Exposed Turn Card Ruling

[JustASpectator]

In a heads up pot (flop of Q T 8), it was checked to me (w /A5o) and I bet out. While my opponent was considering her play, the player who was the dealer that hand burned and laid down the turn card (7). It was ruled that the 7 would be dead, and the next card would be the turn card. My opponent called my bet. The "second" turn card was an Ace. My opponent checked, I bet out, and opponent moved all-in. After thinking about it for a while and trying to talk myself into folding, I called, believing (ok...hoping) my opponent had KQ or QJ. She had KQ. The river was a 5, giving me Aces up, and she was eliminated. After the tournament was over, she said it should have been a misdeal. I know a misdeal (do-over) couldn't be the correct ruling. But was the ruling that was made correct? Or should there have been another "burn and turn" instead of just a "turn"?

Thanks in advance for your responses!

[smoore]

it's in robert's rules (print them out from homepokertourney.com for next time) but here it is:

Leave the burn burnt, put the turn back in the stub and shuffle the stub (riffle, riffle, strip, riffle, cut). Play continues. It sure as hell wasn't a misdeal and you guys handled it OK for not knowing the rule.

edit: oh, sorry. DO NOT burn another card before the "new" turn.

[tubalkain]

[ QUOTE ]
In a heads up pot (flop of Q T 8), it was checked to me (w /A5o) and I bet out. While my opponent was considering her play, the player who was the dealer that hand burned and laid down the turn card (7). It was ruled that the 7 would be dead, and the next card would be the turn card. My opponent called my bet. The "second" turn card was an Ace. My opponent checked, I bet out, and opponent moved all-in. After thinking about it for a while and trying to talk myself into folding, I called, believing (ok...hoping) my opponent had KQ or QJ. She had KQ. The river was a 5, giving me Aces up, and she was eliminated. After the tournament was over, she said it should have been a misdeal. I know a misdeal (do-over) couldn't be the correct ruling. But was the ruling that was made correct? Or should there have been another "burn and turn" instead of just a "turn"?

Thanks in advance for your responses!

[/ QUOTE ]

Shuffle the burn and turn back into the stub, then reburn and return.

[neotope]

[ QUOTE ]
But was the ruling that was made correct? Or should there have been another "burn and turn" instead of just a "turn"?


[/ QUOTE ]

I was playing at Greektown this weekend and a similiar situation came up. It was headsup on the turn and I bet out $10, the other player raised to $20 and then I made it $30. The dealer did a quick burn and turn before the other player had a chance to call the bet.

The floor was called over and I believe he made the proper ruling. He ruled that the river card would be reshuffled into the stack of remaining cards and then another card was dealt.

I still won the hand as the river was a rag both times /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[BreakEven]

Burn card is not re-shuffled back into the stub. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In a heads up pot (flop of Q T 8), it was checked to me (w /A5o) and I bet out. While my opponent was considering her play, the player who was the dealer that hand burned and laid down the turn card (7). It was ruled that the 7 would be dead, and the next card would be the turn card. My opponent called my bet. The "second" turn card was an Ace. My opponent checked, I bet out, and opponent moved all-in. After thinking about it for a while and trying to talk myself into folding, I called, believing (ok...hoping) my opponent had KQ or QJ. She had KQ. The river was a 5, giving me Aces up, and she was eliminated. After the tournament was over, she said it should have been a misdeal. I know a misdeal (do-over) couldn't be the correct ruling. But was the ruling that was made correct? Or should there have been another "burn and turn" instead of just a "turn"?

Thanks in advance for your responses!

[/ QUOTE ]

Shuffle the burn and turn back into the stub, then reburn and return.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea, this is totally wrong, the burn stays burnt, the misplaced turn card is shuffled back in with the remainder of the deck and a new turn card placed (no burn before placing).

[jalsing]

[ QUOTE ]
it's in robert's rules (print them out from homepokertourney.com for next time) but here it is:

Leave the burn burnt, put the turn back in the stub and shuffle the stub (riffle, riffle, strip, riffle, cut). Play continues. It sure as hell wasn't a misdeal and you guys handled it OK for not knowing the rule.

edit: oh, sorry. DO NOT burn another card before the "new" turn.

[/ QUOTE ]

well, if we're quoting robert's rules, let's quote robert's rules:

[ QUOTE ]
6. If the dealer turns the fourth card on the board before the betting round is complete, the card is taken out of play for that round, even if subsequent players elect to fold. Nobody has an option of accepting or rejecting the card. The betting is then completed. The error is rectified in a manner to least influence the identity of the boardcards that would have been used without the error. The dealer burns and deals what would have been the fifth card in the fourth card’s place. After this round of betting, the dealer reshuffles the deck, including the card that was taken out of play, but not including the burncards or discards. The dealer then cuts the deck and deals the final card without burning a card. If the fifth card is turned up prematurely, the deck is reshuffled and dealt in the same manner. [See "Section 16 – Explanations," discussion #2, for more information on this rule.]

[/ QUOTE ]

[Crooked Paul]

Can anyone explain why, according to this rule, a new turn card is dealt BEFORE the misdealt card is shuffled back into the stub and then the river is dealt? Seems more intuitive to do the reshuffling right away, then redeal the turn, then deal the river as normal. Why is this not the rule?


Edit: I notice the rule says "...what would have been the fifth board card is dealt in the fourth card's place..." Perhaps this explains the rule? Although, if the deck was shuffled randomly to begin with, I don't see why you would prefer that "what would have been the river" still hits the board. I mean, if it's random before, and you reshuffle before dealing the turn, it's still equally random. Still confused...


Crooked

[Eric H]

If you reshuffle the stub right away, then both the turn and the river card will (probably) be wrong. If you place a new turn card before the stub is shuffled, then you only have one card in flop that should not (maybe, as it could reappear) be there.

[smoore]

Oh, my fault. I thought robert's rules had a sane way to handle the situation. That's one of those "dumbass robert!" overly complicated solutions, IMO. But, whatever's clever in your game.

And by the way, d00d... I didn't quote shite, I made a mistake in my refrences. If you're going to try to slam me, get your nomenclature right.

[smoore]

I can't explain the rule, Crooked Paul, but I can say that sometimes Bob Cafffione likes to take a simple solution and make it too complex.

[FoxwoodsFiend]

I've seen two ways of handling this:
one: the card gets shuffled back in the deck and the top card is dealt as the turn (as the burn has already happened)
two: the card is left exposed, they burn and expose the card that would have been the river and use that as the turn, and then shuffle the exposed card back in the deck and deal the top card as the river (again, with no burn).

[FoxwoodsFiend]

You are correct, we shouldn't give a crap whether the card that would've been the river ends up on the board...it's all random anyway, and I don't understand why we should care about the current order...if it weren't a pain in the ass, i'd have no problem with a shuffle between each street.

[smoore]

[ QUOTE ]
..if it weren't a pain in the ass, i'd have no problem with a shuffle between each street.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahaha, that's great. I'll have to do that at my home game sometime. Someone will bitch and we can have a good drunken discussion of destiny vs. fate.