Order of Hands Dealt Opinion

When playing a carnival game like UTH, 3CP, Crazy 4 Card or the like, do you prefer the dealer’s hand being dealt first, followed by the players’ hands, or last, after the players’ hands are dealt? If you have a preference, why?

Quote: mrsuit31

When playing a carnival game like UTH, 3CP, Crazy 4 Card or the like, do you prefer the dealer’s hand being dealt first, followed by the players’ hands, or last, after the players’ hands are dealt? If you have a preference, why?

I believe the dealer is more likely to flash his bottom card when dealing himself last , so I’ll vote for that

Letting the dealer have the last hand instead of the first removes even the illusion that the shuffler is rigged in the dealer's favor.

Quote: mrsuit31

When playing a carnival game like UTH, 3CP, Crazy 4 Card or the like, do you prefer the dealer’s hand being dealt first, followed by the players’ hands, or last, after the players’ hands are dealt? If you have a preference, why?

Dealers hand last when it's a game where players are h2h with the dealer. I want the variance. Dealers hand first, it allows the thought, however paranoid, that the results are pre-determined. Last, unless it's a full table, the shuffler doesn't "know" which hand will go to the dealer.

Games Like DWdraw or MS, you're playing a paytable, so it's less important/not important. However, since dealers rotate games, internal consistency in the house will prevent errors where the dealer forgets themselves and voids the hand - should be the same on all tables.

if you look closely under neath the title "player position transition chart"

i have a map of what the positions change into when a player is added (or removed)

notice how when the dealer is dealt last, they always remain on a "ratio" of one half,

yet in everyone elses hands (there are exceptions), they recieve a varying "ratio" of positions

Quote: mrsuit31

When playing a carnival game like UTH, 3CP, Crazy 4 Card or the like, do you prefer the dealer’s hand being dealt first, followed by the players’ hands, or last, after the players’ hands are dealt? If you have a preference, why?

I would prefer that the deal be determined by a random electronic system or by a 'die' like they do in PGP.

Yesterday I was playing 4CP and there was an open seat on my left and on my right. I was winning until a new player entered and took the seat to my right. He immediately started winning and I was losing. I thought 'if this player sat to my left, I would be winning and he would be losing'.

Since the cards are dealt from position 1 to position 6 and the dealer being dealt last, the winning and losing positions never seemed to change. I feel that if the cards were dealt by a random selection method (like they do in PGP) the game would be more fair.

After losing or not qualifying for 8 hands in a row, I decided it was time to leave.

I like The Chinese way: Use RNG (Dice), Like they do in Pi-gow or Pi-gow Poker, but that will slow the game down.
Otherwise, I like Dealer getting their hand last.

I always thought the procedure manual covered that sort of thing. usually surveillance personnel want to see standardization, not optional motions by dealers. Immokalee requires BJ dealer's inactive hand to be flat on felt, not edge of palm on felt.

I especially second the old "dice" way of determining hands, because it truly is random. It may just be me, but I despise sitting at a table where I am not the first hand dealt and have someone sit down changing the order of the hands and the guy next to me gets a big bonus hand because of the extra player that would have been mine. I realize it could have just the opposite as well, but this way I dont have to think about it.

Not only that, but the dice randomizer takes out the overly susicious BS with these new hand setters