Dealer forgot to burn a card

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
This lead to some drama at our usually non-dramatic game this week: 17 players, down to 4 (all in the money), actual cards are insignificant I believe (3 of the 4 players in the hand, two of them all in pre-flop), but the dealer failed to burn a card before the flop, then burns and flips the turn, then burns and flips the river (giving one guy with pocket 3's a set of 3's and the winning hand. A player then notices that the burn cards were short one, and the dealer (not in tourney anymore) admits he may have forgot to burn pre flop. He says "I know I burned before the river, I peaked at it and it was an Ah, and I know I burned before the turn, I looked at it too." he was right, we flip the two burn cards over and he was correct. the only other down cards in the muck were from the lone folder. The dealer then says that because there could have been no action post flop anyway, he was going to back the cards up and reconstruct the community cards correctly, in doing so takes the river 3 and makes it the pre-river burn card, and the guy with pocket 3's loses (to a pair made on third street, which now is second street).

How should this have been handled?

[/ QUOTE ]

I prefer the board to stand as is. But the rule does adress an all-in on the river, and that rule could be extrapolated to all streets, calling for readjustment of the cards. Again, as I said, I prefer to let the board stand. In no case should the deck be reshuffled and a new board dealt.

See the rule:

16. If the dealer fails to burn a card or burns more than one card, the error should be corrected if discovered before betting action has started for that round. Once action has been taken on a boardcard, the card must stand. Whether the error is able to be corrected or not, subsequent cards dealt should be those that would have come if no error had occurred. For example, if two cards were burned, one of the cards should be put back on the deck and used for the burncard on the next round. On the last round, if there was no betting because a player was all-in, the error should be corrected if discovered before the pot has been awarded, provided the deck stub, boardcards, and burncards are all sufficiently intact to determine the proper replacement card.


Edit: NEVER MIND! I changed my mind, after looking at the hold em specific rule which is slightly different than the general rule. The board should be constructed with the correct cards.

Hold Them specific rule:

6. If the dealer fails to burn a card or burns more than one card, the error should be corrected if discovered before betting action has started for that round. Once action has been taken on a boardcard by any player, the card must stand. Whether the error is able to be corrected or not, subsequent cards dealt should be those that would have come if no error had occurred. For example, if two cards were burned, one of the cards should be put back on the deck and used for the burncard on the next round. <font color="red"> If there was no betting on a round because a player was all-in, the error should be corrected if discovered before the pot has been awarded.</font>

[Bulldog]

[ QUOTE ]
Once the action continues play stands. In this case the error was pre flop and since no player could act on the flop, being all in, once the turn was burned and dealt I would rule that was sufficient action for the hand to continue and stand as dealt. Since no one pointed out the descrepency till the hand was concluded the hand stands as dealt. IF a player called attention to the missing burn card after the turn was dealt, the hand would still play to conclusion but I may have the dealer burn two cards to arrive at would have been the "real" river card. But the flop and turn are remaining as dealt. Only if a player called attention to it immediately on the flop would I have redealt the flop with the proper cards. But the hand would still continue. No one gains any individual advantage by knowing what the burn card is - even if there was still more betting to come.

[/ QUOTE ]

Perfect.

[TexRef]

[ QUOTE ]
Once the action continues play stands.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Humble Pie]

Interesting post. The reason cards are burned is to protect players from marked cards. I don't think the general integrity of the deck (in a friendly home game) is fouled by failing to burn. Imagine if you dealt from a deck that was being continuously shuffled so that the next card in play was truely random.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
but the dealer failed to burn a card before the flop, then burns and flips the turn, then burns and flips the river (giving one guy with pocket 3's a set of 3's and the winning hand. A player then notices that the burn cards were short one, and the dealer (not in tourney anymore) admits he may have forgot to burn pre flop.The dealer then says that because there could have been no action post flop anyway, he was going to back the cards up and reconstruct the community cards correctly, in doing so takes the river 3 and makes it the pre-river burn card, and the guy with pocket 3's loses (to a pair made on third street, which now is second street).

[/ QUOTE ]

I prefer the board to stand as is. But the rule does adress an all-in on the river, and that rule could be extrapolated to all streets, calling for readjustment of the cards. Again, as I said, I prefer to let the board stand. In no case should the deck be reshuffled and a new board dealt.

See the rule:

16. If the dealer fails to burn a card or burns more than one card, the error should be corrected if discovered before betting action has started for that round. Once action has been taken on a boardcard, the card must stand. Whether the error is able to be corrected or not, subsequent cards dealt should be those that would have come if no error had occurred. For example, if two cards were burned, one of the cards should be put back on the deck and used for the burncard on the next round. On the last round, if there was no betting because a player was all-in, the error should be corrected if discovered before the pot has been awarded, provided the deck stub, boardcards, and burncards are all sufficiently intact to determine the proper replacement card.


Edit: NEVER MIND! I changed my mind, after looking at the hold em specific rule which is slightly different than the general rule. The board should be constructed with the correct cards.

Hold Them specific rule:

6. If the dealer fails to burn a card or burns more than one card, the error should be corrected if discovered before betting action has started for that round. Once action has been taken on a boardcard by any player, the card must stand. Whether the error is able to be corrected or not, subsequent cards dealt should be those that would have come if no error had occurred. For example, if two cards were burned, one of the cards should be put back on the deck and used for the burncard on the next round. <font color="red"> If there was no betting on a round because a player was all-in, the error should be corrected if discovered before the pot has been awarded.</font>


[/ QUOTE ]

I instinctively don't like reconstructing the entire board, just because it's all-in preflop. I'll have to read these rules again, along with others, and think about this for a bit.

[Lottery Larry]

Two KITN for the dealer:

1) For "screwing up" the board

2) For peeking at the burn cards without showing others.

The player who noticed the missing card- in the hand, or not?

[pfapfap]

[ QUOTE ]
2) For peeking at the burn cards without showing others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? If you stopped at the first part, fine, but I'm not sure why the "without showing others" is what makes it KITN-able.

[Lottery Larry]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
2) For peeking at the burn cards without showing others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wait, what? If you stopped at the first part, fine, but I'm not sure why the "without showing others" is what makes it KITN-able.

[/ QUOTE ]

Show one, show all.


(maybe not, if the dealer wasn't playing in the game.. but he was, from the OP)

[ShannonRyu]

Thank you all for the numerous viewpoints. This happened at our Wed. game and was still a heavy discussion last night at our Fri. game. The view point that the cards are random and missing a burn has no effect on randomness is one I disagree with. It is true, but to no comfort to the players. Much like Blackjack (which I hate), I think the cards are in a particular order and it is important. Saying that a deck can be shuffled at anytime and the odds don't change is true... but is not favored by most players.

Our concensus was that since there was no action to be made, and because the entire board was easilly reconstructable, it was in the best interest of the game to make the hand correct as if no error would have happened.

Some key points too; the dealer was out of the tourney by this point and acting as all-time-dealer. This lent itself to him wanting to save face and make up for his mistake by 'fixing' it. Him peeking at burn cards, because there was no more action and the suspence was high, is not that big of a deal to us. Another point, and I think the biggest point, is that the player who noticed the error was the one to gain from it's correction. This is the only part about the hand reconstruction solution that is questionable. We failed to see (in the heat of the chaos) that if the person who noticed the error had made his hand WITH the error, would he have mentioned it? What helps his argument was that he didn't make one, leaving the decission up to the host without argument or persuasion.

I looked and looked and could not find a specific rule to address this directly, but the different view points provided here are very helpfull. I see the rule that says after an 'action' the board is accepted as-is... but if all their is no 'action' left to make, does not seeing the error immediatly make it any less of an error?

Please keep your views and opinions comming.

[pfapfap]

Did the player complain before or after the incorrect burn cards were revealed? I don't completely hate the idea of trying to correct it. It's a touchy situation, that's for sure. Had there been any betting at all on any street, of course, the board would have played as-is. I'm assuming here that you were able to determine the first card of the flop.

The rules are a little weird on this one. I assume you're familiar with Robert's, yes? Here's from the Hold'em section:

[ QUOTE ]
4. If the dealer failed to burn a card before dealing the flop, or burned two cards, the error should be rectified by using the proper burncard and flop, if no boardcards were exposed. The deck must be reshuffled if any boardcards were exposed.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a rather clear call for re-shuffling. An argument could be made that this applies if the error is noticed on the flop, but both players accepting a burn and turn counts as 'significant action'.

Then we get to a rule quoted above:

[ QUOTE ]
6 . If the dealer fails to burn a card or burns more than one card, the error should be corrected if discovered before betting action has started for that round. Once action has been taken on a boardcard by any player, the card must stand. Whether the error is able to be corrected or not, subsequent cards dealt should be those that would have come if no error had occurred. For example, if two cards were burned, one of the cards should be put back on the deck and used for the burncard on the next round. If there was no betting on a round because a player was all-in, the error should be corrected if discovered before the pot has been awarded.

[/ QUOTE ]

This seems to contradict Rule 4, but I believe this is intended for burns before the turn and river, which are easier to distinguish. The general rule for the flop is that any error results in a re-shuffle, even if you know which cards were the "proper" cards, which is why I think this rule is for post-flop play.

It's a tough situation, to be sure, and in a home game, I'd be inclined to try to get it to the 'proper' order, simply to avoid bad feelings. If it's unclear which was the first flop card, then adjust the turn and river. There's no easy solution. We're having a tough time figuring it out after the fact, so there's no way we'd get it right in the heat of the moment. Perhaps you need some dealing procedures in place (such as always putting burn cards under the chips in the pot, getting in the habit of saying 'burn' before doing so, dealing three cards down before turning over, etc).

[ QUOTE ]
The view point that the cards are random and missing a burn has no effect on randomness is one I disagree with. ... I think the cards are in a particular order and it is important.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a viewpoint that needs to change. Once you accept that cards is cards, problems become much less severe.