| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
*Yes*
Straight
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 282
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
  |
|
| Joe The Elegance Beevers wrote: | I do not agree that this is a misdeal at all. You should always try and get as close to what the natural result would have been.
This is a tournament, not a cash game, and it is in all players interests when a player is eliminated. There is a chance of that here. Just imagine if it was the bubble.
Two players have valid hands. The dealer must reshuffle and deal a flop, turn and river as far as I am concerned. If it is possible to leave out the discards then that would be done.
Rulings should always try to avoid an angle shoot or cheating. As OP says imagine one player has AA and one AK. If the dealer is a friend of the AK player then he can simple 'start shuffling' and the hand is void....? Just imagine...
edit: In fact it may not even be necessary to reshuffle if the top of the deck is intact. Deal as much as possible with the undisturbed stub and then shuffle if necessary. |
But what if the dealer is friends with the A10 player and was shuffling through to make sure it held, or what if they are friends with player C and keep giving him aces and player D kings...
The dealing rules are clear for everyone at the start of a tourny and any sway from those rules is a miss deal regardless of probability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Alex B
Straight Flush
Joined: 25 Apr 2005
Posts: 2788
Location: London
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:34 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| *Yes* wrote: |
But what if the dealer is friends with the A10 player and was shuffling through to make sure it held, or what if they are friends with player C and keep giving him aces and player D kings...
The dealing rules are clear for everyone at the start of a tourny and any sway from those rules is a miss deal regardless of probability. |
But this is not a rule its just something you said, and as you say, the rules are clear at the start, and they would not call this a misdeal. For good reason, as was explained...
And how would the A10 friend help by shuffling?!
_________________
http://www.alexbowler.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon MW
The British Cowboy
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1860
Location: Hastings
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:46 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| Alex B wrote: | | *Yes* wrote: |
But what if the dealer is friends with the A10 player and was shuffling through to make sure it held, or what if they are friends with player C and keep giving him aces and player D kings...
The dealing rules are clear for everyone at the start of a tourny and any sway from those rules is a miss deal regardless of probability. |
But this is not a rule its just something you said, and as you say, the rules are clear at the start, and they would not call this a misdeal. For good reason, as was explained...
And how would the A10 friend help by shuffling?! |
I think he means by stacking the deck
But as that would make them the worst corrupt dealer ever I'm pretty sure that kind of ruse wouldn't last long 
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield
2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
oneshotbob
Full House
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 1276
Location: York, United Kingdom
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 5:51 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
Could the person who needed to hit (QJ) argue that he is less likely to do so in a deck of 34 rather than a deck of 48?
_________________
@oneshotbobby on twitter |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon MW
The British Cowboy
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1860
Location: Hastings
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:11 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| oneshotbob wrote: | | Could the person who needed to hit (QJ) argue that he is less likely to do so in a deck of 34 rather than a deck of 48? |
He could argue it, but he'd be wrong.
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield
2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
stowjon
Royal Flush
Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 7455
Location: willingham
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:16 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| Jon MW wrote: | | oneshotbob wrote: | | Could the person who needed to hit (QJ) argue that he is less likely to do so in a deck of 34 rather than a deck of 48? |
He could argue it, but he'd be wrong. |
why?
_________________
"There's not enough hippies to save our lives, We need more hippies" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
darrensprengers
Misclick
Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 6920
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:27 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| stowjon wrote: | | Jon MW wrote: | | oneshotbob wrote: | | Could the person who needed to hit (QJ) argue that he is less likely to do so in a deck of 34 rather than a deck of 48? |
He could argue it, but he'd be wrong. |
why? |
because u dont know the discards.
_________________
The next best thing to gambling and winning is gambling and losing.
-- Nick "The Greek" Dandalos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rvabdn
One Pair
Joined: 12 Oct 2011
Posts: 43
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:28 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| because, without extra knowledge of the mucked cards, each of his outs has equal chance of being one of the mucked cards as any other card. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seb
Full House
Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Posts: 849
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 6:58 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
You can weight the muck. But, as the Cloutier story show, the odds have also changed in imperceptible ways. My point was this is probably impossible to take advantage of and there's no reason not to play on. But then, I know that meaningless holecard misdeals cause a huge fuss because of the tiny remote chance of dealer collusion.
So what is the actual rule? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
*Yes*
Straight
Joined: 16 Nov 2009
Posts: 282
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:47 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| Alex B wrote: | | *Yes* wrote: |
But what if the dealer is friends with the A10 player and was shuffling through to make sure it held, or what if they are friends with player C and keep giving him aces and player D kings...
The dealing rules are clear for everyone at the start of a tourny and any sway from those rules is a miss deal regardless of probability. |
But this is not a rule its just something you said, and as you say, the rules are clear at the start, and they would not call this a misdeal. For good reason, as was explained...
And how would the A10 friend help by shuffling?! |
I'm not sure how this is just something I've said, I've never played a tourny with a rule that states an all in and a call is followed by a shuffle of the deck.
And I meant paranoia of the dealers motives can start when they first lay hands on the cards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jon MW
The British Cowboy
Joined: 17 Feb 2006
Posts: 1860
Location: Hastings
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| *Yes* wrote: | | Alex B wrote: | | *Yes* wrote: |
But what if the dealer is friends with the A10 player and was shuffling through to make sure it held, or what if they are friends with player C and keep giving him aces and player D kings...
The dealing rules are clear for everyone at the start of a tourny and any sway from those rules is a miss deal regardless of probability. |
But this is not a rule its just something you said, and as you say, the rules are clear at the start, and they would not call this a misdeal. For good reason, as was explained...
And how would the A10 friend help by shuffling?! |
I'm not sure how this is just something I've said, I've never played a tourny with a rule that states an all in and a call is followed by a shuffle of the deck.
And I meant paranoia of the dealers motives can start when they first lay hands on the cards. |
Obviously the shuffling before the hand is over isn't in the rules - your statement that this circumstance is a misdeal is what counts as just something you've said.
_________________
Jon "the British cowboy" Woodfield
2010/11 UK Team Championships: Black Belt Poker Team Captain
5 Star HORSE Classics - 2007 Razz Champion
2007 WSOP Razz - 13/341 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MintTrav
High Card
Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5
|
Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2012 2:53 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
| darrensprengers wrote: | | stowjon wrote: | | Jon MW wrote: | | oneshotbob wrote: | | Could the person who needed to hit (QJ) argue that he is less likely to do so in a deck of 34 rather than a deck of 48? |
He could argue it, but he'd be wrong. |
why? |
because u dont know the discards. |
| rvabdn wrote: | | because, without extra knowledge of the mucked cards, each of his outs has equal chance of being one of the mucked cards as any other card. |
Don't think this is quite true, as the discards are more likely to contain low cards, so bringing them back in reduces the chances of hitting for the player who needs to hit. It is more likely that a J or Q is reintroduced than an A but, otherwise, diluting the pack with all the discarded 3s, 4s, 7s, etc reduces his chances of getting lucky.
Not a misdeal though; even if it's not perfect you gotta play on on the most equitable basis. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AndyH1964
One Pair
Joined: 26 Jul 2011
Posts: 50
|
Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 5:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Casino Card Dealer screws up - What should have happened next? |
|
|
Thank you all for your informative replies.
The dealer - a very attractive lady in her early twenties with a fabulous bodily assets  - had not completely shuffled the pack and stated
'it's alright, I haven't shuffled the top of the pack and we can deal the board'
If I was the tournie director (and I've run quite a few) my view still is that the hands should be played out, with the undisturbed cards at the top of the deck.
Imagine if it was the bubble and you are the short stack who had just folded under the gun....
Imagine if you are the person with AA v AK late on in a tournie....
P.S. If I was the tournie director I would have taken the dealer on one side and given her a real good seeing to |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
