In some of our home games, a couple of things have come up lately that I'd like to get a feel for what the group thinks.

1. Dealer puts out the flop hand is checked around, he burns the next card and when he goes to put out the turn, two cards are turned up. Complete accident, new dealer as the deal is being passed around in this particular game. It's obvious which card is turn and which would be the next burn prior to the river. What is done with the exposed card that would be the burn prior to the river?

2. Playing NL for simplification means, blinds are 100/200 player raises to 400 next player wants to raise to 600 and says it is the difference between the amounts of raise from last raise. I see this in limit, but in NL, I've always played the double the last bet for the raise. Am I wrong here. Kept my mouth closed as it wasn't worth the argument and host wasn't making a decision when I brought it up.

Thanks!!

hope this helps

The way I understand raises is that the amount of the reraise has to be at least the amount of the previous raise. So in your example the raise amount is $200. Therefore a raise to $600 would be totally legal, at least according to RROP the last time I read it

The hard rule is that too many cards = shuffle, regardless of if you think you know which one is which.

Sure, $600 is a legal raise, as is pretty much any number bigger than $600.

To be crystal clear, here's RRoP's word on the subject:

If you're peeling up two at once for the burn, it's very obvious which should be which. This happens every now and again in a casino. No reshuffle, play the turn, expose the burn, put it face-up on the deck, then burn it face-down for the river. This way the river is the same as it would have been anyway. But remember to put the exposed card back on top of the deck, otherwise you're likely to burn again. Plus, the point of the burn is to protect the top of the deck, so you need it up there anyway.

Home poker....

If you know for sure, keep the turn and use the burn as burn (see pfapfap).

Yup, you are wrong. The minimum raise is the same amount it was just raised. On the turn, had someone fired 400, then the min raise is to 800.

Unless I missed something else, the above is wrong, everybody else had it right: blind is 200, raise to 400....re-raise to 600. This is correct....two min-raises so far.

OP was wrong in thinking the raise needed to be a bet of double the prior bet. I agreed (Yup, you are wrong).

IF IF IF IF IF IF IF (missing emphasis from last part) we are talking about the non-blind, non-pre-flop action..... Then someone who bet 400 would need to be raised to at least 800. That's why some people remain confused about having to (at least) double bets when raising.

gotcha big blue....I just saw in your op that you said "had someone fired"...I did not see your what if there.

my bad.

As has already been pointed out several times - the STANDARD rule is a re-raise needs to be at least 2x the previous RAISE. However, I wouldn't say that you are completely wrong. There are some places that DO (for simplification and the mathematically challenged) use a "house rule" of 2x the previous BET. Just know that this is not standard.

RE: Bad Turns


Other than it happens to be the method that people seem to like, or that it's what some casinos may do, I see NO supporting information for "just put the right one up."

First, it's 100% clear that flops (and I know flops aren't turns) must be misdealt if they contain an extra card - even if it's absolutely clear which the extra card was - and it's also fairly clear what we're supposed to be doing with an extra turn, since Robert's describes what happens with a dealing error (of any kind) for the fourth boardcard: Put out the river as the turn and shuffle. That's not limited to premature action, despite it being used as the example in the "discussion" section of Roberts.


You can argue with this not being Robert's intent, but I'd love to see someone support their, "Oh, just fix it, we're pretty sure what card it was" logic with substance.

I see no support for your position. I see nothing in Robert's rules to suggest that the rule for a premature turn would apply here.... not sure why you think it would.

When dealing with a four card flop ... It it is not possible to know for certain which card was the fourth card. That is not the case with 2 card turns.

1. It's not the rule for a premature turn. It is the rule for a dealing error on the turn.
2. I'm not asking for support for my position -- I'm asking for ANY support for the "just put the card back" position, since that's what doesn't exist.

No, it is not. Current TDA procedure is to take the four cards, turn them over and shuffle the four cards. TD then picks one card to use as the burn.