Opinions on exposed Card

pokerkingsni

I know there are a couple of different House Rules on an exposed card (by the dealer) in the game. Something i am thinking of introducing into my weekly game is this:

If a card is exposed accidently during a deal by the dealer, the card is placed back in deck, the deck is shuffled, and the deal continues.

The two reasons for doing this are that if a misdeal is called, players with 2 cards always look, and someone always seems to have aces or kings! Or if the card is used as the first burn card and sits face up, it can very often affect the current hand. These are the 2 complaints i got from my players.

Just wanted to know any opinions on putting the exposed card back in the deck, shuffling it and continuing with the deal.

bohsman

First round of the deal its a misdeal, second round you give the player the 3rd card from the bottom of the deck and muck theexposed card, it does not become the burn card.

Grimebox

the deck should be kept in such a way that the flop, turn and river should still be in the correct order that they would have come out. This is the most important thing when continuing with a deal

It depends also on which card is exposed. If say the turn card is exposed somehow before it should, the 3rd burn is put down and the river is put face down. This ensures that the river is the same card it always was going to be (for the purists). The turn card is reshuffled into the deck and new random one is picked out. It really depends which card is exposed and at what time.

A misdeal should never be "called". It is up to the dealer to know when it is and when it isnt, even im not sure sometimes to be honest. Just act confident in your decision and you should get away with it If it is definetly a misdeal and a player has AA, too bad move on.

pokerkingsni

But the reason i dont wanna muck the exposed card is because it can have an effect on the rest of the hand. Say the exposed card is an ace?

Grimebox

it really dosent matter what the exposed card is. What i always do is briefly put the exposed card face up in the middle of the table and say something like "Ace of clubs exposed" loudly so everyone knows and then muck it. From then on its up to the players to remember that extra info

bohsman

The deck is set, reshuffling the deck means the flop turn and river will be different majorly affecting the rest of the hand.

pokerkingsni

Grimebox wrote: »

the deck should be kept in such a way that the flop, turn and river should still be in the correct order that they would have come out. This is the most important thing when continuing with a deal

It depends also on which card is exposed. If say the turn card is exposed somehow before it should, the 3rd burn is put down and the river is put face down. This ensures that the river is the same card it always was going to be (for the purists). The turn card is reshuffled into the deck and new random one is picked out. It really depends which card is exposed and at what time.

A misdeal should never be "called". It is up to the dealer to know when it is and when it isnt, even im not sure sometimes to be honest. Just act confident in your decision and you should get away with it If it is definetly a misdeal and a player has AA, too bad move on.

Surely if the deck is to be kept in the same order you cant put the turn card back in and shuffle?

Mellor

how is it in the same order if you shuffle?
The key is to keep the deck as close as posible to what was intended.
If the card exposed was inportant then tough.
This outweighed by the times where the card was unimportant, but the new card is. It all cancels out.

pokerkingsni

pokerkingsni wrote: »

Surely if the deck is to be kept in the same order you cant put the turn card back in and shuffle?

Oh yeah, i see now. Takes me a while to catch on!

Grimebox

pokerkingsni wrote: »

Surely if the deck is to be kept in the same order you cant put the turn card back in and shuffle?

Thats why the river is to be taken out first, so it will be the card it was meant to be. Once thats done the rest of the deck is not really needed so you can shuffle away. The turn has to be a random card if somebody has already seen it. I think im explaining this badly

pokerkingsni

Grimebox wrote: »

Thats why the river is to be taken out first, so it will be the card it was meant to be. Once thats done the rest of the deck is not really needed so you can shuffle away. The turn has to be a random card if somebody has already seen it. I think im explaining this badly

You explained ok mate, i just needed to read it twice. I was looking for a way to put the exposed card back into the deck and continue the hand with noone knowing what the exposed card was.

But there is no way to do this, so my players will have to suck it up and get on with it!!:)

semibluff

interested to hear a few more opinions on this.

scenario : turn card shown before last guy has chance to act - so it has to be put in and re-shuffled with the burn card (from the turn only). This is the ruling, end of IMO. i wouldnt have thought that the current river card and its equivalent burn also has to be taken out>??
Once the exposed turn card is re-shuffled into the deck, the deck remains random - which is the main purpose.

agree with oscar re- pre flop.

pokerkingsni

semibluff wrote: »

interested to hear a few more opinions on this.

scenario : turn card shown before last guy has chance to act - so it has to be put in and re-shuffled with the burn card (from the turn only). This is the ruling, end of IMO. i wouldnt have thought that the current river card and its equivalent burn also has to be taken out>??
Once the exposed turn card is re-shuffled into the deck, the deck remains random - which is the main purpose.

agree with oscar re- pre flop.

So if the turn is exposed early it is put back in the deck with out burning and turning the river, then the turn and river with burn cards are dealt from the re-shuffled deck?

semibluff

thats my understanding of it, as it is still random on the next card to come out - but i look forward to other opinions

pokerkingsni

That's what i did the one and only time it happened in my tourney. It seemed the only thing to do. Players all agreed.

Just out of interest, if a player exposes his/her card during the deal, is it correct to say they play the rest of the hand with that card face up and cannot act aggressively?

5starpool

Donal, the correct ruling on an exposed turn card before action is completed is explained above. You deal the river burn card, and place the river card face down on the table, then shuffle the early turn card back in with the unused cards (no the muck and 3 burn cards are not shuffled back in). This means that the same card has a chance of coming back out again, but it does not affect the river card that would have came. This is the standard ruling.

5starpool

pokerkingsni wrote: »

That's what i did the one and only time it happened in my tourney. It seemed the only thing to do. Players all agreed.

Just out of interest, if a player exposes his/her card during the deal, is it correct to say they play the rest of the hand with that card face up and cannot act aggressively?

No, if a player accidentally exposes a card during deal (hits their hand or some such), they keep the card, but they can still bet and raise as normal. If they exposed their hand deliberately after the deal, either to get information or thinking that everyone had folded this is a different situation.

semibluff

that a given everywhere? ok , nice to know - thanks dom

5starpool

semibluff wrote: »

that a given everywhere? ok , nice to know - thanks dom

As far as I know that is the only correct ruling there, but I'm sure Oscar or some others can add their tuppence'orth.

Goodluck2me

5starpool wrote: »

As far as I know that is the only correct ruling there, .

.

Vascular15

tbh the correct ruling is that if there is a card exposed on the first round its a misdeal, no shuffling it back into the deck, not the 1st burnt card.

If a card is exposed after the flop, like the turn coming out before a player has a chance to act, the turn card and the card burned before the turn are shuffled back into the deck

your not supposed to take a card 3rd from the bottom or take out the river card

semibluff

pre flop the ruling is, if a card is exposed in the first round of dealing, ie the first card everyone receives then its a misdeal and cards are retrieved and dealt again.
if its during the second round pre flop, ie the second card everyone is getting then it is the third last card in the deck is given in replacement of the exposed card.

As regards after the flop, this is clearly answered in 5Starpools post

5starpool

Vascular15 wrote: »

tbh the correct ruling is that if there is a card exposed on the first round its a misdeal, no shuffling it back into the deck, not the 1st burnt card.

If a card is exposed after the flop, like the turn coming out before a player has a chance to act, the turn card and the card burned before the turn are shuffled back into the deck

your not supposed to take a card 3rd from the bottom or take out the river card

The burn card for the turn is not reshuffled into the deck as this should not have a chance to come out on the turn.

As said, if a card is exposed by the dealer or chips (not the players fault) on the first round, it is a misdeal, if on the second round the 3rd from the bottom is the best rule I tihnk, but first burn and replace exposed card on top of the deck is the only other viable option. If 2 cards are exposed during second round of deal then it is automatically a misdeal

Ace2007

Dom - Do you remember the nite (think it was EOM) when max made an absolute mess of this.

ozpoker

Lol at all the machinations we have to put up with to replace one random card with another due to the "preordained" order of the deck.

-Oz-

Ace2007

one quick question for dearlers - why is it the third from the bottom as oppose to being the bottom one???

5starpool

3rd card is probably due to the ease which someone may be able to engineer a specific card at the bottom of the deck, thus increasing collusion possibilities.

Ya, I remember when max made a mess of that. He though he knew, but effed it up badly.

semibluff

ozpoker wrote: »

Lol at all the machinations we have to put up with to replace one random card with another due to the "preordained" order of the deck.

-Oz-

agreed

corkie123

pokerkingsni wrote: »

I know there are a couple of different House Rules on an exposed card (by the dealer) in the game. Something i am thinking of introducing into my weekly game is this:

If a card is exposed accidently during a deal by the dealer, the card is placed back in deck, the deck is shuffled, and the deal continues.

The two reasons for doing this are that if a misdeal is called, players with 2 cards always look, and someone always seems to have aces or kings! Or if the card is used as the first burn card and sits face up, it can very often affect the current hand. These are the 2 complaints i got from my players.

Just wanted to know any opinions on putting the exposed card back in the deck, shuffling it and continuing with the deal.

1 if a card is exposed on the deal on first round then the deal is redone

2 if a card is exposed on the second round then the dealer carrys on and deal the first burned card to that person and then use the exposed card as the burned card after showing the table the card .

3 if 2 or more cards are exposed than the deal is redone

Vascular15

the 3rd from the bottom thing should never be used, it is not a proper rule

1st round of dealing is anytime when dealing the players the hole cards, if they are exposed it should be a misdeal, no 1st burn card

semibluff

Vascular nobody has ever claimed its anything but a misdeal on the first round of dealing. do you just type without readin previous posts?

that SILLY third from the bottom is used in atleast 2 of the four main casinos in ireland aswell at most of the festivals

Vascular15

it seems that ppl have different opinions on wat the 1st round actually is??

3rd from the bottom, is it used in other places besides Ireland?

FungiWalsh

The only time I've seen it happen post-flop, personally, was in a cash game in the Macau. The turn was dealt accidentally before betting was completed on the flop. The ruling at the time was that the river, as it would have been, was dealt face down, and the exposed turn card was shuffled back into the deck, and a new one was dealt.

D.C.C

Hi Guys,
Some interesting quuestions and answers...There are 2 standard rulings or house rules i've used.It is a misdeal on the first round if a card is exposed or in some clubs if the first 2 cards ie.the small and big blind are exposed its a misdeal.IMO the first ruling is the fairest.Also 2 ruling what to do with the exposed card???In Ireland the general rule is that its replaced with the 3rd card from the bottom.In general other places around the world use the the 1st burn card to replace the exposed card.Both with efficent dealers are fine!

You'll just have to use which ever rule in your opinon is fairest for the game and when you have reasons to back up your ruling in general all the players will agree with you.

Goodluck2me

Jps rules Aka Roberts rules of poker say that its only a misdeal if its the very first CARD turned over.

a147pro

corkie123 wrote: »

1 if a card is exposed on the deal on first round then the deal is redone

2 if a card is exposed on the second round then the dealer carrys on and deal the first burned card to that person and then use the exposed card as the burned card after showing the table the card .

3 if 2 or more cards are exposed than the deal is redone

Everyone seems to agree this is the rule, but I think its pure cat.

Can anyone explain why if its the first round you start again and the second you don't? This is completely illogical.

If a card is exposed pre anyone taking action I think the only rule should be re deal. Its a nonsense playing on when everyone knows one card is gone, it influences your decisions. Invaraiably someone knows they've less chance of making a pair or their straight, and the card is a feature on the board causing an action that wouldn't ordinarily occur. I can't understand why people insist on tring to continue the hand, it takes 30 secs to redeal.

If you got dealt a monster, chances are the rule you've used to deal with the situation means you shouldn't have gotten that second card anyway. And if that isn't why you got it, tough. Whats the difference between losing aces to a bum deal and a dealer mucking them by accident, or the guy next to you throwing them in in error, or in the bigger picture, getting dogged by someone repushing with J7, or no-one playing the hand when you're in the BB. Its all variance.

Whenever I see this happen in a club I try and insist on a redeal, possibly by fecking my cards in face up (prob a little unfair). There are always a few hacks who insist no, take the third card from the bottom of the deck etc. Their attachment is to the fact that "thats the rule", and often that they are in the privileged position of knowing that thats the rule, not that it is a good rule. I think this rule has lasted more from force of precedence than because it actually represents a good response to the situation.

Incidently, don't bother looking at your holding, and certainly don't let what you see influence what you say should happen (unless its AA, whereupon insist on calling a ruling, start gettting thick with the guy who's insisting on the hand being played, then limp and induce antagonistic raise

Am I alone in this rant?

ozpoker

goodluck2me wrote: »

Jps rules Aka Roberts rules of poker say that its only a misdeal if its the very first CARD turned over.

This is the standard in the US, although I don't know the rational. Generally, the standard rules attempt to keep maximum efficiency while ensuring a secure game. It doesn't seem like much in isolation, but I'd estimate the difference in these two interpretations (misdeal on first card vs first round) is probably worth a few thousand euro in drop to a card room in a year.

-Oz-

pokerkingsni

a147pro wrote: »

Everyone seems to agree this is the rule, but I think its pure cat.

Can anyone explain why if its the first round you start again and the second you don't? This is completely illogical.

If a card is exposed pre anyone taking action I think the only rule should be re deal. Its a nonsense playing on when everyone knows one card is gone, it influences your decisions. Invaraiably someone knows they've less chance of making a pair or their straight, and the card is a feature on the board causing an action that wouldn't ordinarily occur. I can't understand why people insist on tring to continue the hand, it takes 30 secs to redeal.

If you got dealt a monster, chances are the rule you've used to deal with the situation means you shouldn't have gotten that second card anyway. And if that isn't why you got it, tough. Whats the difference between losing aces to a bum deal and a dealer mucking them by accident, or the guy next to you throwing them in in error, or in the bigger picture, getting dogged by someone repushing with J7, or no-one playing the hand when you're in the BB. Its all variance.

Whenever I see this happen in a club I try and insist on a redeal, possibly by fecking my cards in face up (prob a little unfair). There are always a few hacks who insist no, take the third card from the bottom of the deck etc. Their attachment is to the fact that "thats the rule", and often that they are in the privileged position of knowing that thats the rule, not that it is a good rule. I think this rule has lasted more from force of precedence than because it actually represents a good response to the situation.

Incidently, don't bother looking at your holding, and certainly don't let what you see influence what you say should happen (unless its AA, whereupon insist on calling a ruling, start gettting thick with the guy who's insisting on the hand being played, then limp and induce antagonistic raise

Am I alone in this rant?

See this is why i posted this question. I didn't want to know the ruling, i already know the ruling. So i'm with you in the rant. My point was that if a card is exposed during the deal, is there not a way of getting that card back into the deck and continuing the deal? Apparently not. So if a card is exposed during the deal the hand shouldn't continue with the entire table knowing one of the cards isn't a part of the hand. I think that if a card is exposed during a deal, no matter what round, it should be a re-deal. I'd like to see the rule changed.

tricky D

a147pro wrote: »

Everyone seems to agree this is the rule, but I think its pure cat.

Can anyone explain why if its the first round you start again and the second you don't? This is completely illogical.

If a card is exposed pre anyone taking action I think the only rule should be re deal. Its a nonsense playing on when everyone knows one card is gone, it influences your decisions. Invaraiably someone knows they've less chance of making a pair or their straight, and the card is a feature on the board causing an action that wouldn't ordinarily occur. I can't
understand why people insist on tring to continue the hand, it takes 30 secs to redeal.

Not if you think about it. Firstly, on the first round, no one can get really annoyed as they don't quite have a hand yet with only one card. Also, time. Doing it on the first round wastes less time for both the card room and players. Players do get more impatient than you suggest, it's 30 *more* seconds and wrt to -OZ-'s point, a card room, like any business, is entitled to lessen its loses from inefficencies like redealing misdeals in this case.

a147pro wrote: »

If you got dealt a monster, chances are the rule you've used to deal with the situation means you shouldn't have gotten that second card anyway.

No, the whole point is that you always get the cards you should have gotten except for the player whose card is exposed. The deck is set, its order has been predetermined and must be preserved as well as possible. This is a cardinal principle in live poker. This is despite the statistics theory about the cards being random and unknown. (We've had this argument before - theory does not apply - I lost)

a147pro wrote: »

And if that isn't why you got it, tough.

Why? Don't the innocent deserve some protection from the rules. Why should I lose out on AA when it's not my mistake.

a147pro wrote: »

Whats the difference between losing aces to a bum deal and a dealer mucking them by accident, or the guy next to you throwing them in in error, or in the bigger picture, getting dogged by someone repushing with J7, or no-one playing the hand when you're in the BB. Its all variance.

The differences are big. Losing AA to a bum deal is not the player's fault, not protecting your hand and subsequently it getting mucked is considered your own fault. Again why should the innocent be penalised?

a147pro wrote: »

Whenever I see this happen in a club I try and insist on a redeal, possibly by fecking my cards in face up (prob a little unfair).

Don't try that when I'm TD, it won't work. You will likely get a warning, the hand will proceed, your cards will be treated as exposed and declared, as will anybody else's who you have induced to expose (defo warning), they might also still be live and you will only have the option to fold or call bets.

a147pro wrote: »

There are always a few hacks who insist no, take the third card from the bottom of the deck etc. Their attachment is to the fact that "thats the rule", and often that they are in the privileged position of knowing that thats the rule, not that it is a good rule. I think this rule has lasted more from force of precedence than because it actually represents a good response to the situation.

No, there is thinking behind the 3rd card from bottom, it is not going to affect the 'setness' of the deck which is absolute in live play and the burn card remains in place fulfilling its purpose.

a147pro wrote: »

Incidently, don't bother looking at your holding, and certainly don't let what you see influence what you say should happen (unless its AA, whereupon insist on calling a ruling, start gettting thick with the guy who's insisting on the hand being played, then limp and induce antagonistic raise

We know a few players who behave like that, we generally dislike them. Your call...

Mistakes get made and the rules are designed to minimise the damage, but you can't get perfect solutions in these sorts of imperfect situations. You might consider giving the rule makers and enforcers a bit more credit, some of us do actually think long and hard about these matters. Also, Hold'em rules aren't so complicated, try some stud variants.

corkie123

having played in a lot of countrys i have only come across this third card from bottom in ireland and this i think comes from the pub culture games here.the only way i seen it been done in wsop ,ept ,aussie millons. is the burned card is used as i stated early on .but as i said before about rules ask before u play in tourie and if u dont like them or feel there wrong dont play .

pokerkingsni if u know wat the rule is why post here so to find out what ?the rants of many people who play all over ireland to different rules .pub , clubs , home games ? and the many guys who in the last few years who set themself up in the poker club scene and now are quoting there own rules as the one and only .

i think myself all the clubs should get together and fix one and all the rules we will play with then they wont be this 3rd from bottom in some or the burned card in others .


and as a interest just for me what do u think the right rule is m8 and why ?:D:D:D

bohsman

pokerkingsni wrote: »

I think that if a card is exposed during a deal, no matter what round, it should be a re-deal. I'd like to see the rule changed.

ffs, 72o on the bb again, whoops that 2 just hit my hand and flipped over, MISDEAL!!!

bohsman

corkie123 wrote: »

having played in a lot of countrys i have only come across this third card from bottom in ireland and this i think comes from the pub culture games here.the only way i seen it been done in wsop ,ept ,aussie millons. is the burned card is used as i stated early on .but as i said before about rules ask before u play in tourie and if u dont like them or feel there wrong dont play .

Fairly sure the 3rd from bottom is a Luke Ivory rule. The problem with giving the burn card is that it negates the use of a burn card in the first place, the back of the first flop card is exposed.

a147pro

Tricky D

I agree with pretty much all your saying, but I think once the card is exposed by dealer error theres less, i don't know, "mystery" in the deck and ye should just start again. The hand is compromised. Didn't realise the 3 from the bottom thing was designed to maintain the order though.

As an aside I think calling a ruling in order to get some agro guy come over the top is good poker!

pokerkingsni

bohsman wrote: »

ffs, 72o on the bb again, whoops that 2 just hit my hand and flipped over, MISDEAL!!!

I'm talking about dealers exposing the card in a deal, not players.

bohsman

It was definitely the dealers fault, I didnt touch the card, honestly, ruling.

tricky D

The wind could also have blown it over of you're near the door...

pokerkingsni

Players could still say that without a misdeal? Why would they suddenly start doing that if the rule changed?

pokerkingsni

And the TDA says exposure of one of the first two cards dealt is a misdeal.