[sekrah]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Now I do find it odd that the high-hand jackpot payouts are not made if a deck is found to have 51 cards. That *IS* in the rules (I saw that one). Seems like either the deck is good enough and the hand plays, or the deck is bad and the hand doesn't play. It shouldn't be good enough to award the pot, but bad enough to skip the high-hand award.

[/ QUOTE ]

Everyone contesting for the pot was playing with the same 51 card deck. Assuming the high hand award is a progressive amount the players competing for that were not playing with the same deck.

[/ QUOTE ]


True scenario. But how did the card end up on the floor in the first place? How often does this truly happen? I can never recall a deck coming up short EVER while playing B&M.

Also, if OP is dealt J-J, how fair is it that after the hand is over, we discover that a jack is missing from the deck, cutting his odds of making a set in half..

He's putting in huge amounts of money into the pot thinking he has two jacks in the deck to help make his hand.


This is an outrageous rule. I would be stunned if the gaming commission approved of it.