New procedure for premature turn cards (1 Viewer)

[Nine_high]

RRoP Section 5 Rule 8 said:
A dealing error for the fourth boardcard 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.

I use this method, and I don't see myself changing any time soon.

I don't think a premature turn card "deserves" two chances to come off, and certainly not at the expense of the original river card.

I wouldn't hate burning and placing the original river facedown, shuffling the premature turn back in and turning again. But that's messy, has it's own issues, and also I've never seen it done or prescribed. I don't do this.

 

[glynn]

That's fine, but just know that the poker world has moved on from that mindset. It will be increasingly surprising to your guests if they are not reminded before the point of conflict.

Speaking from personal experience, the vast majority of players don't know the old procedure anyway, and so it always required an explanation, whereas they seem to intuitively understand the new procedure.

So the transition is easy and worth additional consideration imo.

 

[Nine_high]

That's fine, but just know that the poker world has moved on from that mindset. It will be increasingly surprising to your guests if they are not reminded before the point of conflict.

I don't know if the poker world has moved on. Maybe TDA changed their rule a couple months ago but in my cash games, aside from a couple house rules we stick to RROP.

Speaking from personal experience, the vast majority of players don't know the old procedure anyway, and so it always required an explanation, whereas they seem to intuitively understand the new procedure.

In my experience, my players look to the house (me) to make rulings. The first time a turn got flipped prematurely, they all started arguing about misdeals and what not. I made the ruling, and everyone nodded and went along. It makes sense and is fair. They understood and no one fought it or complained. Maybe they didn't get it and we're just going along because house rules. Oh well.

So the transition is easy and worth additional consideration imo.

Changing it would probably cause more confusion now that we do it this way. Ymmv.

Cheers!

 

[JustinInMN]

this is a new procedure where I am at, just curious if its been in effect elsewhere for a while? or is this relatively new?

I think it was just in the past few years TDA went this way, so not surprised that casinos are following.

It feels like reshuffling it all has a more frustrating effect, I don't know why.

It does but it's important because it does ensure all cards that were in the stub before the mistake are in the stub after the mistake. This is important because the turn card should have been unknown, and the turn card that showed has the same odds of appearing as any of the unknown cards.

I host games and I got to say, I don't really know what to do in the event that a card is shown prematurely. It happened before and what we'd do is consider it a second burn.

Well hopefully this thread helped. But I would say your resolution comes short because it doesn't restore the stub.