ruling for an exposed card

[sirfoldalot]

[ QUOTE ]
Come on guys, is this really how you would rule at your own home game?

[/ QUOTE ]

This really is a tough decision. The rules are clear but in a small friendly game I most likely would give the BB the burn and play on. In my four table game I would rule that the hand is dead, no question.

You are correct that exposing the six really doesn't hurt those that already acted. It actually helps those that were relying on a six to improve. They can choose to fold when action is on them again based on that information.

This is yet another example of why I gave up on the idea of multiple decks at a table. Although this is the first time I heard of the breeze from a riffle exposing a card. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I don't see the difference between using that exposed 6 as the burn card and giving BB a new card and just killing BB's hand. What is the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, I think there's a typo in your message... or you need to clarify that last question?

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
This is yet another example of why I gave up on the idea of multiple decks at a table. Although this is the first time I heard of the breeze from a riffle exposing a card. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

That was a bad reason to not go with multi-decks

[grebe]

thanks all for the replies...I appreciate the thoughts on this.

Like i said, at this game I was better off not tapping the glass for sure. Whatever they wanted to do was pretty much fine by me. And for the record, the BB was doing nothing productive...he was watching TV or something.

At my game, I think that I would make the person play the card and make sure everybody at the table razzed him about it....unless it was a deliberate action by another to expose...then Im not sure.

Also added: I dont think that this would have ever happen with a nice deck...the cards were very warped, which was the cause of the "sailboat". As a matter of fact, I could have seen a lot of cards during the deal if I had no morals. Two more reasons for investing in plastic cards.

[PantsOnFire]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, I don't see the difference between using that exposed 6 as the burn card and giving BB a new card and just killing BB's hand. What is the difference?

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, I think there's a typo in your message... or you need to clarify that last question?

[/ QUOTE ]
Scenario A: BB's 6 is exposed, action is halfway around the table. The decision is to kill BB's hand and continue as normal.

Scenario B: BB's 6 is exposed, action is halfway around the table. The decision is to give BB the burn card and use the exposed 6 as the new burn card. Action continues as normal. BB retains possession of two random cards.

Actually there is a difference in these two scenarios, my bad. In scenario A, BB is screwed royally since he is posting a BB and has no hand. In scenario B, everyone else is screwed a little since they are missing out on having dead money in the pot and one less player in the action.

My interpretation is that this is a correctable problem and it seems that Scenario B does the least damage to the integrity of the game.

And as a matter of fact, I now remember an incident during one of my regular home 2 table MTTs. The dealer tossed a guy' hole card past him to the next guy (you know, slippery KEMs). The next guy gave the card a flick towards the rightful owner and the card flipped over. So technically, the dealer didn't expose his card, his neighbor did. We used scenario B.