When does a hand start?

[Muley05]

I'm not sure if this is the correct room for this topic, but I thought it fit.

At my home game, we use rotating dealers with two decks of cards per table.  The SB shuffles the next deck.  Once the blind timer goes off, it is restarted right away, and then the next hand starts as the next blind level.

There are a few occasions per game where the blind timer is about to expire right near the end of the hand being played.  Some guys will try to post their blinds real quick right after the pot is won, saying that since their blind was out before the timer expired the hand should be played at that level.  How do you guys do this?  Does the hand start once the dealer deals out the first hole card?  When he presents the deck for a cut?  When a blind is posted?

[Martini]

According to Robert's Rules of Poker: "10. If there is a signal designating the end of a betting level, the new limits apply on the next deal. (A deal begins with the first riffle of the shuffle.)"

My games use two decks and if the timer goes off between hands then the blinds stay at the same level since the riffle for that hand will have already started during the play of the previous hand.

[72]

we do it like this at the casino:

if you started the "wash" it's the start of the shuffle. if the timer goes off after the wash, level goes up after that hand.

[Blaster]

I've played self-deal games where the blind goes to the next level if it's "before the 1st card has been dealt" .. So if the timer goes off , say, just before the pot is awarded, the "next" hand would be at the new blind level ....
 For a home game , you can also say that once the new deck has been "cut" , (which must occur after the prev hand is over), the blind level is locked & the buzzer sounding after the cut would not affect that deal .....

[Gobbs]

I've played self-deal games where the blind goes to the next level if it's "before the 1st card has been dealt" .. So if the timer goes off , say, just before the pot is awarded, the "next" hand would be at the new blind level ....
 For a home game , you can also say that once the new deck has been "cut" , (which must occur after the prev hand is over), the blind level is locked & the buzzer sounding after the cut would not affect that deal .....

One deck, first riffle signifies the start of a new hand (typically, not the scramble).

Two decks, need a house rule.

Gobbs

[ChrisChip10]

I've played self-deal games where the blind goes to the next level if it's "before the 1st card has been dealt" .. So if the timer goes off , say, just before the pot is awarded, the "next" hand would be at the new blind level ....
 For a home game , you can also say that once the new deck has been "cut" , (which must occur after the prev hand is over), the blind level is locked & the buzzer sounding after the cut would not affect that deal .....

One deck, first riffle signifies the start of a new hand (typically, not the scramble).

Two decks, need a house rule.

Gobbs

We play blinds posted.  No posting before the previous hand is done though, meaning pot collected.

[Gobbs]

I've played self-deal games where the blind goes to the next level if it's "before the 1st card has been dealt" .. So if the timer goes off , say, just before the pot is awarded, the "next" hand would be at the new blind level ....
 For a home game , you can also say that once the new deck has been "cut" , (which must occur after the prev hand is over), the blind level is locked & the buzzer sounding after the cut would not affect that deal .....

One deck, first riffle signifies the start of a new hand (typically, not the scramble).

Two decks, need a house rule.

Gobbs

We play blinds posted.  No posting before the previous hand is done though, meaning pot collected.

If I'm the small blind and the big blind delays his posting, I'm going to be really pissed.  (In other words, not a good idea.)

Gobbs

[Detroitdad]

If I'm the small blind and the big blind delays his posting, I'm going to be really pissed.  (In other words, not a good idea.)

Gobbs


You wouldn't like me when I'm angry.............Puny Humans!!!

[Muley05]

Based on the responses I have seen here and after thinking about it myself, I think it would be best to make a house rule (since we use two decks and rotating dealers) that the next hand starts once the pot is won.  That eliminates a slow blind poster from making the other blind angry, and keeps the blinds from posting before the previous hand is over.  Thoughts?

[Gobbs]

Based on the responses I have seen here and after thinking about it myself, I think it would be best to make a house rule (since we use two decks and rotating dealers) that the next hand starts once the pot is won.  That eliminates a slow blind poster from making the other blind angry, and keeps the blinds from posting before the previous hand is over.  Thoughts?

When is the pot won?

Gobbs

[Muley05]

Based on the responses I have seen here and after thinking about it myself, I think it would be best to make a house rule (since we use two decks and rotating dealers) that the next hand starts once the pot is won.  That eliminates a slow blind poster from making the other blind angry, and keeps the blinds from posting before the previous hand is over.  Thoughts?

When is the pot won?

Gobbs

My immediate thoughts are when showdown is completed, or if there is no showdown, when all players except the winner of that hand have folded. 

[Martini]

Based on the responses I have seen here and after thinking about it myself, I think it would be best to make a house rule (since we use two decks and rotating dealers) that the next hand starts once the pot is won.  That eliminates a slow blind poster from making the other blind angry, and keeps the blinds from posting before the previous hand is over.  Thoughts?

When is the pot won?

Gobbs

My immediate thoughts are when showdown is completed, or if there is no showdown, when all players except the winner of that hand have folded. 

I would go with when the pot is awarded as the indicator of when the hand is completed.

[Gobbs]

Based on the responses I have seen here and after thinking about it myself, I think it would be best to make a house rule (since we use two decks and rotating dealers) that the next hand starts once the pot is won.  That eliminates a slow blind poster from making the other blind angry, and keeps the blinds from posting before the previous hand is over.  Thoughts?

When is the pot won?

Gobbs

My immediate thoughts are when showdown is completed, or if there is no showdown, when all players except the winner of that hand have folded. 

If you insist on using two decks of cards, I'd go with the moment the dealer cuts the deck as when the new hand begins.

When is the showdown completed?  When all players show their hands or when you figure out whose hand is best?  When is a hand folded?  When the players says "I fold" or when the player tosses his cards toward the dealer?

The cut is a lot more simple to define and not contingent on different factors.  The dealer has to cut the cards and it's a quick thing.

Gobbs

[Nerre]

I'm with Gobbs here, the cut is the best solution.

The decision should preferrably be made before the blinds are posted (so the blinds are known when they are to be posted) and the point chosen shall be something of a short duration (showdown and awarding the pot are things that can take between a second and half a minute depending on the number of players and the size of the pot).

I'd say "When the first half of the deck is put down on the cut card".

[Ghaleon]

What's the difference if we use the cutting of the cards or the posting of the blinds as the starting point for a hand?

Gobbs - you said that one blind could delay his posting and either force a player to post a larger blind, or at least piss a guy off.

Why can't the same situation occur with the cut.  If I'm in the cutoff and the button hands me a the deck to cut and the BB is short stacked on the bubble, why would I be in a hurry to cut the cards?  what if I was talking to someone or otherwise not paying attention?  All you're doing in that situation is shifting the blame of delaying the hand.  You're not really solving the problem.  What difference does it make if the BB gets mad at the small blind for not posting timely, or if he gets mad at the CO for not cutting quickly?

I'm not saying either way is right or wrong.  I'm  just saying that the only fair way to handle this is to clearly define the start of the hand as part of your  house rules and make players aware.  then just be consistent with your application of the rule.

[Gobbs]

What's the difference if we use the cutting of the cards or the posting of the blinds as the starting point for a hand?

Gobbs - you said that one blind could delay his posting and either force a player to post a larger blind, or at least piss a guy off.

Why can't the same situation occur with the cut.  If I'm in the cutoff and the button hands me a the deck to cut and the BB is short stacked on the bubble, why would I be in a hurry to cut the cards?  what if I was talking to someone or otherwise not paying attention?  All you're doing in that situation is shifting the blame of delaying the hand.  You're not really solving the problem.  What difference does it make if the BB gets mad at the small blind for not posting timely, or if he gets mad at the CO for not cutting quickly?

I'm not saying either way is right or wrong.  I'm  just saying that the only fair way to handle this is to clearly define the start of the hand as part of your  house rules and make players aware.  then just be consistent with your application of the rule.

Are you just arguing to be arguing?  You aren't really serious with this one, are you?

If you have problems with people talking and delaying their deal, you have a lot more serious problems than determining when a hand starts.

The dealer is responsible for moving the game along and taking control.  It doesn't matter if you have one person dealing or if you are rotating the deal.  If the dealer is delaying the cutting of the cards, he is holding up the entire game and you have a big problem.  If this is truly a problem for you, I suggest using a single dealer (well, I recommend that anyway, but....)

If the Big Blind delays posting his Big Blind, he has not slowed the game a bit.  If the dealer delays dealing, you'll have 8 players mad at him.  I'll let you do the math.

Gobbs

[pathand]

What's the difference if we use the cutting of the cards or the posting of the blinds as the starting point for a hand?

Gobbs - you said that one blind could delay his posting and either force a player to post a larger blind, or at least piss a guy off.

Why can't the same situation occur with the cut.  If I'm in the cutoff and the button hands me a the deck to cut and the BB is short stacked on the bubble, why would I be in a hurry to cut the cards?  what if I was talking to someone or otherwise not paying attention?  All you're doing in that situation is shifting the blame of delaying the hand.  You're not really solving the problem.  What difference does it make if the BB gets mad at the small blind for not posting timely, or if he gets mad at the CO for not cutting quickly?

I'm not saying either way is right or wrong.  I'm  just saying that the only fair way to handle this is to clearly define the start of the hand as part of your  house rules and make players aware.  then just be consistent with your application of the rule.

Are you just arguing to be arguing?  You aren't really serious with this one, are you?

If you have problems with people talking and delaying their deal, you have a lot more serious problems than determining when a hand starts.

The dealer is responsible for moving the game along and taking control.  It doesn't matter if you have one person dealing or if you are rotating the deal.  If the dealer is delaying the cutting of the cards, he is holding up the entire game and you have a big problem.  If this is truly a problem for you, I suggest using a single dealer (well, I recommend that anyway, but....)

If the Big Blind delays posting his Big Blind, he has not slowed the game a bit.  If the dealer delays dealing, you'll have 8 players mad at him.  I'll let you do the math.

Gobbs

Rebuttal, Ghaleon?

[Ghaleon]

Gobbs, do you even read what I write?  Or do you just assume that you know everything and start tearing into my arguments.

In all the home games I've played, where there is a rotating deal.  The palyer in the CO cuts the deck.  Not the dealer.  If you read my post, you'll see I never mentioned anything about the DEALER delaying action.

So I'll reiterate.  Whether you use the posting of the blinds, or the completion of the cut to signify the start of the hand.  The risk is still the same.

If it's up to the dealer to keep the game moving then he is just as responsible for making sure the blinds are posted as he is for making sure the deck is cut in a timely manner.

And as I said, it's up to the house rules, and it's fair either way as long as it is applied consistently.

[pathand]

Gobbs, do you even read what I write?  Or do you just assume that you know everything and start tearing into my arguments.

In all the home games I've played, where there is a rotating deal.  The palyer in the CO cuts the deck.  Not the dealer.  If you read my post, you'll see I never mentioned anything about the DEALER delaying action.

So I'll reiterate.  Whether you use the posting of the blinds, or the completion of the cut to signify the start of the hand.  The risk is still the same.

If it's up to the dealer to keep the game moving then he is just as responsible for making sure the blinds are posted as he is for making sure the deck is cut in a timely manner.

And as I said, it's up to the house rules, and it's fair either way as long as it is applied consistently.

Quickly Gobbs, quickly.

[Ghaleon]

Scenario 1

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up deck and begins shuffling.  While he is shuffling, SB and BB post.  Shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who is looking over at the TV, or talking to someone, or is otherwise asleep at the wheel.  BEEP, the blind timer goes off.

Scenario 2

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up the deck and begins shuffling.  While is shuffling, BB posts, SB does not.  The shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who promptly cuts the deck.  Button player picks up the deck.  BEEP, the Blind timer goes off before the SB posted his blind.

In one of these cases, the hand has not started and the blinds are up.  In the other, the hand has started and the blinds remain the same for the current hand.  Which scenario is which depends on whatever the house rules are.

[pathand]

Scenario 1

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up deck and begins shuffling.  While he is shuffling, SB and BB post.  Shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who is looking over at the TV, or talking to someone, or is otherwise asleep at the wheel.  BEEP, the blind timer goes off.

Scenario 2

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up the deck and begins shuffling.  While is shuffling, BB posts, SB does not.  The shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who promptly cuts the deck.  Button player picks up the deck.  BEEP, the Blind timer goes off before the SB posted his blind.

In one of these cases, the hand has not started and the blinds are up.  In the other, the hand has started and the blinds remain the same for the current hand.  Which scenario is which depends on whatever the house rules are.

Oh Gobbs............................?

[Ghaleon]

Pathand - Dont' be an instigator.  It's not cool

My frustration with Gobbs comes from the fact that I feel he has misinterpreted what I'm saying or is otherwised misinformed on my point.  It's happened a couple of times recently and I'll admit, I'm exasperated.  However, that doesn't mean that there are any hard feelings or disrespect.  Nor does it mean that this has turned into some kind of grudge-match or slugfest over what is the correct ruling.

Gobbs - I apologize if my words in my last post were harsh.

Pathand, if you aren't going to post something relevant to the topic, then mind your own business.

[Detroitdad]

Pathand - Dont' be an instigator.  It's not cool  Its just some light hearted fun

My frustration with Gobbs comes from the fact that I feel he has misinterpreted what I'm saying or is otherwised misinformed on my point.  It's happened a couple of times recently and I'll admit, I'm exasperated.  However, that doesn't mean that there are any hard feelings or disrespect.  Nor does it mean that this has turned into some kind of grudge-match or slugfest over what is the correct ruling.

Gobbs - I apologize if my words in my last post were harsh.

Pathand, if you aren't going to post something relevant to the topic, then mind your own business.  Somebody is a little sensitive

(Click to show/hide)

what a fun sucker pet name for my wife

I know, I ,know.........if its not relevant mind my own business. In my defense, have you seen my other posts? 

B

[Muley05]

I appreciate all of the responses, and the back and forth showing how not having a concrete way to define when a hand starts would be problematic.

Right now, we use a rotating dealer with two decks.  The SB shuffles the next deck, and the current dealer (who is CO for the next hand) cuts the deck.  With that scenario, what is the best way to define when a hand starts, something fixed that is not able to be delayed by any players?

[pathand]

Pathand - Dont' be an instigator.  It's not cool

My frustration with Gobbs comes from the fact that I feel he has misinterpreted what I'm saying or is otherwised misinformed on my point.  It's happened a couple of times recently and I'll admit, I'm exasperated.  However, that doesn't mean that there are any hard feelings or disrespect.  Nor does it mean that this has turned into some kind of grudge-match or slugfest over what is the correct ruling.

Gobbs - I apologize if my words in my last post were harsh.

Pathand, if you aren't going to post something relevant to the topic, then mind your own business.

Hey G., I was just passing time. The mere fact that you choose to post, makes it everybody's business, so take a pill. Trust me, I won't be offended if you don't read my posts. If the moderators tell me to stop, I will. Take your thin-skinned issues up with somebody else. I'm the least of your worries. I'm all about fun and I won't apologize for trying to help other people to lighten up.

Now, where were we? Gobbs.....?             

[Ghaleon]

Muley - I still maintain that it doesn't matter.  Just do whatever you and your players are comfortable with.  As long as you do it consistently, there should be no problems.

The "blinds posted" rule is so overwhelmingly common amongst most of the people I play with, that I just use it in order to keep things simple.

No matter what the rule is, there is always a risk of a hand not beginning timely and thus the blinds increasing one hand before they probably should.  After all, the timer doesn't lie.  20 minutes is 20 minutes.  So if the blinds are increased one hand early because of a missed post, slow cut, or slow shuffle, then that just means you get one more hand at that level before the blinds go up again.  As long as whatever rule you use is applied consistently, in the long run, it should not affect the game.

[Ghaleon]

Pathand - Dont' be an instigator.  It's not cool

My frustration with Gobbs comes from the fact that I feel he has misinterpreted what I'm saying or is otherwised misinformed on my point.  It's happened a couple of times recently and I'll admit, I'm exasperated.  However, that doesn't mean that there are any hard feelings or disrespect.  Nor does it mean that this has turned into some kind of grudge-match or slugfest over what is the correct ruling.

Gobbs - I apologize if my words in my last post were harsh.

Pathand, if you aren't going to post something relevant to the topic, then mind your own business.

Hey G., I was just passing time. The mere fact that you choose to post, makes it everybody's business, so take a pill. Trust me, I won't be offended if you don't read my posts. If the moderators tell me to stop, I will. Take your thin-skinned issues up with somebody else. I'm the least of your worries. I'm all about fun and I won't apologize for trying to help other people to lighten up.

Now, where were we? Gobbs.....?             

I don't think I'm being oversensitive.  There was clearly some animosity rising up between me and Gobbs and you chose to insert yourself into the middle.  If you saw two people getting into a heated argument in public you wouldn't insert yourself into it like that.  Just because you're on the internet and anonymous doesn't make it any less rude.

I will not comment any further on this issue.

Let's get back to the question in the OP

[austin5string]

There was clearly some animosity rising up between me and Gobbs and you chose to insert yourself into the middle. 

Stick around long enough and you'll find that that happens in about 98% of the threads Gobbs posts in.

~A5S

[Crimson]

Just to toss a few cents in for me, my tourneys are 2 decks, next dealer shuffles during the hand and the cutoff cuts (that's why he's called the cut-off, right? j/k). My main rules for that are that two people must influence the deck and the person who cuts is not the one who gets the first card.

We determine that the hand essentially ends when its outcome is imminent. That means, last player had folded, all players have showed down, all cards have been dealt in an all-in situation. Since the next dealer is, in theory, ready to go, we don't count cleaning up from the last hand (pot moved to winner and cards moved to next dealer) as part of the hand. We just get the table cleaned up and the next dealer can start handing out cards.

As a partner to this rule, at least one blind must be posted between the end of the last hand and the final beep of the timer, otherwise they missed their opportunity and must pay the higher blind.

For us, it's one of those things that gives my game the distinction of "friendly game". This doesn't really ever become an issue. The annoying beeping of Tournament Director makes sure no one forgets the blinds are about to go up.

[Gobbs]

Gobbs, do you even read what I write?  Or do you just assume that you know everything and start tearing into my arguments.

In all the home games I've played, where there is a rotating deal.  The palyer in the CO cuts the deck.  Not the dealer.  If you read my post, you'll see I never mentioned anything about the DEALER delaying action.

So I'll reiterate.  Whether you use the posting of the blinds, or the completion of the cut to signify the start of the hand.  The risk is still the same.

If it's up to the dealer to keep the game moving then he is just as responsible for making sure the blinds are posted as he is for making sure the deck is cut in a timely manner.

And as I said, it's up to the house rules, and it's fair either way as long as it is applied consistently.

So, you have one player shuffle, one player cut, and a third player deal?  And this is supposed to speed things up?

Either way, the same thing applies....whoever cuts the deck will be holding up the entire game if they delay.  Whoever posts a blind will not.  Same thing....so, it does matter greatly.  Same concept.

This is simply another reason why using two decks is not a good idea.

Gobbs

[Gobbs]

Scenario 1

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up deck and begins shuffling.  While he is shuffling, SB and BB post.  Shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who is looking over at the TV, or talking to someone, or is otherwise asleep at the wheel.  BEEP, the blind timer goes off.

Scenario 2

Hand ends, pot is awarded.  Button player picks up the deck and begins shuffling.  While is shuffling, BB posts, SB does not.  The shuffle is completed and the deck is placed in front of the CO player who promptly cuts the deck.  Button player picks up the deck.  BEEP, the Blind timer goes off before the SB posted his blind.

In one of these cases, the hand has not started and the blinds are up.  In the other, the hand has started and the blinds remain the same for the current hand.  Which scenario is which depends on whatever the house rules are.

OK...there's your problem right there.  You are assuming one deck.  The OP said two decks.  If there is only one deck, there is no question - the new hand starts on the first riffle by the dealer.  It doesn't matter when the pot was awarded or when things were posted...it's very simple and quite standard.

Gobbs

[Gobbs]

Muley - I still maintain that it doesn't matter.  Just do whatever you and your players are comfortable with.  As long as you do it consistently, there should be no problems.

The "blinds posted" rule is so overwhelmingly common amongst most of the people I play with, that I just use it in order to keep things simple.

No matter what the rule is, there is always a risk of a hand not beginning timely and thus the blinds increasing one hand before they probably should.  After all, the timer doesn't lie.  20 minutes is 20 minutes.  So if the blinds are increased one hand early because of a missed post, slow cut, or slow shuffle, then that just means you get one more hand at that level before the blinds go up again.  As long as whatever rule you use is applied consistently, in the long run, it should not affect the game.

Now, you are probably going to take offense to this (and sorry for the multiple posts in a row), but the only time I've ever seen the hand starting when blinds were when I first started out playing pub poker.  Most people who want more than pub poker graduate from that and use the proper rules.  It truly is a sign of a beginnner.

Having said that, you obviously missed that the OP was talking about two decks, not one.  As I said in the other post, one deck is simple - hand starts on the first riffle.  The question here was two decks - and I think it's rather obvious why the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.

Pat - I have to agree with Ghaleon - while the threads are for everybody to debate about a topic, posts should still at least attempt to add something to the current topic or raise other important questions.  Sure, there are often sidebars and jokes that accompany some posts (and sometimes, I may be guilty of some heavy sarcasm), but your posts are really only serving to agitate, not add or relieve tension.

Gobbs

[Ghaleon]

Now, you are probably going to take offense to this (and sorry for the multiple posts in a row), but the only time I've ever seen the hand starting when blinds were when I first started out playing pub poker.  Most people who want more than pub poker graduate from that and use the proper rules.  It truly is a sign of a beginnner.

Having said that, you obviously missed that the OP was talking about two decks, not one.  As I said in the other post, one deck is simple - hand starts on the first riffle.  The question here was two decks - and I think it's rather obvious why the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.

Gobbs

Sorry, I don't see why it's obvious that the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.  If the blinds go up before a hand starts because one of the blinds was slow to post, or if they go up because the CO player was slow to cut, what's the difference?  Both situations can arise if there is one deck, or two.  And, to rebut your previous post, in neither case, is the dealer doing anything less than necessary to keep the game moving.  It's the blinds or the CO who is slowing things down.

I'm not offended by your "beginner" comment.  I actually agree.  However, in a friendly home game, it's simple and friendly to just keep this rule.  As long as it is applied consistently and everyone is aware of their responsibility to know when it is their blind then there is absolutely no problem.  And if someone is slow to post and the buzzer goes off, then sorry, rules are rules, blinds are up.  However, I do like Crimson's idea of basing it on just one of the blinds being posted.

My point is, that it doesn't matter what criteria you use to define the start of a hand.  As long as it is within the rules, and those rules are applied the consistently.  Then the number of hands dealt per blind level shouldn't change much. 

[Martini]

I do see an advantage to using blinds posting as an indication of the next hand. Namely that it is always in the blinds best interest to post as soon as possible if they want to avoid having to pay bigger blinds. When using other actions such as cutting the cards, awarding the pot, etc. the person responsible could conceivably intentionally slow down their action so as to force higher blinds on another player.

[Dr. Neau]

I do see an advantage to using blinds posting as an indication of the next hand. Namely that it is always in the blinds best interest to post as soon as possible if they want to avoid having to pay bigger blinds. When using other actions such as cutting the cards, awarding the pot, etc. the person responsible could conceivably intentionally slow down their action so as to force higher blinds on another player.

And when the blinds start putting their blinds out before the hand is over?

[Crimson]

That's why we end the current hand by those methods. You can post your blind before the hand is over if you're not in said hand, but if the hand doesn't actually end until after the timer goes off, then you'll have to pay the higher blind. All the players (especially the short stacks) have an incentive to pay the lower blinds because it changes the minimum limp-in amount for the next hand, so when the blind counter is ticking down the final seconds, if a hand is "almost" over they will usually hasten its completion but no one gets mad if someone is facing a tough decision and lets the timer elapse. Most people are good about treating people how they would like to be treated in the same situation and it doesn't get abused.

[Martini]

I do see an advantage to using blinds posting as an indication of the next hand. Namely that it is always in the blinds best interest to post as soon as possible if they want to avoid having to pay bigger blinds. When using other actions such as cutting the cards, awarding the pot, etc. the person responsible could conceivably intentionally slow down their action so as to force higher blinds on another player.

And when the blinds start putting their blinds out before the hand is over?

Then they pay the lower blinds. At least it's not slowing down the game. If you adapt the first riffle rule for the second deck then they are paying the lower blinds anyway even if the timer went off in the middle of the hand.

[Ghaleon]

I agree with Martini.

I think we all know the situation in question here, but it's difficult to put into words.  It's that time when the buzzer goes off, but we are indiscernably close to the start of a hand.

Obviously this problem is easily solved by using just one deck, as Gobbs pointed out.  However, when you paly with two, you need some kind of signal to identify the beginning of a new hand.  And we can debate all day about whether its the cut, blind posting, the riffle, the dealing of the first card, etc.  I still maintain that it doesn't matter.

Even if you get that sort of iffy start/end point and the timer goes off, why can't you just say, "Ok blinds are up NEXT hand" and take one more hand at the lower level.  In the long run, it wouldn't matter.  Because the next time this situation arises, you'll get another hand at THAT level.

As long as you do it the same way every time, the number of hands per blind level will even out.

The player cutting the deck could angle shoot to delay the hand just as easily as the player posting blinds.  Similarly, when a second deck is in use, a player could cut the deck before the current hand is over just as easily as a player could post his blind before a hand is over.

For those of us who have killed an entire day on this forum playing the "what if" game, we know that there is always gonig to be a possible angle-shoot.  No one has yet to offer a fool-proof solution to this problem.  It comes down to having a rule that is understood, and consistently adhered to.  As long as you do that, you narrow down the risk and know what to look for.  And by doing that, you ensure that the game is fair to all players, all the time.

[Gobbs]

For those of us who have killed an entire day on this forum playing the "what if" game, we know that there is always gonig to be a possible angle-shoot.  No one has yet to offer a fool-proof solution to this problem.  It comes down to having a rule that is understood, and consistently adhered to.  As long as you do that, you narrow down the risk and know what to look for.  And by doing that, you ensure that the game is fair to all players, all the time.

I take offense to that statement - I only spend 3/4 of the day.

Actually, I believe I did propose a fool proof solution.  Use one deck and go with the riffle.  Better yet, use a competent-dedicated dealer.  (OK, how many of you have been wondering how long it would take me to post that?)

Gobbs

[Nerre]

Sorry, I don't see why it's obvious that the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.  If the blinds go up before a hand starts because one of the blinds was slow to post, or if they go up because the CO player was slow to cut, what's the difference? 

You didn't read my post, did you?

The decision should be made before the blinds are posted, so they know how much they are supposed to post.


Also, the blinds are affected by the blind level, the CO is not. The "standard" rule also is the first riffle, which is in now way "better" than the cut (because the player shuffling is as affected by the blinds as CO).

You examples were that the blinds post slow, but what if they instead post fast? They see clock is getting close so they post their blinds even before the previous hand has been finished.


And the reason that the standard ruls is "first riffle" is most likely that the wash is harder to tell when it starts (otherwise the wash would be a better point).


Oh, I just realised one more reason to NOT use the "when pot awarded" rule: How would you handle rebuys? Rebuys are to be made between hands, but if the next hand starts when the pot is awarded there is not time between hand...

[Ghaleon]

Sorry, I don't see why it's obvious that the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.  If the blinds go up before a hand starts because one of the blinds was slow to post, or if they go up because the CO player was slow to cut, what's the difference? 

You didn't read my post, did you? And you clearly didn't read my post.  Because the exact same problems arise when you use the cut as do when you use the posting of the blinds to signify the start of a hand.  What if the CO player is slow to cut, or is not paying attention.  Conversely, in a two deck game, it's entirely possible that the cut could occur WAY before the end of the previous hand.

The decision should be made before the blinds are posted, so they know how much they are supposed to post.There is no "decision" to be made before the blinds are posted.  The decision should be made before the game even starts.  Set the rule and stick to it.  That's all


Also, the blinds are affected by the blind level, the CO is not. The "standard" rule also is the first riffle, which is in now way "better" than the cut (because the player shuffling is as affected by the blinds as CO). All players are affected by the blind level.  And the standard rule of first riffle is absolutely better than the cut if we're using just one deck.

You examples were that the blinds post slow, but what if they instead post fast? They see clock is getting close so they post their blinds even before the previous hand has been finished. So what?  As long as it's not so early that it interferes with the previous hand, it doesn't matter.  And theoreticall the same thing could happen at the beginning of the new blind level, therefore the number of hands per level remains constant.


And the reason that the standard ruls is "first riffle" is most likely that the wash is harder to tell when it starts (otherwise the wash would be a better point).  I'll remind you, as I've been reminded, that we're talking about a TWO deck game.  The first riffle means nothing in this game.


Oh, I just realised one more reason to NOT use the "when pot awarded" rule: How would you handle rebuys? Rebuys are to be made between hands, but if the next hand starts when the pot is awarded there is not time between hand...

[Gobbs]

Sorry, I don't see why it's obvious that the cut is more desirable than the posting of blinds.  If the blinds go up before a hand starts because one of the blinds was slow to post, or if they go up because the CO player was slow to cut, what's the difference? 

You didn't read my post, did you? And you clearly didn't read my post.  Because the exact same problems arise when you use the cut as do when you use the posting of the blinds to signify the start of a hand.  What if the CO player is slow to cut, or is not paying attention.  Conversely, in a two deck game, it's entirely possible that the cut could occur WAY before the end of the previous hand.

The decision should be made before the blinds are posted, so they know how much they are supposed to post.There is no "decision" to be made before the blinds are posted.  The decision should be made before the game even starts.  Set the rule and stick to it.  That's all


Also, the blinds are affected by the blind level, the CO is not. The "standard" rule also is the first riffle, which is in now way "better" than the cut (because the player shuffling is as affected by the blinds as CO). All players are affected by the blind level.  And the standard rule of first riffle is absolutely better than the cut if we're using just one deck.

You examples were that the blinds post slow, but what if they instead post fast? They see clock is getting close so they post their blinds even before the previous hand has been finished. So what?  As long as it's not so early that it interferes with the previous hand, it doesn't matter.  And theoreticall the same thing could happen at the beginning of the new blind level, therefore the number of hands per level remains constant.


And the reason that the standard ruls is "first riffle" is most likely that the wash is harder to tell when it starts (otherwise the wash would be a better point).  I'll remind you, as I've been reminded, that we're talking about a TWO deck game.  The first riffle means nothing in this game.


Oh, I just realised one more reason to NOT use the "when pot awarded" rule: How would you handle rebuys? Rebuys are to be made between hands, but if the next hand starts when the pot is awarded there is not time between hand...

Ghaleon,

You're grasping at straws now.  Again, I'm not trying to be offensive, but some of your comments make it a little obvious that you do not know the proper procedures for doing things.  For example, above, you say the cut could be done before the end of the hand - it better not be.  The cards should not be given to the dealer before the hand is over.  Therefore, the cut cannot be done ahead of time.  The cut should be done, with one hand, right before the hand is dealt.  You even collect antes before the cut.  The cut is done immediately before dealing the hand...not any other time.

You commment about making decisions makes no sense...the decision regarding blind amounts for the current hand can only be made based on the level and the timer.  Yes, the blind structure is pre-determied, but the blinds for the current hand is determined by factors that cannot be known until the previous hand is completed.

I think everybody agrees, with a single deck, the first riffle is the superior method for determination.  Therefore, logically, with a two-deck game, you want to approximate this rule as best as possible.  Quite obviously, the cut is the closest approximation for a riffle for this style. 

For the remainder of your arguments, you seem to use "it doesn't matter" a lot.  In some cases, for that particular factor, you are right, but it's not a valid argument.  There are many factors for which it does matter and they almost all favor a cut above the posting of the blinds.  So, I've been trying to determine the underlying factor for why you so much want the posting of the blinds to be the determining factor.  Now, I'm no psychologist, but I may have an answer.  Is it because you want the blinds to have the responsibility for determining how much they pay so that you don't have to tell somebody to put more in, the blinds are up?  Or is it because you have been using this and you know if you change it, people are going to revolt because "I posted my blind before the buzzer - I don't care about the cut/riffle, I'm not putting in more"?

Gobbs

[cigarherb]

here is what we do. It is not perfect, but it works for us and in over 4 years we have not had a single problem.

rotateing dealer
2 decks

What we do is this, if the alarm goes off to raise the blinds during any point in the transition between hands. Be it awarding the pot, posting the blinds, cutting the cards, dealing the first card, whatever. We play the lower blind lever for that hand. We are a friendly group, we are talking about a few seconds of a 5 or 6 hour game. There can be several what ifs, and how abouts, but this is what we do and it works for us. You do not have to agree with it, and you do not have to do it. We have found that this situation does not come up all that often to turn it into a major crisis.

typically while a hand is being played the second deck is being shuffled. not always, but typically.

[Dr. Neau]

here is what we do. It is not perfect, but it works for us and in over 4 years we have not had a single problem.

rotateing dealer
2 decks

What we do is this, if the alarm goes off to raise the blinds during any point in the transition between hands. Be it awarding the pot, posting the blinds, cutting the cards, dealing the first card, whatever. We play the lower blind lever for that hand. We are a friendly group, we are talking about a few seconds of a 5 or 6 hour game. There can be several what ifs, and how abouts, but this is what we do and it works for us. You do not have to agree with it, and you do not have to do it. We have found that this situation does not come up all that often to turn it into a major crisis.

typically while a hand is being played the second deck is being shuffled. not always, but typically.

This is what we do.

[pathand]

What we do is this, if the alarm goes off to raise the blinds during any point in the transition between hands. Be it awarding the pot, posting the blinds, cutting the cards, dealing the first card, whatever. We play the lower blind lever for that hand. We are a friendly group, we are talking about a few seconds of a 5 or 6 hour game. There can be several what ifs, and how abouts, but this is what we do and it works for us. You do not have to agree with it, and you do not have to do it. We have found that this situation does not come up all that often to turn it into a major crisis.

This is the same agreement we use in our tournaments. We've also avoided any major disagreements.   

[Martini]

What we do is this, if the alarm goes off to raise the blinds during any point in the transition between hands. Be it awarding the pot, posting the blinds, cutting the cards, dealing the first card, whatever. We play the lower blind lever for that hand. We are a friendly group, we are talking about a few seconds of a 5 or 6 hour game. There can be several what ifs, and how abouts, but this is what we do and it works for us. You do not have to agree with it, and you do not have to do it. We have found that this situation does not come up all that often to turn it into a major crisis.

This is the same agreement we use in our tournaments. We've also avoided any major disagreements.   

What? You don't get players in the blinds insisting that they should pay the new higher blinds instead of the previous round's blinds?

Same method here. Timer goes off in the transition period then we play one more hand, applied consistently for everyone.

[demon604]

here is what we do. It is not perfect, but it works for us and in over 4 years we have not had a single problem.

rotateing dealer
2 decks

What we do is this, if the alarm goes off to raise the blinds during any point in the transition between hands. Be it awarding the pot, posting the blinds, cutting the cards, dealing the first card, whatever. We play the lower blind lever for that hand. We are a friendly group, we are talking about a few seconds of a 5 or 6 hour game. There can be several what ifs, and how abouts, but this is what we do and it works for us. You do not have to agree with it, and you do not have to do it. We have found that this situation does not come up all that often to turn it into a major crisis.

typically while a hand is being played the second deck is being shuffled. not always, but typically.

Us as well.

[Gobbs]

I guess I prefer a more "professional" environment instead of a "friendly game".

Gobbs

[pathand]

Would you also be willing to participate in a friendly game if a professionally run game was not available?     

Pat

[cigarherb]

I guess I prefer a more "professional" environment instead of a "friendly game".

Gobbs

good point. It all depends on what people want.  If I want a professional environment I will go to a casino, since no other environment can be professional. All others are what we call home games or illegals. It can be pretend professional, but not professional. This is just me, but as soon as you say you have a professional environment, anything that happens to me I am suing. I get robbed, trip and fall over something, fall down the stairs, fall on a wet floor, car gets hit outside, burn myself, you name it. If I do any of that at a friendly environment, my bad. A professional environment and you had better have some insurance. There had also better be some security cameras to review any table discrepancies. Me and my guys can have a friendly game and pretend to be in a professional environment, just as easily as we can have a game with a pretend professional environment. In fact tonight I am going to tell everyone to pretend we are playing at the Bellagio.


No one said "friendly Game", all I said is we are a "friendly Group". Dont even try to tell me that you are letting a bunch of complete strangers in off the streets to play your games. You are a group that are friends. You are a friendly group. Everyone at your game knows someone else there. I also do not remember reading anything about the environments of the games, but I did not read every word of ervery post.