Rulings Question - MTT Community

Walkinwoods · 06-03-2012, 07:44 PM

Hope this is concise and makes sense!! I'm unsure of what the proper rule should be!!! I would also like your opinion on whether the blame should go on the dealer, UTG player (seat 7 for not asking for action) , seat 2 (as a complete angle shoot) or the TD,

Local card room tournament.

UTG (seat 7) limps , seat 9 limps, seat 2 shoves all in, UTG calls (leaving 2 big blinds in their stack).

Flop comes and dealer DOES NOT ask for action from players, and burns and puts up the turn. Seat 2 exclaims , "that should be a burn , the card is dead, you didnt ask for action dealer"

Dealer concurs , floor is called and TD agrees.

Is the ruling correct? And it does seem like an angle shoot on 2 seat. Without boring you with the hands , it was obvious 2 seat was wayyyy behind seat 7, and was trying to isolate the loosey goosey 9 seat

thanks

plo ufo · 06-03-2012, 08:12 PM

if 1 player is all in and 1 player has called what other action is there?

Walkinwoods · 06-03-2012, 08:23 PM

perhaps it wasnt concise

3 players involved

UTG seat 7 96k
seat 9 160 k
seat 2 82k

blinds were 2k/4k

seats 7 (14k) and 9 (78k) had chips left , action not asked for on flop

jh1711 · 06-03-2012, 09:45 PM

Seat 9 called as well preflop? You left that out in your OP.

I do not understand what the tournament director ruled, so I can't comment on the ruling.

Walkinwoods · 06-03-2012, 10:12 PM

seat 2 , the all in player, exclaimed when the turn card came out "thats a burn card correct dealer? you didnt ask for action after the flop , so thats a burn card correct" ....dealer was flustered and said you're right it should be a burn b/c i didnt ask for action post flop, "i'lll burn another card , reinsert the previous turn card and reshuffle" then put another turn card up

TD ruled that seat 2 was correct in their assertion and dealer was correct in burning and turning again....

hukel 9 · 06-04-2012, 12:41 AM

To avoid this thread becoming a complete trainwreck, I am going to attempt to fill in the gaps Walkinwoods seems oblivious to explain.

It appears after seat 2 goes all in, seat 7 and 9 merely call, leaving 14k and 78k behind. Seat 2 feels he is behind after the flop and hoping to only have to face one villian the rest of the way, demands that the turn card (which wasnt helpful to his case) be discarded. Seat 2 was hoping that the larger stack 9 can effectively bet seat 7 and his meager 14k stack away. Since the dealer never asked for action between either seat 7 or 9, and proceeded straight to the turn, it was ruled that the turn card should in fact be discarded.

Am I close Walkinwoods?

plo ufo · 06-04-2012, 02:26 AM

oh, well, if thats the case then just move thread to mttc live

Walkinwoods · 06-04-2012, 05:26 AM

thats correct hukel9, i just wanna know if anyone knows if the ruling that the turn card be discarded is correct?

James Starkey · 06-04-2012, 07:30 AM

If the dealer doesn't ask the players left in the hand for action on the flop and goes straight to the turn then the action is correct.

Caputop · 06-04-2012, 03:06 PM

It shouldn't be totally discarded.

It was exposed before action on the flop was completed, so the problem needs to be fixed. Proper procedure is to put the card off to the side. Then you complete action for the flop. After flop action is complete they should burn another card and put the card that would have been the river out as the new turn card. Now let the two players act on the new turn card. After that action is complete, take the original turn card and the rest of the stub (not the burn cards), shuffle them, and put out a new river card without burning a new card.

jh1711 · 06-04-2012, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caputop

It shouldn't be totally discarded.

It was exposed before action on the flop was completed, so the problem needs to be fixed. Proper procedure is to put the card off to the side. Then you complete action for the flop. After flop action is complete they should burn another card and put the card that would have been the river out as the new turn card. Now let the two players act on the new turn card. After that action is complete, take the original turn card and the rest of the stub (not the burn cards), shuffle them, and put out a new river card without burning a new card.

Perfect!

Now we still need to blame somebody as requested by the OP.

Dealer shares some blame for not realizing that two players still had chips behind.

Seat 7 and Seat 9 are to blame for not protecting their action on the flop.

Seat 2 is not to blame.

Pascal-lF · 06-05-2012, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caputop

It shouldn't be totally discarded.

It was exposed before action on the flop was completed, so the problem needs to be fixed. Proper procedure is to put the card off to the side. Then you complete action for the flop. After flop action is complete they should burn another card and put the card that would have been the river out as the new turn card. Now let the two players act on the new turn card. After that action is complete, take the original turn card and the rest of the stub (not the burn cards), shuffle them, and put out a new river card without burning a new card.

just cuirous why you'd put out river card instead of reshuffling for turn, given it could change how the players play?

Caputop · 07-02-2012, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pascal-lF

just cuirous why you'd put out river card instead of reshuffling for turn, given it could change how the players play?

Because superstitious people want the card that is "supposed" to come out to come out. You do this to keep 4/5 correct board cards, without letting people see the card while making their decision.