Is this a misdeal?

Charity game at the local VFW. Single deck, dealt face down, shuffle after every round, BJ pays 6-5. The dealer accidentally flips over a player's card, revealing a seven, while continuing to deal to the rest of the table. He complains and wants a new card. The dealer calls the supervisor over and agrees to give him a new card, but he doesn't want any card; he wants the dealer to slide his neighbor's card over to third base, and the dealer to slide their cards to the left. The player at third base complains, wanting to keep his twenty rather than take the dealer's eight. Third base and the guy who caught the miscard get into an argument, and the supervisor bans both of them from the table for twenty minutes.
The supervisor declared the hand dead and replaced the dealer, who was pretty angry and needed a break.
I don't recall a similar situation in a real casino. How would it have been handled? Should the exposed card have been replaced? My thoughts are no.

I had one hand where the dealer either didn't deal a card when I indicated I wanted one of vice versa. Other players saw my indication and backed me up. After a few minutes with higher ups talking to the dealer, I got paid for the hand. They didn't move cards around.

There is a lot going on there. I prefer not to dissect it all.

It is important to remember that the game is player vs dealer, and the dealer does not have free choice in actions. An exposed card cannot hurt the player.

Moving a dealt card from one hand to another is absolutely inappropriate.
As a courtesy, I think it would be reasonable to allow the player to inspect their hand as dealt, and then allow them to take a push on the wager and resign from the hand, if they choose.

Quote: billryan

Charity game at the local VFW. Single deck, dealt face down, shuffle after every round, BJ pays 6-5. The dealer accidentally flips over a player's card, revealing a seven, while continuing to deal to the rest of the table. He complains and wants a new card. The dealer calls the supervisor over and agrees to give him a new card, but he doesn't want any card; he wants the dealer to slide his neighbor's card over to third base, and the dealer to slide their cards to the left. The player at third base complains, wanting to keep his twenty rather than take the dealer's eight. Third base and the guy who caught the miscard get into an argument, and the supervisor bans both of them from the table for twenty minutes.
The supervisor declared the hand dead and replaced the dealer, who was pretty angry and needed a break.
I don't recall a similar situation in a real casino. How would it have been handled? Should the exposed card have been replaced? My thoughts are no.
link to original post

It should not be a misdeal. It doesn’t hurt the player having a card exposed. The floor making everyone slide a card over didn’t know what he was doing.

Quote: Hunterhill

Quote: billryan

Charity game at the local VFW. Single deck, dealt face down, shuffle after every round, BJ pays 6-5. The dealer accidentally flips over a player's card, revealing a seven, while continuing to deal to the rest of the table. He complains and wants a new card. The dealer calls the supervisor over and agrees to give him a new card, but he doesn't want any card; he wants the dealer to slide his neighbor's card over to third base, and the dealer to slide their cards to the left. The player at third base complains, wanting to keep his twenty rather than take the dealer's eight. Third base and the guy who caught the miscard get into an argument, and the supervisor bans both of them from the table for twenty minutes.
The supervisor declared the hand dead and replaced the dealer, who was pretty angry and needed a break.
I don't recall a similar situation in a real casino. How would it have been handled? Should the exposed card have been replaced? My thoughts are no.
link to original post

It should not be a misdeal. It doesn’t hurt the player having a card exposed. The floor making everyone slide a card over didn’t know what he was doing.
link to original post

To clarify, the supervisor didn't make a decision. The player with the exposed card argued for sliding the cards. The so-called supervisor was a volunteer, as was the dealer, as far as I know. He certainly didn't know how to handle the situation.

Who cares if the card was face up or not? (Barring other issues.) Everybody got their appropriate card, so it's not even like he was skipped and demanding cards be backed up so it doesn't mess with 'the flow'.

Moving cards, especially after they're exposed, is out of the question.

Which kind of reminds me of something I ran into the other day: Halfway through a hand, the CSM breaks down. Half the table have their hands resolved; half of them can't hit. The dealer has both of their cards already (exposed card was an 8), though it's unknown if they'll have to hit, and how it'll resolve. What's the appropriate response? (Actual response: People were given the option to stand where they were, or withdraw their wager. Dealer opened to an 18. Hands were resolved accordingly.)