Yet Another Ruling Thread

[KarmaDope]

Hi all,

One that came up in a game recently. Low buy in, self deal.

Player 1 = SB
Player 2 = BB
Player 3 = first to act - does nothing because he has spotted he has 3 cards.
Player 4 = folds
Player 5 = folds
Player 3 = Realises he has 3 cards and announces it.

Misdeal? Hand dead? I looked at RR and these 2 came to mind:

1. Once action begins, a misdeal cannot be called. The deal will be played, and no money will be returned to any player whose hand is fouled. In button games, action is considered to occur when two players after the blinds have acted on their hands. In stud games, action is considered to occur when two players after the forced bet have acted on their hands.

1. Your hand is declared dead if:

(a) You fold or announce that you are folding when facing a bet or a raise.

(b) You throw your hand away in a forward motion causing another player to act behind you (even if not facing a bet).

(c) In stud, when facing a bet, you pick your upcards off the table, turn your upcards facedown, or mix your upcards and downcards together.

(d) The hand does not contain the proper number of cards for that particular game (except at stud a hand missing the final card may be ruled live, and at lowball and draw high a hand with too few cards before the draw is live). [See Section 16 - “Explanations,” discussion #4, for more information on the stud portion of this rule.]

(e) You act on a hand with a joker as a holecard in a game not using a joker. (A player who acts on a hand without looking at a card assumes the liability of finding an improper card, as given in Irregularities, rule #8.)

(f) You have the clock on you when facing a bet or raise and exceed the specified time limit.

The counter argument was that it was a misdeal. The ruling was that Player 3's hand was dead and rest of the hand plays out as normal.

[Tal]

Two guys have folded out of turn and one guy has three cards? Lolselfdealaments

Not sure that two folds constitutes "action", but in any event, Misdeal. The community cards have changed because of what has happened.

I can't imagine a different ruling would be appropriate. Even if I'm in the bb with dem aces

[doubleup]

Dead imo -  he has to insta-announce that he has too many cards.

Otherwise someone could try to get a freeroll eg raise and try to take the blinds and if that doesn't work call a misdeal.

[Kev B]

Miss deal unless you're playing Pineapple.

[KarmaDope]

Not playing Pineapple - but Robert's Rules does say that action is 2 players after the blinds acting on their hands. If action, cant be a misdeal. Doesnt say anything about being out of turn.

[KarmaDope]

This could also lead to angleshooting by seats 4&5 - they had a bag of spanners, folded but now get the chance at a new hand.

[George2Loose]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

[Tal]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

Would you not then burn a card before the flop? That would be one way to resolve it, actually.

[Jon MW]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

Would you not then burn a card before the flop? That would be one way to resolve it, actually.

from a probability point of view it's irrelevant - as long his 3 cards are dead and face down it doesn't change the odds of any of the other hands.

If they're shown then do what you said.

[Tal]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

Would you not then burn a card before the flop? That would be one way to resolve it, actually.

from a probability point of view it's irrelevant - as long his 3 cards are dead and face down it doesn't change the odds of any of the other hands.

If they're shown then do what you said.

Well, yes, but the sequence of cards after the cut has been fixed. Before the small blind receives his first card, the river has been decided. We just don't know what it is.

[Jon MW]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

Would you not then burn a card before the flop? That would be one way to resolve it, actually.

from a probability point of view it's irrelevant - as long his 3 cards are dead and face down it doesn't change the odds of any of the other hands.

If they're shown then do what you said.

Well, yes, but the sequence of cards after the cut has been fixed. Before the small blind receives his first card, the river has been decided. We just don't know what it is.

But it doesn't have to be, it's irrelevant - hence the reason why poker players get their knickers in a twist about rulings which involve shuffling the deck and playing the hand out.

You could shuffle the deck between each street and it would still be completely irrelevant if it wasn't for poker players being stupid about it.

[Tal]

Not a mis deal. His hand is dead. Carry on with the hand

Would you not then burn a card before the flop? That would be one way to resolve it, actually.

from a probability point of view it's irrelevant - as long his 3 cards are dead and face down it doesn't change the odds of any of the other hands.

If they're shown then do what you said.

Well, yes, but the sequence of cards after the cut has been fixed. Before the small blind receives his first card, the river has been decided. We just don't know what it is.

But it doesn't have to be, it's irrelevant - hence the reason why poker players get their knickers in a twist about rulings which involve shuffling the deck and playing the hand out.

You could shuffle the deck between each street and it would still be completely irrelevant if it wasn't for poker players being stupid about it.

I completely understand your argument. (One step further: in theory, the cards have no value until they are on their backs) I just don't agree with the application here.

The cards in a normal hand are dealt. At that point, the next eight cards in the deck are:

Burn 1
Flop 1
Flop 2
Flop 3
Burn 2
Turn
Burn 3
River

What value each of those cards has no relevance. We agree there. But they are the defined cards at that point that are either to be in play (in the case of cards 2,3,4,6 and 8 ) or to be burned (1,5 and 7). The action then takes place based on those facts.

Stud and draw games are different because those cards aren't yet determined.

I'm not taking offence at the implication, but I just think these are two valid and contrasting views of the same facts.

[AdamM]

Schrodinger's deck.
The cards are not defined until their turned over surely

[Tal]

Schrodinger's deck.
The cards are not defined until their turned over surely

The cat is still the same cat!

Only Paul Daniels could switch the cats

[doubleup]

Tal - the cards are dealt as per the rules.  In this case the rules state "no misdeal carry on as normal and don't fanny about discussing quantum physics"