing with your shuffle before stacking.

2- he hands them to no one. Shuffle the deck and set it down to your left with the cut card on top. The current dealer can cut and place the deck to his left at any point during the hand, it takes literally two seconds. If it's in any way awkward you are doing it wrong

3- nope, as said in #2 the next deck should be cut and placed to his left before the current hand is over. As soon as the current hand ends the next dealer should be able to pick up his fresh deck and start dealing.

If it sounds even remotely complex, believe me that it only sounds that way. If it seems complex in game it's not being done correctly.

 

[rjbf65]

I believe I saw a similar discussion a few years ago on here (or perhaps that other site), where all this was described and debated. I hadn't played much at that time, nor thought about it much. From the discussion/debate then, "behind" seemed to be the preferred by most then too. I thought about each in my head, and with the experience of the debaters, I concluded "behind" was the best.

Since then, I've played in a lot of different home games, where some dealt behind and some ahead. With experience in both, I've changed my mind/vote for "ahead" to be the best. And here's why...

1) While the dealer has most of the cards in his hand already, he also has a higher percentage of winning the pot because position being so important in NLHE. He is more interested in collecting and stacking the chips he just won, than shuffling. On many occasions the cards don't get shuffled timely because the winner is totally pre-occupied with the winnings and how he did it. Also, even if he realizes he needs to shuffle, there is no room because of all the chips that are in a pile.

2) Once the cards are shuffled timely, he hands it to who? The guy who is now dealing. Now the dealer has to play, deal the hand, AND negotiate 2 decks of cards!. Cutting the cards for the next hand is of lower importance than dealing, so he isn't going to cut the deck until everything else is done. Furthermore, he is likely to win the pot as well (see #1), so now he is dealing with chips, and 2 decks of cards.

3) Even if he didn't win, he has to put down the deck he just dealt, pick up the other deck and cut it, and carry across from right to left, then start his shuffling duty.

In summary, behind has a lot of clutter and congestion.

**********

When dealing ahead, the dealer pushes the board, muck, and his remaining cards to the next BB. The BB picks up the cards and most likely has not won the pot. He just needs to put his BB out there, shuffle, and place the cards to his immediate right. The next hand the SB, which is the dealer for the next hand, and also has most likely not won the pot, picks up the deck, carries the deck from his left to the right, asks the former dealer (who has released all the cards) to cut. The cut occurs, and he picks them up and deals.

Using ahead, nobody deals with 2 decks of cards, and most likely is not dealing with chips being in the way.

I've always been a shuffle behind guy. I feel the best way to go about this is for the cut to happen only after the chips are all collected by whoever wins the pot and for the cards from the hand collected and out of the way. Then the cut is made and then new dealer starts dealing. Takes a few seconds. Also I'd prefer that a cut be made mandatory.

There are times that the new dealer is dealing even before the mess from the previous hand is on the table. It's just messy and not necessary.

 

[dkersey]

If it sounds even remotely complex, believe me that it only sounds that way. If it seems complex in game it's not being done correctly.

I don't think its complex. My point was all the activity tends to be in 1 place and creates clutter and congestion. Which can be handled by the ultra focused serious poker player, but not the guys night out beer drinking poker players.

 

[grantc54]

I don't think its complex. My point was all the activity tends to be in 1 place and creates clutter and congestion. Which can be handled by the ultra focused serious poker player, but not the guys night out beer drinking poker players.

I agree 100%. All I know is that when I changed to shuffle ahead with my group things went noticeably smoother with less error, etc.

 

[Ronoh]

I don't think its complex. My point was all the activity tends to be in 1 place and creates clutter and congestion. Which can be handled by the ultra focused serious poker player, but not the guys night out beer drinking poker players.

There is zero clutter nor congestion when it's done properly, that's the point.

Two people have jobs.

The dealer who just finished pulls in the remaining cards, shuffles them and sets them down to his left. When done properly this is finished well before action is on him.

The current dealer deals the hand and at any point cuts the fresh deck to his right and places it on his left. This takes two seconds and can be done at any time. Normally I make it part of the flop (deal the flop, cut the deck, place to my left) but often I do it preflop if someone takes a few seconds on their action.

 

[Ronoh]

Bottom line, in the simplest terms, when shuffling ahead there is work to be done between hands before the next deal.

When shuffling behind the next hand is ready to go on or before the flop of the current hand and less people had any responsibility.

 

[BGinGA]

I've changed my mind/vote for "ahead" to be the best. And here's why...

1) While the dealer has most of the cards in his hand already, he also has a higher percentage of winning the pot because position being so important in NLHE. He is more interested in collecting and stacking the chips he just won, than shuffling. On many occasions the cards don't get shuffled timely because the winner is totally pre-occupied with the winnings and how he did it. Also, even if he realizes he needs to shuffle, there is no room because of all the chips that are in a pile.

2) Once the cards are shuffled timely, he hands it to who? The guy who is now dealing. Now the dealer has to play, deal the hand, AND negotiate 2 decks of cards!. Cutting the cards for the next hand is of lower importance than dealing, so he isn't going to cut the deck until everything else is done. Furthermore, he is likely to win the pot as well (see #1), so now he is dealing with chips, and 2 decks of cards.

3) Even if he didn't win, he has to put down the deck he just dealt, pick up the other deck and cut it, and carry across from right to left, then start his shuffling duty.

In summary, behind has a lot of clutter and congestion.

I disagree with many of your points above.

As dealer, the current dealer has access (or should) to all components of the deal and deck - the muck pile (which he should be managing), the pot, the burn cards, the board cards, and the deck stub/cut card. All of these are within easy reach (or should be). Once the current hand is over (pot pushed to winner and dealer button moved), the dealer takes the cut card, cuts the shuffled deck sitting to his right, and sets it to his left - which the new dealer picks up and begins dealing. He then drags all of the cards together, shuffles, and places the new shuffled deck to his left, for the current dealer to cut after the current hand is over. (at that point he can start stacking his chips, and act when it's his turn in the hand). This process works regardless of whether or not two cut cards are used (although I personally prefer just one).

Shuffled decks reside between players, and are only accessed at the beginning of a new hand. Ronoh suggests cutting the new deck can occur during the current hand, but I prefer that only one deck is accessed in any context during a hand to avoid any confusion whatsoever. For tournament play, a new hand is defined as beginning with the first riffle of the shuffle, but in a two-deck game, we define the new hand as beginning with the cut of the new deck..... so having it occur after the current hand is over makes more logistical sense (the nonsense of already having posted blinds is just that, nonsense - the blinds go up when they go up, in accordance with the rules for a new hand).

Although shuffle-ahead can and does work (and works best with the BB doing the shuffling, not the SB), the single biggest drawback is actually getting all of the cards TO the new shuffler, which must 1) cross directly in front of the current dealer who is 2) trying to deal around all of the confusion in the first two seats, which incidentally also must have blinds posted in front of them (right where the shuffling occurs). With shuffle-behind, the cards are already where they need to be for shuffling, and are typically already out of the way by the time the dealer is pitching cards to the final seats getting cards.

This has been debated countless times, including at least once on PCF earlier this year. Shuffle behind is by far the more efficient method. The main advantage of shuffle-ahead (the shuffler has more time to shuffle before he has to act on the current hand) is outweighed by the disadvantages and inefficiencies inherent to the method.

 

[rjbf65]

2 deck, or not 2 deck. That is the question.
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous misdeals,
Or to take arms against a sea of irregularities, and by opposing end them......

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/two-decks-or-one.17764/

This may help answer your question.

 

[Duck]

Was a big fan of shuffling ahead as it felt smoother with my group....but then came one bad incident of cheating and we've been doing shuffle behind since.

 

[crussader]

2 deck, or not 2 deck. That is the question.

The answer is: With 1 deck, shuffle ahead. With 2 decks, shuffle behind.

 

[dkersey]

I disagree with many of your points above.

Your further explanation is a good one. However, you didn't address my main point, which is the fact that the dealer tends to win more pots and has the additional task of stacking chips on top of the normal duties, and has less room to do so.......congestion....clutter!

 

[tommythecat]

I believe I saw a similar discussion a few years ago on here (or perhaps that other site), where all this was described and debated. I hadn't played much at that time, nor thought about it much. From the discussion/debate then, "behind" seemed to be the preferred by most then too. I thought about each in my head, and with the experience of the debaters, I concluded "behind" was the best.

Since then, I've played in a lot of different home games, where some dealt behind and some ahead. With experience in both, I've changed my mind/vote for "ahead" to be the best. And here's why...

1) While the dealer has most of the cards in his hand already, he also has a higher percentage of winning the pot because position being so important in NLHE. He is more interested in collecting and stacking the chips he just won, than shuffling. On many occasions the cards don't get shuffled timely because the winner is totally pre-occupied with the winnings and how he did it. Also, even if he realizes he needs to shuffle, there is no room because of all the chips that are in a pile.

2) Once the cards are shuffled timely, he hands it to who? The guy who is now dealing. Now the dealer has to play, deal the hand, AND negotiate 2 decks of cards!. Cutting the cards for the next hand is of lower importance than dealing, so he isn't going to cut the deck until everything else is done. Furthermore, he is likely to win the pot as well (see #1), so now he is dealing with chips, and 2 decks of cards.

3) Even if he didn't win, he has to put down the deck he just dealt, pick up the other deck and cut it, and carry across from right to left, then start his shuffling duty.

In summary, behind has a lot of clutter and congestion.

**********

When dealing ahead, the dealer pushes the board, muck, and his remaining cards to the next BB. The BB picks up the cards and most likely has not won the pot. He just needs to put his BB out there, shuffle, and place the cards to his immediate right. The next hand the SB, which is the dealer for the next hand, and also has most likely not won the pot, picks up the deck, carries the deck from his left to the right, asks the former dealer (who has released all the cards) to cut. The cut occurs, and he picks them up and deals.

Using ahead, nobody deals with 2 decks of cards, and most likely is not dealing with chips being in the way.

They way you describe the difficulty of shuffling behind I can only picture the people in infomercials that can't do anything with any kind of coordination..."Is your knife too dull?!" cut to someone trying to slice a tomato with the flat end of a paring knife...

 

[Ronoh]

Your further explanation is a good one. However, you didn't address my main point, which is the fact that the dealer tends to win more pots and has the additional task of stacking chips on top of the normal duties, and has less room to do so.......congestion....clutter!

1- if the dealer wins pull the chips in and spend a few seconds dealing with your shuffle before stacking.

 

[bergs]

I would invite anyone that believes shuffle behind to the better approach to sit between me, Chicken Rob, and Guinness somewhere around the 10 hour mark of a session with a full refrigerator full of IPAs. When you're going on the 4th consecutive hand where one of the three of us has screwed up the arcane kata of deck movements required to facilitate the dark art of the shuffle-behind, you will soon see the value of shuffle ahead. Shuffle ahead, we live. Shuffle behind, and we will most assuredly perish.

 

[bsdunbar1]

Which can be handled by the ultra focused serious poker player, but not the guys night out beer drinking poker players.

This has a lot to do with either method running smooth.

 

[WedgeRock]

We self cut, which others have said is a huge no-no. But if someone else is shuffling and hands you a deck with a cut card on top, how much can you manipulate the deal by self cutting?

For tournament play, a new hand is defined as beginning with the first riffle of the shuffle, but in a two-deck game, we define the new hand as beginning with the cut of the new deck.....

This makes sense. But what do you do headsup with no dedicated dealer? At that point, many pots are taken down PF, so there is little time to shuffle while the deal occurs. Does the next hand still start (for next blind level purposes particularly) with the cut of the deck?

And at heads up, shuffling behind IS shuffling ahead!

 

[bentax1978]

And at heads up, shuffling behind IS shuffling ahead!

 

[BGinGA]

But what do you do headsup with no dedicated dealer? At that point, many pots are taken down PF, so there is little time to shuffle while the deal occurs. Does the next hand still start (for next blind level purposes particularly) with the cut of the deck?

And at heads up, shuffling behind IS shuffling ahead!

We never self-deal. Ever. Even our heads-up tournaments aren't self-dealt.

Proudly self-dealt-free since 2007.

 

[AK Chip]

Dedicated dealer, two decks , BB shuffles (last to act) Button cuts the deck. We find you can play a lot more hands with two decks. This for tournament play. Cash we use one deck dealer shuffles.


BB does not give up the deck until the next hand is ready to be dealt. found out the hard way that we needed to do this.

 

[detroitdad]

Cash we use one deck dealer shuffles.

For our cash games we use two decks until it gets to 4 players. Then we usually drop to one deck.

 

[Jambine]

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/two-decks-or-one.17764/

This may help answer your question.

Oh, I don't have a question. One deck on the table, never two

 

[Blaster]

".......my main point, which is the fact that the dealer tends to win more pots and has the additional task of stacking chips on top of the normal duties, and has less room to do so.......congestion....clutter!

I doubt that is more than minimally statistically significant , & not relevant enough to offset various problems with shuffle ahead, when an 'ahead' player also scoops such a "massive pot that it is cluttered", & either he can't shuffle or the ahead player "between" has the clutter slowing down things as well,.

Shuffle ahead also has the sometimes problem of the new dealer starting the next deal, since the clock is running, while the stub & discards need / in process to be pushed across him & another player, while shuffle behind cards never have to be pushed across a couple of players including the current dealer, & there is not a need to "wait" for the discards to pass if the new deck is ready ....
As I'm sure others here do, the very occasional Big pot won by any dealer, the Dealer simply asks the person on his left to "do me a favor, shuffle these while I stack"..

BTW , there are TWO shuffle aheads some refer about, the 3rd player to the left of the current dealer (BB), which most here are referring to, & the terrible, horrible, noob amateur, sacrilege, dreadful, awful, terrible, shocking, appalling, horrifying, horrific, horrendous use of 2nd player to the left of the current dealer, where that player would actually be shuffling the deck for his Own next deal, & should never be used in invite games

 

[upNdown]

I doubt that is more than minimally statistically significant, & not relevant enough to offset various problems with shuffle ahead, when an 'ahead' player also scoops such a "massive pot that it is cluttered", & either he can't shuffle or the ahead player "between" has the clutter slowing down things as well,.

Shuffle ahead also has the sometimes problem of the new dealer starting the next deal, since the clock is running, while the stub & discards need / in process to be pushed across him & another player, while shuffle behind cards never have to be pushed across a couple of players including the current dealer, & there is not a need to "wait" for the discards to pass if the new deck is ready ....
As I'm sure others here do, the very occasional Big pot won by any dealer, the Dealer simply asks the person on his left to "do me a favor, shuffle these while I stack"..
BTW , there are TWO shuffle aheads some refer about, the 3rd player to the left of the current dealer (BB), which most here are referring to, & the terrible, horrible, noob amateur, sacrilege, dreadful, awful, terrible, shocking, appalling, horrifying, horrific, horrendous use of 2nd player to the left of the current dealer, where that player would actually be shuffling the deck for his Own next deal, & should never be used in invite games

You don't think the dealer wins more pots a statistically relevant amount of times?
I bet they do. I bet the dealer wins more than twice as much as any other seat. I wouldn't be surprised to hear the dealer wins 3 times more than any other seat.
Who's got some stats?

 

[Blaster]

You don't think the dealer wins more pots a statistically relevant amount of times?
I bet they do. I bet the dealer wins more than twice as much as any other seat. I wouldn't be surprised to hear the dealer wins 3 times more than any other seat.
Who's got some stats?

No doubt at all, but eliminate All the hands where he picks up the blinds, Eliminate all the hands where he raises & it folds to him, Eliminate all the hands that he wins on the flop after a continuation bet, eliminate all the hands where the pot won is managable , ect ....
The OP was describing pots so massive they would disrupt the whole shuffle thing ...., eliminate all but those is what I meant ...

 

[dkersey]

This process works regardless of whether or not two cut cards are used (although I personally prefer just one).

I do agree with this though...

 

[BGinGA]

It has been my (undocumented and unconfirmed) observation that an extraordinary number of pots are awarded to the small blind seat. Even more so than the pots won by the button position (which makes no logical sense).

Pushing a pot AND the dealer button to the same seat seems remarkably common in our tournaments, depending on the players. Maybe it's due to first-strike donk betting from the SB seat in a steal attempt.... but it happens a lot.

 

[upNdown]

It has been my (undocumented and unconfirmed) observation that an extraordinary number of pots are awarded to the small blind seat. Even more so than the pots won by the button position (which makes no logical sense).

Pushing a pot AND the dealer button to the same seat seems remarkably common in our tournaments, depending on the players. Maybe it's due to first-strike donk betting from the SB seat in a steal attempt.... but it happens a lot.

Yup. Now that you mention it, that's the position I was thinking of. "You win the pot and the deal" - is a phrase I hear at home games a lot. And you're right; it makes no sense.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Hot topic. Let me respond to everyone in a single post.

I always tell people in my games that if they can manipulate the shuffle and cheat then they are in the wrong game. Cheating us out of a few hundred dollars at most is a piss poor way to make a living.

Fair enough, but before a cheater dives into the deep end of the pool to cheat for a living, he might want to hone his skills on a smaller home game where the host is soft on anti-cheating protocol. If you don't care, then you are the perfect cheater's practice game.

Don't care... I shuffle in between hands... Oh, I have a dealer across from me and we are in the middle, I deal a hand, other person shuffles then deals, I then shuffle while he is dealing and so on... I dont have to worry about players shuffling all weird or on the floor, also the ends of the table NEVER have to deal....

Why doesn't everyone do this??????

If you have dedicated player-dealers sitting across from one another, then those players will never have position on the other one. Since the 2 best players at the table are also likely to be the 2 best dealers, they have the distinct advantage of never having the best player on their left.

Teach your players to deal.

Having the BB shuffle makes more sense to me for these reasons:
- most importantly: not passing the cards in front of the current dealer when done shuffling
- there is more time before the action is on the BB vs the cutoff
- there is something satisfying about being done with the cards when you are done dealing

As far as gathering the cards after the deal is done, how hard is it for the BB to collect cards vs the dealer? Things went much smoother when I transitioned from shuffling from behind to ahead.

This is why Canada is always so cold. Shuffle behind, and enjoy your summers.

For tournament play, a new hand is defined as beginning with the first riffle of the shuffle, but in a two-deck game, we define the new hand as beginning with the cut of the new deck..... so having it occur after the current hand is over makes more logistical sense (the nonsense of already having posted blinds is just that, nonsense - the blinds go up when they go up, in accordance with the rules for a new hand).

Interesting side topic. We always declare the start of the new hand when at least 1 player has posted their blind. I get it - TDA rules indicate first riffle, and cutting the deck is very close to that rule, but the TDA rule involves an impartial, non-playing dealer. In a self-dealt tournament, a big-stack dealer can "stall" their cut to get blinds up. With 2 players (SB and BB) able to start the next level, the opportunity to stall a few seconds is reduced as it would take require 2 players to delay.

 

[BGinGA]

Interesting side topic. We always declare the start of the new hand when at least 1 player has posted their blind. I get it - TDA rules indicate first riffle, and cutting the deck is very close to that rule, but the TDA rule involves an impartial, non-playing dealer. In a self-dealt tournament, a big-stack dealer can "stall" their cut to get blinds up. With 2 players (SB and BB) able to start the next level, the opportunity to stall a few seconds is reduced as it would take require 2 players to delay.

For starters, lol at any of the players intentionally stalling so that the blinds will go UP. Even the big stacks in home games scramble to save those few precious chips when blinds are about to jump up, even if it's in their best interest for the blinds to increase.

Having players posting blinds is another situation where one has to make a determination of ~when~ it should be done and/or allowed. Can I post my blind for the next hand during the middle of this one? No? Then the ~actual~ cut-off point is the END of the current hand, if that's what the next hand blind posting must wait for. So how is that 'end-of-hand' defined? Pot delivered, winning hand mucked, or dealer button moved? Or all three? Why not just use that as the cut-off, instead of adding in a new start point? It just gets needlessly messy, for no reason (and certainly no gain).

Having the players determine it is lunacy -- it needs to be a fixed and repeatable procedural point that everyone can clearly identify. We use the deck cut because it mimics the "first dealer action" set forth in the TDA/RROP rules (the first riffle of the shuffle) in a two-deck scenario -- it's the first action that starts the new hand.