Dropped Stub

[fatshark]

After extensive search I pose a question:

On the turn of a NL HE game, it is down to heads up. The dealer goes to burn and turn for the turn and drops the stub. The floor supervisor arrives to find he cannot decipher between the muck, burn, and stub cards. What is the proper ruling?

[FCBLComish]

Ruling= Automatic nut kicking to the dealer.

If the composition of the deck cannot be determined, the supervisor should instruct the dealer to shuffle up all the stuff in the pile (stub + burn + muck) that could be part of the stub. If the composition of the deck cannot be determined, the dealer should get a second nut kicking.

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
If the composition of the deck cannot be determined, the supervisor should instruct the dealer to shuffle up all the stuff in the pile (stub + burn + muck)

[/ QUOTE ]

Since there's been significant action, the above is correct. Nut-kicking not really necessary in this case though, since there's no real harm here (aside from the delay).

When you raise and the dealer mucks your cards, nut kicking is okay in most houses. Be warned though, I can throw a 44-card stub pretty damn hard, especially from 3 feet away. I am a large man, and prefer to aim for the face.

[RR]

[ QUOTE ]
After extensive search I pose a question:

On the turn of a NL HE game, it is down to heads up. The dealer goes to burn and turn for the turn and drops the stub. The floor supervisor arrives to find he cannot decipher between the muck, burn, and stub cards. What is the proper ruling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Shuffle up and finish the hand.

[pig4bill]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the composition of the deck cannot be determined, the supervisor should instruct the dealer to shuffle up all the stuff in the pile (stub + burn + muck)

[/ QUOTE ]

Since there's been significant action, the above is correct. Nut-kicking not really necessary in this case though, since there's no real harm here (aside from the delay).

When you raise and the dealer mucks your cards, nut kicking is okay in most houses. Be warned though, I can throw a 44-card stub pretty damn hard, especially from 3 feet away. I am a large man, and prefer to aim for the face.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nut-kicking is mandatory. No real harm? Read the piece in this month's Bluff. Pocket 10's against pocket kings, stub dropped, and re-shuffle. Except someone had already mucked pocket 10's, so no 10 should have been possible. Guy sucks out with a set of 10's.

[Gonso]

[ QUOTE ]
Nut-kicking is mandatory. No real harm? Read the piece in this month's Bluff. Pocket 10's against pocket kings, stub dropped, and re-shuffle. Except someone had already mucked pocket 10's, so no 10 should have been possible. Guy sucks out with a set of 10's.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even in such a rare example, the players in the hand would have no way of knowing that unless the 10s had been exposed or announced (they would have had no way to know the composition of the muck prior to making their decisions, unless something else weird had happened). The two players are entitled to their random flop, turn, and river. Kk guy is not "owed" a draw from a deck missing two tens, because the TT guy might argue that the board would have made him a ten-high straight and so on.

Of course KK guy is going to get all upset losing here, but if had been two K's lost he would have been fine with the re-shuffle. Unless the dealer is flat-out colluding with a player, crap like this happens now and then... sometimes it will go your way, sometimes not.

This is a little easier to avoid if you slide your burn cards under the pot a little. Maybe they do it some other way out west.

What kills me more is when similar situations arise over a dealer forgetting to burn a card. It's a mistake, but once you're past the point of being able to correct it it's no biggie - you got your random flop, or 6h street card or whatever.

[tom10167]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the composition of the deck cannot be determined, the supervisor should instruct the dealer to shuffle up all the stuff in the pile (stub + burn + muck)

[/ QUOTE ]

Sucks you don't know anything about gambling, nut kicking for you.

Since there's been significant action, the above is correct. Nut-kicking not really necessary in this case though, since there's no real harm here (aside from the delay).

When you raise and the dealer mucks your cards, nut kicking is okay in most houses. Be warned though, I can throw a 44-card stub pretty damn hard, especially from 3 feet away. I am a large man, and prefer to aim for the face.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nut-kicking is mandatory. No real harm? Read the piece in this month's Bluff. Pocket 10's against pocket kings, stub dropped, and re-shuffle. Except someone had already mucked pocket 10's, so no 10 should have been possible. Guy sucks out with a set of 10's.

[/ QUOTE ]

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
No real harm? Read the piece in this month's Bluff. Pocket 10's against pocket kings, stub dropped, and re-shuffle. Except someone had already mucked pocket 10's, so no 10 should have been possible. Guy sucks out with a set of 10's.

[/ QUOTE ]

No harm.

Until someone said something at the end, no one knew the destiny of the case tens. From the perspective of the players in the hand, the fold could have been KT, K8, or all kinds of other stuff.

If you believe that the KK had a right to win with those exact cards, as opposed to being a substantial favorite with a random turn and river card, then you're needlessly results-oriented. It's much like a case previously discussed where a player plays JJ as normal, then after the hand a jack is found on the floor. Since no one knew the identity of the missing card, it didn't make the hand unfair. (It could just as easily have been any other rank.) Since no one knew that the case tens folded, unless they said something about it (or unless the dealer looked in the muck and conspired to get it shuffled back in to favor his friend with tens!), the integrity of the hand was in no way compromised.