4/8 LHE game 8 handed.

SB is to the very right of the dealer and bets the turn with out the dealer seeing it after the Co and BTN had indicated checks prematurely.

Dealer burns and lifts river card with a slight flair, possibly revealing it to the SB -who has already acted-as the table is pointing out the bet. He returns the card to the top of the deck, has the CO and BTN complete their actions(they called the bet) and calls the floor.

I believe I am remembering the sequence correctly here- the Sb says, 'yea I saw it' and the floor has the card flipped, it was a diamond that would complete a flush draw.

The card is returned to the deck and shuffled in, the burn is already done, new river card is put out.

SB wins with 2p, BTN who had the FD is not happy.

I wonder if the SB had liked the card and said "I did not see it" what would have happened.

This was handled properly by the floor. IMO the dealer should be calling the floor immediately, not waiting till action is complete, so everybody can understand what will happen.

As for the 'what if' scenario, it really would depend on what the dealer tells the floor. If the card comes off the deck at all, it should be treated as premature. If the dealer tries to downplay what happened for whatever reason, it would open up the door for the floor to get this one wrong.

Agreed. If it comes off at all, it should be shuffled back in and redealt.

If no one saw it, then random is random and no one can even say if it is a different card than the original.

If someone saw it, especially someone in the hand still, then obviously it needs to go back.

There is also no point to keeping it if only people not in the hand saw it, because they can signal or otherwise affect the outcome, and why would someone not in the hand any more care if the card changes anyway.

Exposing the card first is an interesting conundrum. On the river especially, I’d be tempted not to expose it because it. Can cause pointless drama. But if one player did see it (say it’s the ace of a suit that ends up completing a flush draw), then that is info that everyone should have. So yeah, you really should expose it even if it causes these sorts of hurt feelings.

I guess this has to play out this way.

My first reaction was that the river should stay because the SB didn't have any remaining action on the turn. But it is possible that the SB reacted to seeing the card and the other players would have some kind of advantage because it was their turn to act and they saw the reaction. It is also possible that one of the other players saw the card and called specifically so that they could improve the chance that it would stay.

I do think that it is wrong for the Floor to ask the SB if he saw the card because it does set up the potential for cheating. He should just ask the dealer if it was flipped and the dealer could say yes and then it gets burned back in the deck.

The other problem is that if one of the other players raised then the dealer must act right away to prevent the SB from acting.

If I had been the dealer I would have stopped the action before the other players did anything and called the Floor over.

If I had been the SB I would have spoken up immediately after I saw the card.

There’s no point in asking sb if he saw it. Just ask the dealer if he exposed the card in the direction of sb. No need to either give someone a free roll or make the other players mad at him for no reason

Agree with consensus no reason to ask SB. Card was exposed or not, obv was, if player claims to see or not does not matter.

Card needs to be exposed since knowing it is available may be important info that no one or everyone must have access to. We don’t know if SB has info or not, and we can’t ask him to find out.

Don’t have an issue with allowing CO and BTN to finish acting so long as SB takes no further action. Can call floor immediately but let action to continue. Knowing eventual actions should not impact those decisions. Definitely do not expose card to CO or BTN until they have called, folded, or raised as that knowledge could affect their action.


Where I differ is using card as is or shuffling into stub. IMO if the dealer is absolutely certain that there is no chance CO and BTN and SB made the bet before the card was exposed. Then I don’t see a problem using the card as is. But those things must both be KNOWN and we don’t start polling players. But it is a high bar. If there is any doubt on those two things, any doubt at all, the card gets exposed and shuffled into stub for a new river. So while I could see allowing card to play, I certainly don’t have an issue with how it was handled. Likely the more certain way to handle it. But if floor is certain no advantage was gained, let the card play.

I am actually more concerned with the OOT actions. Before card could have been exposed, two players had to check OOT, I assume dealer taps table, the dealer burns, and goes to put out the river. When did SB bet or attempt to stop the action to protect his action? Was it actually OOT checks OR did SB bet silently and in turn CO and BTN improperly checked but in turn. If the checks were OOT, the tap and the burn occurred before SB actually acted to bet or stop the OOT action, has he lost the right to bet.

This could be a tougher decision as it could be a true bang bang thing with little time to respond or SB might be trying to take advantage of the knowledge he gained from the OOT action or one of the other players were trying to angle shoot. (by now raising the bet, though they did not in this case)

While most here know what 'should' happen that doesn't mean Rule #1 steps in for reality. I call these 'point of action' moments and the Floor, even the Dealer, should feel free to assess each spot 'as is'. I will always lean towards not fussing with how the hand 'should've' played out.

#1 is call the Floor 1st .. not after action is complete. Let the Floor take in the whole situation.

If the Dealer is 100% certain that SB had already acted AND either is the only active Player to see or has not seen the card, then I don't mind letting the action play out and putting the card on the Board 'as intended'. If action changes, then we have no choice but to handle the 'exposure' as the room normally would.

While not a huge fan of getting Player input during a Floor call .. unless story errors are occurring .. there are opportunities to consider it. We all know it's coming, but just like in court when a lawyer says something they know will be objected to, it still is 'out there' and hard to ignore as a human.


Is there a difference between a 'flash' and an 'exposure' .. we can cut hairs perhaps with that. LOTS of Dealers snap expose cards and probably lean towards exposing a card versus not. But I lean more towards asking the Player what they think they saw .. when action is back on them .. and letting the hand play out. Obv you can have potential angles if a Player says something 'not true' and that's why you hold the card (and the Floor) until the hand is complete and then reveal the card. GL