Poker room manager decision

NOTE: Please vote for the hand decision as well as the river card decision.


OK, since there was a comment to post more questionable poker room manager calls, here's one I was involved in at the Taj about 2 years ago.

Note: I MAY have posted this before, but I'm saving the decisions and which player I am till after I get some replies. PLEASE don't look up my old posts.


After the flop, there are three people in the hand.


Early position, seat 2 checks. Middle position, seat 7, bets a few bucks. Late position, seat 10, calls. Seat 2 calls.

Seat 2 checks. Seat 7 bets. Seat 10 has no cards. The dealer turns to seat 2 for a decision. After a minute, seat 2 calls.

The dealer burns, and shows the river.

It is at THIS point that seat 10 says he hasn't acted on the turn action. He reveals that he was protecting his cards by covering them with his hands. He was protecting them so much that neither of the players in the hand, nor the dealer, saw that he had cards.

Normal rules for a mis-deal of this type is to pick up the river and burn card, and shuffle them into the stub.

Seat 2 argues that seat 10's hand should be dead beacuse:
1 - He was hiding the cards.
2 - He had ample time to speak up while seat 2 was deciding.
3 - He had time to speak up when the dealer scooped the chips from seat 7 and seat 2.
4 - He had time to speak up when the dealer burned a card.
5 - He had time to speak up before the dealer showed the river.


So what should the floor manager do?

Call the hand dead or alive? And reshuffle the river or not?

I say the hand is alive, and seat 10 can only call other action as he was not necessarily deliberately masking his cards, and could simply be not paying attention. I would however warn him that repeated offenses would be penalised and to pay attention.

As to the river, the burn stays out and the river card is reshuffled into the stub.

I cant really explain why (as I dont know the exact procedure without looking up the rules at work) but that would be the ruling I would give for the cards.

I believe the correct action is put the river card to one side and go back to seat ten for an action on the turn. The burn card stays burnt, and the river card is re-shuffled only. I think it would be harsh to penalise for this. He has no benefit for doing so.

Quote: DJTeddyBear

Normal rules for a mis-deal of this type is to pick up the river and burn card, and shuffle them into the stub.

Normal rules apply unless there was something so outrageous as to make the normal rules unjust.

It seems player 10 intentionally misplayed and kept silent but then later tried to take advantage of the situation he himself had created.

I vote the hand dead. The player had been paying enough attention to be protecting his cards he knew what was happeninng. Hiding cards is not allowed in any case, they must at the least be able to be seen by the eye at all times.


Secondly, but more important, a decision not to call is a decision to fold. Along with it being your responsibility to protect your cards you must protect your interest.

Floor manager should declare his hand dead and tell him if he wants a game he can not pay attention to he will get him a seat a "Casino War."

If the manager believes there was intent to deceive by player 10 then play should continue as if player 10 folded. If the manager believes that all the action after player 10's hand was supposed to act occurred too fast for player 10 to reasonably act (highly unlikely), then player 10 should be given a chance to call or raise, and the card should be replaced in deck and shuffled. My guess is that 99 times out of a hundred the first scenario is how I would rule. I like AZ's suggestion.

Although the dealer should have remembered that player 10 was still in the hand, it is the player's job to act in turn. Seat 10, right next to the dealer, is easy to skip.

If I were the floor person, I would declare his hand dead. I would return his bets, and warn him that his cards have to remain visible. The burn and river remain unchanged.

I've been looking at some of my old threads, and realized I never followed up on this one.

I was the player in seat 2.

The floor-person ruled that if I was unsure if it was my turn to act, I should have asked. I argued that I was not unsure, because the dealer was looking at me, prompting me to act.

I argued that the player was hiding his hand, intentionally causing confusion.

The floor gave him a warning, and ruled that the river needed to be shuffled back in. I'm not sure if the burn was also shuffled in, not that it matters.

The original river had given me a straight. I would have won. The new river gave me crap. The pot went to seat 7. Seat 10 lost either way.

I'm not an expert on the fine points of poker rules, but I think the rule about shuffling the river card back in was meant to address careless dealer errors, not deliberate attempts to mislead the dealer, which I think this was. I say if a player is deemed to be deliberately hiding his cards and he doesn't act when it is his turn, especially if another card has been played, then he is deemed to have folded.

It's been a long time since I played poker, and I know things have changed much in the intervening years. However, during the time I was playing, I did happen to believe that players had a responsibility, mainly to themselves, to make sure they knew exactly what other players were in the hand, and to make sure it was their turn to act. I know that the dealer is supposed to keep track of this as well, but I always felt like the it was in a player's best interest to be aware of what players were in the hand as well.

Obviously, it doesn't help for your situation as it occurred, but it's something I learned to be aware of, to make sure something like this didn't happen to me.

As for the river card being re-shuffled into the deck, I've seen this as pretty much standard operating procedure amongst card rooms, at least in the past.

Quote: konceptum

Obviously, it doesn't help for your situation as it occurred, but it's something I learned to be aware of, to make sure something like this didn't happen to me.

As for the river card being re-shuffled into the deck, I've seen this as pretty much standard operating procedure amongst card rooms, at least in the past.

Thanks. I've been far more observant since this incident - even if I'm not in the hand, I'm often watching.

I was hoping the ruling would go my way, obviously, but I expected that either seat 10's hand would be dead and the original river stands, or that the river get shuffled back in.

I've never seen a player's hand declared dead because they "missed" a bet. Rather that, as what happened to you, the river card was "rewound" back into the deck, player 10 was given the option to call or fold, and then a new river card dealt out. I have seen a person who did this several times asked to leave the card room. In my experience, if it happens one time, the events as happened to you unfold, with the person being given a warning. If it happens a second time, it becomes the room manager's option. If the player is a "good customer", they may be warned again. If not, they will be asked to leave.

Personally, I think that all the action should be rewound to that player's turn. In other words, your call is no longer valid either. You should be given your chips back, and then it is back to that person's turn. He can now choose to call, raise, or fold. After his action, you then have yours, again, with option to call, raise, or fold. Knowing that your card is being shuffled back into the deck, you may now choose to fold, depending on the probability of getting that card or another card that may help you. On the other hand, you could say something like, "So that card gets shuffled back in, right? So there's less of a chance of it coming back out? I RAISE!"

Unfortunately, most card rooms do subscribe to the tenant that actions are binding, and as you have already called the bet, you are assumed to still be in the hand at that level of action. I'm not sure I completely agree with it, but that's the default behavior.