A Few Questions

[Poker Jack]

Hi there,

dealt a NL Hold'em Tourney last night and a couple of questions came up:

- Now and again, there are players who say "fold", but don't want to muck their hands because they want to be able to show their cards when the hand is over to proove to others they indeed held, say, a gutshot that hit on the river, or something like that.
I know that it's not allowed to hold on to your cards once you folded them due to numerous reasons, I just want to know what you say to players that are, say, calling you a nit, or giving you a hard time when you are just trying to do a good job.

- I dealt the first down card to each player. When I am about to deal the second down card, I realize that a player mistook a downcard of an empty seat for his own.
Now, I did not know whether he looked at the cards already, or not - it doesn't make much difference anyway because even if he said he didn't, I couldn't be sure if it was the truth.
So, what's the ruling here?

[Dr. Neau]

The fact that they want to hold onto their cards after folding is actually giving away information to players still active in the hand and therefore bad form.  It should be squashed immediately.

If you take the wrong downcard, your hand is dead.  Period.

[Martini]

If a player is being badgered for playing a certain way then that's even more reason to never show cards unless necessary. So for instance, the guy folds a Set when an unlikely possible Straight comes on the Turn. He folds and shows his hand and people tell him that he's probably well ahead and should have stuck around in case the board paired even if he were behind. It's showing cards that opens him up to criticism in the first place. If you're going to fold, just ditch your cards...as seen on TV! If a player wants to say after the hand "Oooh I would have made my Flush!" then he can if he wants. It is giving away extra information for free and it's hardly a rarity that someone folds a draw and hits. It just shows the lack of skill and experience of the poker player when he feels compelled to announce what his hand.

Despite the fact that I can't find a specific rule covering the scenario of looking at another player's cards I would rule his hand dead anyway. I would also show the entire table any card(s) that you are unsure if he saw or not.

[Poker Jack]

Concerning "player looked at wrong hole card":

Provided that it is assumed that cards are dealt randomly from the stub, you could just show both cards to all players, then put the exposed cards back in the stub, reshuffle and redeal.
Since the deck is always random, it shouldn't make any difference to other players, except that they know a little more about two specific cards.

It's the notion that the deck is some kind of mystical, pre-destined thing that has to be kept in a certain order that makes things difficult.
What is so blasting important about the order of cards after they are shuffled? As long as they are kept annonymous and random in the stub, it's all fine, I guess.

[72]

i say misdeal.

RROP:

. The following circumstances cause a misdeal, provided attention is called to the error before two players have acted on their hands.

(a) The first or second card of the hand has been exposed by a dealer error.

(b) Two or more cards have been exposed by the dealer.

(c) Two or more boxed cards (improperly faced cards) are found.

(d) Two or more extra cards have been dealt in the starting hands of a game.

(e) An incorrect number of cards has been dealt to a player, except the top card may be dealt if it goes to the player in proper sequence.

(f) Any card has been dealt out of the proper sequence (except an exposed card may be replaced by the burncard).

(g) The button was out of position.

(h) The first card was dealt to the wrong position.

(i) Cards have been dealt to an empty seat or a player not entitled to a hand.

(j) A player has been dealt out who is entitled to a hand. This player must be present at the table or have posted a blind or ante.

[Martini]

Concerning "player looked at wrong hole card":

Provided that it is assumed that cards are dealt randomly from the stub, you could just show both cards to all players, then put the exposed cards back in the stub, reshuffle and redeal.
Since the deck is always random, it shouldn't make any difference to other players, except that they know a little more about two specific cards.

It's the notion that the deck is some kind of mystical, pre-destined thing that has to be kept in a certain order that makes things difficult.
What is so blasting important about the order of cards after they are shuffled? As long as they are kept annonymous and random in the stub, it's all fine, I guess.

Rules and procedures are not about preserving a mystical order of the deck. They are about making sure that irregularities are handled the same way each time to ensure the game is fair for everyone.

As an example, let's take the scenario of a card being dealt off the table. In one case it's a Deuce and the guy says "Give me another one." In another case the card ends up being an Ace and the guy says "It's OK, I'll keep it." By having the same rule apply (the rule is that he gets a replacement regardless and the card is exposed for everyone) then that prevents someone from trying to gain advantage in that situation.

As for keeping the cards as close to original order as possible I have always assumed that that is because it is a convenient standard for rules to strive for and it makes intuitive sense that hand should play out as close to how it would have if there had not been an irregularity.

[Wedge Rock]

...waiting for the first version of Martini's Rules of Poker.

[Martini]

...waiting for the first version of Martini's Rules of Poker.

I thought that the WPA did an excellent job on their rule set. Unfortunately the WPA seems to have gone away and their site no longer exists. I have what I believe to be a full copy of their rules that I'll post after I dig it up. If I had to pick one rule set it would be the WPA one. More discussion about it here: http://forums.homepokertourney.com/index.php/topic,21575.0.html

[Dr. Neau]

Concerning "player looked at wrong hole card":

Provided that it is assumed that cards are dealt randomly from the stub, you could just show both cards to all players, then put the exposed cards back in the stub, reshuffle and redeal.
Since the deck is always random, it shouldn't make any difference to other players, except that they know a little more about two specific cards.

It's the notion that the deck is some kind of mystical, pre-destined thing that has to be kept in a certain order that makes things difficult.
What is so blasting important about the order of cards after they are shuffled? As long as they are kept annonymous and random in the stub, it's all fine, I guess.

I suggest you start shuffling the deck after the deal, before the turn and before the river.  Then explain to your friends, "What's the difference?".  See how long that lasts.

[Dr. Neau]

Despite the fact that I can't find a specific rule covering the scenario of looking at another player's cards I would rule his hand dead anyway. I would also show the entire table any card(s) that you are unsure if he saw or not.

I wouldn't show the table.  You are then potentially screwing someone over by showing everyone a card that causes one person to play the hand differently.

If you want to show the cards after the hand, I wouldn't see a problem there.

Just punish the dude who isn't paying attention and let everyone else play as if he had simply folded.

[Martini]

Despite the fact that I can't find a specific rule covering the scenario of looking at another player's cards I would rule his hand dead anyway. I would also show the entire table any card(s) that you are unsure if he saw or not.

I wouldn't show the table.  You are then potentially screwing someone over by showing everyone a card that causes one person to play the hand differently.

If you want to show the cards after the hand, I wouldn't see a problem there.

Just punish the dude who isn't paying attention and let everyone else play as if he had simply folded.

[Poker Jack]

I suggest you start shuffling the deck after the deal, before the turn and before the river.  Then explain to your friends, "What's the difference?".  See how long that lasts.

Well, I'm sure most of my friends or poker players around would find that most disagreeable. I for one would be fine with it if it didn't screw up the hands per hour rate immensely.
However, that's not what I was trying to say when I suggested re-shuffling.
I was just suggesting to simply re-shuffle in the event of an irregularity. Just as you put any pre-maturely exposed card dealt to the board back in the deck and re-shuffle, you could just do the same for the scenario we are talking about.

[figjam]

i say misdeal.

RROP:

. The following circumstances cause a misdeal, provided attention is called to the error before two players have acted on their hands.

(a) The first or second card of the hand has been exposed by a dealer error.

(b) Two or more cards have been exposed by the dealer.

(c) Two or more boxed cards (improperly faced cards) are found.

(d) Two or more extra cards have been dealt in the starting hands of a game.

(e) An incorrect number of cards has been dealt to a player, except the top card may be dealt if it goes to the player in proper sequence.

(f) Any card has been dealt out of the proper sequence (except an exposed card may be replaced by the burncard).

(g) The button was out of position.

(h) The first card was dealt to the wrong position.

(i) Cards have been dealt to an empty seat or a player not entitled to a hand.

(j) A player has been dealt out who is entitled to a hand. This player must be present at the table or have posted a blind or ante.

I don't think either of these apply.

e)  An incorrect number of cards was not DEALT to a player.  The player grabbed a card that was not his.

f)  The cards were not dealt out of sequence.

[nutN2Lewz]

- Now and again, there are players who say "fold", but don't want to muck their hands because they want to be able to show their cards when the hand is over to proove to others they indeed held, say, a gutshot that hit on the river, or something like that.
I know that it's not allowed to hold on to your cards once you folded them due to numerous reasons, ...

"You have two options - option number 1 is fold and muck your hand, option number 2 is to play your hand. Don't worry, we will all believe you when you tell us what cards you folded. After all, we are poker players, we don't lie."

I just want to know what you say to players that are, say, calling you a nit, or giving you a hard time when you are just trying to do a good job.

"We play pretty strict casino rules at my games. We do that so no one gets into bad habits that will be disallowed when that person plays in a casino. Besides, as Tournament Director, I am the person who have to make a ruling if something goes wrong and a player asks for a ruling. I want to play poker - I don't want to have to be making rulings ... rulings that will probably go AGAINST the player doing something weird. I would like to avoid that completely and the casino management team asks for your cooperation in this matter."

I dealt the first down card to each player. When I am about to deal the second down card, I realize that a player mistook a downcard of an empty seat for his own.  Now, I did not know whether he looked at the cards already, or not - it doesn't make much difference anyway because even if he said he didn't, I couldn't be sure if it was the truth. So, what's the ruling here?

Surprisingly, I couldn't find this situation explained in RR. I would expose the card and use it as the first burn card.

Good luck, nutn

[Poker Jack]

Surprisingly, I couldn't find this situation explained in RR. I would expose the card and use it as the first burn card.

Good luck, nutn

Well, the trouble is, how do you, as the dealer, decide which card the player already peeked at and which one he didn't peek at? Also, how do you decide which card is his/her down card and which one originally belongs to the stack of the empty seat?
Truth is, you can't decide that because you were busy dealing cards, not checking on that player.
So, you would have to show both cards, and, at the same time, take them away from the player because you can't say for sure which one is his and which one isnt'.

It would make the matter much more easier to resolve if you would just show both cards, put them back into the deck and re-shuffle and then redeal.

[Martini]

Surprisingly, I couldn't find this situation explained in RR. I would expose the card and use it as the first burn card.

Good luck, nutn

Well, the trouble is, how do you, as the dealer, decide which card the player already peeked at and which one he didn't peek at? Also, how do you decide which card is his/her down card and which one originally belongs to the stack of the empty seat?
Truth is, you can't decide that because you were busy dealing cards, not checking on that player.
So, you would have to show both cards, and, at the same time, take them away from the player because you can't say for sure which one is his and which one isnt'.

It would make the matter much more easier to resolve if you would just show both cards, put them back into the deck and re-shuffle and then redeal.

You should not redeal the hand. First of all, if two players had already acted then too much action has taken place to declare a misdeal. Secondly, if you redeal then you are opening the door for possible collusion. Let's say it's late in the tourney and blinds are high. UTG knows he needs to shove and get lucky before the blinds hit him next hand. He looks at his first card and it's a rag so he signals to his buddy across the table to "accidentally" pick up the card from the seat next to him. Declaring a misdeal in that instance is not protecting the integrity of the game.

[72]

there was no significant action by players yet as the dealer was still on the initial deal, dealing 2nd hole cards when it was discovered. it's a misdeal. if he grabbed a neighbour's card, he now has 2 cards in sequence from the deck, and one more card than everyone else at that point, so it is all out of proper sequence. misdeal.

[Dr. Neau]

You should not redeal the hand. First of all, if two players had already acted then too much action has taken place to declare a misdeal. Secondly, if you redeal then you are opening the door for possible collusion. Let's say it's late in the tourney and blinds are high. UTG knows he needs to shove and get lucky before the blinds hit him next hand. He looks at his first card and it's a rag so he signals to his buddy across the table to "accidentally" pick up the card from the seat next to him. Declaring a misdeal in that instance is not protecting the integrity of the game.

Yeah, it's got nothing to do with action or not.

Simply put, if you don't muck the hand of the offender (the person who looked), then you are opening up a huge opportunity for cheating.