You Are The Floor

[13CARDS 0]

PLEASE BAN ME, MODS!!

[cubsfan44 0]

hmmmmmm...I think I dont take sandwedges idea? sw

[TheCinciKid 0]

Shoot the dealer for being an idiot. Then re-shuffle all the cards as if the were the stub and put out a new river card. Presumably, the players in the hand don't know what's in the muck, so the new river card will still be random.

[Canuckickstan 2]

The first river card nails you, and the second misses by a mile. Kill someone ?

[13CARDS 0]

PLEASE BAN ME, MODS!!

[TB17 0]

What's your name ? (Serious Q because I was at fallsview last sat and was looking out for you)

[acesup85 0]

Rock, Paper, Scissors. Or you give B back his money from the reraise and keep the original river card and kill the action right there.

[gatortom64 1]

House rules prevail.

[finztotheleft 0]

Then re-shuffle all the cards as if the were the stub and put out a new river card. Presumably, the players in the hand don't know what's in the muck, so the new river card will still be random.

I dislike this for more than one reason...

What else could you do ?

[finztotheleft 0]

House rules prevail.

House rules don't cover dealer compounding his mistake

[psujohn 0]

I don't get it. The stub is on top of the muck right? The dealer/floor can very easily calculate exactly how many cards should be in the stub. Count off that many cards and follow the rules of the room.

[navybuttons 15]

this is like the grossest spot a floor man could ever get into. i thought about this for a while. you're never going to please every player in the hand. every person would want a different action. and the loser would always be upset. one idea i had is that you could explain to them that there is no way to resolve the matter (they should understand that), but you could divide the pot based on turn equity since if the one player calls there's no more bets left. if i was a player and this happened, i would go for it.so gross.

[david_keena 0]

Rock, Paper, Scissors. Or you give B back his money from the reraise and keep the original river card and kill the action right there.

+1

[ROBBBIGG 0]

this is like the grossest spot a floor man could ever get into. i thought about this for a while. you're never going to please every player in the hand. every person would want a different action. and the loser would always be upset. one idea i had is that you could explain to them that there is no way to resolve the matter (they should understand that), but you could divide the pot based on turn equity since if the one player calls there's no more bets left. if i was a player and this happened, i would go for it.so gross.

I can't really solve it either. I also really like the idea of dividing money on pot equity based on the turn after player a decides since there is no clear solution without helping one player and hurting another.

[13CARDS 0]

PLEASE BAN ME, MODS!!

[psujohn 0]

There are situations where the premature river card will help player A but I think they're few and won't realistically affect the outcome. For example if A has the K high flush and is worried that B has the A high and the A is put out on the premature river then even though that won't likely be the actual river player A knows B doesn't have it and therefor he has the best hand.Of course unless player A is a complete tard he's calling the bet with the 2nd nuts. Actually unless player A is on a complete bluff he's calling here all the time and the premature river won't affect anything.

[TB17 0]

I was NOT in the poker room last night; I was working in the Salon Prive. You can always ask at the brush for 13CARDS... someone will let me know and I can come and meet you.

not last night, the week before.I was thinking of doing that, but I was thinking what a retard I'd look like if they gave me the old blank stare.

[acesup85 0]

So are you going to post the ruling anytime soon?

[David_Nicoson 1]

13cards, the rule you've described sounds standard to me. That is, I don't think there's anything unique about the reshuffling procedure.

I don't get it. The stub is on top of the muck right? The dealer/floor can very easily calculate exactly how many cards should be in the stub. Count off that many cards and follow the rules of the room.

This sounds like the right resolution to me. If we get slightly too few, the effect is pretty trivial. It's certainly smaller than the information that the exposed card is still in the deck.

[13CARDS 0]

PLEASE BAN ME, MODS !!

[David_Nicoson 1]

What if of the stub (essentially playing with a deck of less than 52 cards)?

Yeah, so what? We need to randomly select a river card among the cards that were still in the deck. The dealer dropping some of them into the muck is nearly as good a randomization as shuffling them. The only thing that changes (in an actionable way) is that the exposed card becomes more likely to appear if we eliminate some of the deck. As long as we can identify 20 or so cards that we know aren't mucked cards then we're pretty good, imho.Even if some of the dead cards are mixed in that's not a disaster unless you think the dealer is colluding with a player. What else can you propose?

[biggswolll 0]

i actually had this situation come up a couple of weeks ago, but not exactly as you described it. In my particular situation, there were 2 players in a somewhat smallish pot. The river was put out prematurely, which is silly being as there were only 2 players, and the deck wasnt dropped on top of the muck, but rather completely mixed in with the muck. Thinking back, im pretty sure the turn action was 10 dollars, and there was about 30 in the pot. The problem i have with this situation is this, as a floor i can never justify putting dead cards back into play. That being said, what the heck do i do?Edit- not trying to hijack, just found it interesting that this situation has actually come up somewhere else and would love to hear what other people think.

[Abbaddabba 0]

the problem with any of the resolutions is that the person who still has to call the remaining bet may have discretion over whether or not he'll see a second river card.if it is a favorable card, he can just slip his chips in and say he called - and since it's a fairly small amount, it's really difficult to contest whether he would fold. 99% of the time when you call a turn bet of $150, you're calling when it's $70 more to you when there's an additional $300 in there. after the river was turned, you wouldnt say "NO NO NO, IT IS A MISDEAL" on his behalf because it would be silly... if the river card was favorable to him, he would have said "yeah of course im calling", and that would be that. i think the key piece of information that you need to know is whether the dealer is the one who brought it to everyones attention, or if it was the guy who had still to call a bet did so. if it was the dealer, you can be sure that it isnt being ruled as a misdeal because of the outcome. he likely just realized his error. if that was the case, reshuffling the stub (or all of the muck if it cant be differentiated) makes sense. if it was the player who still needed to call $70 was the one who brought it to the dealers attention, I would give the guy who still has $70 left the option of calling the extra $70 or folding despite the river. i expect that he will choose to fold almost every single time, and that the only reason he brought the issue up is because he didnt like the river card. he gets of for $70 less, but he doesnt get the luxury of having an entirely different river card dealt.it's not perfect, but it's better than the alternatives.

[chgocubs99 0]

Walk over, take $70 from the guys stack, throw it in the center, showdown.

[13CARDS 0]

PLEASE BAN ME, MODS !!