dealer error ruling needed

captain2man · #1 09-01-2006, 01:33 PM

This happened last night in a home game...

post-flop there are 4 people in the hand.
1st, 2nd, and 3rd players all check.

Dealer deals the turn card before 4th person had a chance to act (dealer didn't see that the person was still in the hand - it was an innocent mistake).

The turn card makes 3 diamonds on the board - 1st player instantly makes a big bet - not realizing himself of the mistake that was made.

After 1st person makes the bet - it's pointed out that player #4 never got a chance to act post-flop.

What's the ruling here?....does the post-turn bet by player #1 get to stand with player #4's opportunity to act post-flop taken away?

That's not how we resolved it.....we made player #1 take his bet back - we took the turn card off the board & reshuffled it back into the deck - and then allowed player #4 to act as if nothing had happened subsequent to that.

Of course - when the turn & river ended up non-diamond - player #1 was pissed to say the least....

There doesn't really seem a genuinely fair way to resolve this issue. Player #4 should clearly have an opportunity to act post-flop....at the same time, player #1 pretty much gave away his hand by his bet....although I guess player #1 should have been observant enough to realize the dealer error...but it was understandable - he saw the dealer roll the turn card & acted.

Thanks.

BJK · #2 09-01-2006, 03:02 PM

The player's bet needs to be taken back.

The three of diamonds becomes a temporary burn card. It gets set aside face up so the entire table has the opportunity to see it.

The card that should have been the next burn card becomes the turn card.

And then, after the turn, the three of diamonds should be shuffled back into the deck. Then you burn and turn the river.

SheridanCat · #3 09-01-2006, 03:04 PM

I think your resolution was reasonable, however I would have gone the other way. But it would depend on the circumstances a bit.

I'm assuming the dealing is a bit laissez faire, so there was probably no table tap by the dealer to signal a card is about to come off. That's why I'd unroll the action and give player 4 a chance to act. It's the responsibility of the player yet to act to protect his action, and if he didn't have time to speak up, then he shouldn't be penalized.

If there was time for Player 4 to protect his action and point out he hadn't acted BEFORE Player 1 bet, and he failed to do so, then he loses his right to act. Player 1's represents significant action, and normally should stand.

Note that the card coming off and being exposed isn't the action. If that had happened and Player 4 had spoken up before Player 1 acted, then the card is shuffled back in and you continue on.

That's my opinion anyway. You might post in the Home Poker forum also for other takes.

BJK · #4 09-03-2006, 02:22 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Note that the card coming off and being exposed isn't the action. If that had happened and Player 4 had spoken up before Player 1 acted, then the card is shuffled back in and you continue on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is a good post illustrating the difference between home game rules and B&M rules. I'd like to just point out one thing, though, about what should be done with the exposed card.

I believe it is essential that you wait until the river to shuffle the card back into the deck. You want to make sure that the turn card is the same as it would have been had the card not been accidentally exposed, and then you want to give the exposed card another chance to hit the board on the river after the deck has been reshuffled with the exposed card (but not the previous burns) back in it.

onnel · #5 09-03-2006, 04:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I believe it is essential that you wait until the river to shuffle the card back into the deck. You want to make sure that the turn card is the same as it would have been had the card not been accidentally exposed, and then you want to give the exposed card another chance to hit the board on the river after the deck has been reshuffled with the exposed card (but not the previous burns) back in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you explain why? I as a newbie would think it more logical to shuffle it back in immediately (after making sure everyone knew what it was) so it had a chance to come on the turn again. Anything else is altering the chances of any given board being dealt since now the 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] will only have one chance to be dealt (the river) instead of the turn and river like all other cards in the deck.

An honest question as to why you feel it should be done that way (and I've never played in a live games so I may be missing something obvious).

Onnel

BJK · #6 09-03-2006, 12:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I believe it is essential that you wait until the river to shuffle the card back into the deck. You want to make sure that the turn card is the same as it would have been had the card not been accidentally exposed, and then you want to give the exposed card another chance to hit the board on the river after the deck has been reshuffled with the exposed card (but not the previous burns) back in it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you explain why? I as a newbie would think it more logical to shuffle it back in immediately (after making sure everyone knew what it was) so it had a chance to come on the turn again. Anything else is altering the chances of any given board being dealt since now the 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] will only have one chance to be dealt (the river) instead of the turn and river like all other cards in the deck.

An honest question as to why you feel it should be done that way (and I've never played in a live games so I may be missing something obvious).

Onnel

[/ QUOTE ]

When the hand is complete with a mistake like this involved, you want to be able to look back at the hand and say that it played out as close as it would have without the mistake as possible. If there was another diamond waiting to be peeled off on the river, you don't want to screw the guy whose already been screwed once. You want that diamond to still end up on the board, albeit a card early.

engineer_mba · #7 09-05-2006, 10:44 PM

The two people at fault are the dealer for not checking to ensure that every one had bet, and player four for not announcing his intentions before the turn.

Since player 1 bets which basically lets every one know his hand, the action cannot possibly be taken back and recreated. If no betting action had taken place, there is no harm in simply giving a random card. Unfortunately, the game state cannot be recreated.

Also, the OP failed to mention if player 4 bet and how much. Was his bet justified based on his hands, and did either of the other two players drop since they knew that player 1 was on an obvious flush draw?

As far as what happened, if I were player #1, I would feel cheated and quite possibly refuse to play again. Of course, the other players wanted a random card. Most of them would obviously lose if he hit the flush, and wouldn't bet if he did.

I think the only "fair" thing to do is simply say that player 4 simply missed his opportunity to bet because he did not speak up on this particular hand. Alternatively, you create a situation in which dealer mistakes dramatically impact the outcome of a game.

Honestly, the more I think about this situation, the more I am positive you guys made a wrong decision and player #1 got cheated out of the pot.

Just my two cents,

Leo

ps. It would have been great if OP had posted how much was in pot / stakes. Player 1's reaction would probably be really different betwen a $20 pot and a $500 pot.

captain2man · #8 09-06-2006, 12:11 AM

There was only 1 person at fault- the dealer.

Player 4 had no time whatsoever to announce his intentions (I thought I made this kind of clear).

When Player 3 checked - Player 4 had his hands covering his cards and had his head down thinking about his play.

As soon as Player 3 beat the table announcing the check, the dealer burned & turned - as soon as the diamond came out - Player 1 bet. This entire action took place in a matter of seconds. As soon as Player 1's chips hit the table for the post-turn bet, Player 4 looked up with an expression of "WTF" on his face - and Player 3 said to the dealer - "Player 4 never got to go."

This was definitely the dealer's fault. Definitely NOT Player 4's fault. The only player who had REMOTELY any fault at all was Player 1 - who - unlike the dealer - WAS aware that Player 4 was still in the hand. Seeing the error, Player 1 should have held back his bet when he saw the card & waited until the situation resolved itself - as it was inevitable that someone was going to point this out.

there is no doubt that Player 1 was screwed out of the pot. That was acknowledged on the spot - but - at the same time - it's clear that Player 4 should not have been deprived an opportunity to act. Player 4 might have had a strong hand at that point - bet big - knocking Player 1 out of the pot before he could hit his flush.

So - perhaps we didn't resolve the situation the correct way - but - guess what? That's why I posted the question here.

This game is a friendly game at a home between friends who have known each other since high school. Although Player 1 was angry in the moment - he knew -as did everyone else, it was an honest mistake. It was a hand in a $20 buy-in NL tournament - nothing big - a friendly Thursday night game among friends.

the end result - if you're curious - is that Player 4 did check after all. The turn came - wasn't a diamond. Player 1 ended up checking. Player 3 bet big - everyone folded.

In my local B&M - I asked 2 of the dealers about this situation - and both said exactly the same thing - and that is that Player 1's bet is nullified. The faulty turn card is left exposed. Burn & turn the river - which is now the turn. Shuffle the faulty turn back into the deck - and turn the "new" river with no burn card. While that isn't quite how we did it - it was much closer to the actual rule than simply having Player 4 miss their turn.

engineer_mba · #9 09-06-2006, 01:58 AM

Hi,

Thanks for the follow-up and clarification. Knowing that you guys are friends makes a huge difference as it could have been that dealer and player 4 had an arrangement.

Second, a $20NL tourney also isn't too big so there shouldn't be any long term hurt feelings.

Cheers,

Leo

AKQJ10 · #10 09-06-2006, 11:07 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I believe it is essential that you wait until the river to shuffle the card back into the deck.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a standard cardroom procedure to do it this way, but I don't think it's essential at all. As long as the turn and river cards are random it doesn't much matter. Making sure "the same card" comes out is nice for superstitious fish, hence +EV, but as long as the cards are random it's really just window dressing.

As for Player 1 "getting screwed," not really. He got two random cards to make his flush with the same number remaining in the deck. Also it's harder to feel sorry for him if he took a blatant angle shot by betting knowing that the prior round's action wasn't finished. He chose to break the rules to represent a diamond draw to the table, so there's no way you could let the diamond turn stand without really opening the game up to angle shots. Better luck next time concealing your hand by following the rules, pal.

Sometimes you get an ace exposed during the deal; sometimes it's a deuce. There's no point in getting upset in the former case, because the procedures for dealing with the situation are the same regardless.